Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   Kodak (
-   -   Are You Relucant to Recommend Kodak? Now Let's be Honest! (

mtclimber May 13, 2009 10:31 PM

Are You Relucant to Recommend Kodak? Now Let's be Honest!
This Kodak Forum has had a good deal LESS activity that I would expect!

Are you unwilling to recommend Kodak Cameras to others?

You really should not be reticent in recommending Kodak Cameras at all!

I for one, have never had a single problem with a Kodak Camera.

Do I personally believe in KODAK CAMERAS?

I Certainly do!

I just spent $(US) 367.00 purchasing a Kodak Z-890 Camera, which I will receive on 05/16. I am a big Kodak camera supporter. But, folks, I will be honest with you! If we do NOT support Kodak cameras, they will be soon gone. So please! I am urging you, rather simply and in very simple terms.

If we do not make every attempt possible to support Kodak Cameras, they will soon be gone from the digital camera market. So, this is indeed the time that you should speak up rather (very) loudly in support of Kodak cameras.

Yes, I certainly do agree, we Kodak users are a rather declining/deminishing voice in the camera world. We need, and must have, a more vocal and a much bigger voice in the camera world. Kodak Cameras are good cameras!

Unless, we make that really well known in the camera world, Kodak will indeed disappear from the camera market. Is that what you desire?

Kodak, I sincerely believe, has a really big place in the camera market. Based on the historical camera market, Kodak, based, soley on your support will keep its place in the digital camera market!

But folks, it is going to take your whole hearted, full blown support to keep Kodak cameras in the digital cameras market's eye!

Plese support Kodak cameras!

Sarah Joyce

Is that how you really desire it to be?

Tuscola Jim May 14, 2009 4:21 PM

Yes, Kodak has been around before digital cameras were
invented. I even had an old box camera as my first
camera way back in the 1950's. Hope Kodak doesn't
fade away for sure. Their prices and quality have always
been top notch..... Jim

mtclimber May 14, 2009 5:38 PM

Thanks, Jim for a very refreshing reply. I recently picked up a second Kodak Z-7590 camera at a garage sale still in the original box for $5. It takes great photos and it will make an excellent beginner camera for one of our grand daughters for has expressed a wish for a camera.

Sarah Joyce

sw2cam May 16, 2009 11:39 PM

Are You Relucant to Recommend Kodak? Now Let's be Honest!

No ........ in fact it's the ONLY non dslr brand I recommend.

Alan T May 17, 2009 2:51 AM

Both the best and the worst cameras I've got in this house are Kodaks. My Z712 is the best, most practical all-rounder I've ever had for my lifestyle. (That includes my OM-10 SLR & lenses because of their weight & bulk.) This is especially true in terms of value for money.

However, the tiny Instamatic my wife owned when I first met her 31 years ago produced dreadful results from its tiny negs, at least in part because of the difficulty of holding it still. I photographed it for the 'Biweekly Shoot Out' forum last year...

ISTR my family had various battered plastic Kodaks, with sticking plaster over cracked corners, when I was a small child, and they produced very good results (due to the large 120 roll-film format).

slipe May 17, 2009 9:53 AM

Friends bought a Kodak V550 several years ago on my recommendation. They keep the camera in the cradle, so they never go off with a low battery. They just push a button on the cradle and the EasyShare software makes a folder titled with the date and downloads the photos into it. It has taken very good photos for them, and since they never crop or make large prints it is still as good as anything they could buy for their use.

My only complaint with their camera and Kodak in general is the proprietary nature of EasyShare. Easyshare blocks normal PTP operations so that you can only access the camera through EasyShare. EasyShare will not let you move photos back to the camera for processing, which is the easiest way for a non-computer person to sort and print their photos. It seems Kodak wants you to establish an account and have Kodak print the photos and send them to you.

It is probably for that same reason they bury the photos deep in Documents and Settings so the user can only access them through EasyShare. I moved their photos to My Pictures and set EasyShare to put new downloads there. They also got a card reader so they could put photos on the card for printing. More hassle than was necessary IMO.

You can uninstall EasyShare and most Kodak cameras become normal PTP cameras – but not all Kodak cameras. They are the only major company that has made non-PTP cameras in the past five years or so. I would be reluctant to recommend a Kodak camera to someone unless I was sure it was PTP. I also think a normal user of another brand has a more useable setup using normal PTP operations and a program like Picasa. Once a Kodak buyer installs EasyShare they have what I consider a stunted photo system.

I wish Kodak well. I could recommend them more wholeheartedly if they would make their software more useable and less proprietary.

mtclimber May 17, 2009 10:18 AM

I agree. The EasyShre software leaves a lot to be desired. Many Kodak users just do not install it.

Sarah Joyce

sw2cam May 17, 2009 10:56 PM

The KODAK software is not needed to download pictures from the camera. The only time easyshare is needed if for the drivers for a printer dock or printer. Evan then the easyshare software does not need to be used for downloading or for any other reason. So if you were to find out how to operate a computor you would not have to move anything from easyshare into any other program. It's funny how people that know least complain the most about how stuff works.

Alan T May 18, 2009 12:31 AM


Originally Posted by sw2cam (Post 969608)
.....So if you were to find out how to operate a computor you would not have to move anything from easyshare into any other program. It's funny how people that know least complain the most about how stuff works.

For many people, who may be enthusiastic photographers, this is easier said than done. As cameras and computers become more so-called 'user-friendly', the reality is that their operation is hidden behind an ever more obscure, less transparent, software interface.

My own method of dealing with it is to stay well behind the times, and keep everything as simple & transparent as possible. The best advice we can offer here for new users is to tell them to buy a card reader and not even to try connecting the camera direct to the computer.

In my local 'pound shop', read-only card readers, like USB2 pen drives with an SD card slot, cost 1 ukpound (US$1.50 approx.) each. I have bought many of these, and hand them out as presents to friends & family, where they solve many interface problems. They're small enough to live in a camera case or a pocket.

With such a tool, my octogenarian mother-in-law has taken up digital photography at last, retiring her APS film camera. With one of these readers, she doesn't need a computer at all. Images goes via USB to her HDD/DVD video recorder for sorting and writing to DVD, and glorious display on her huge HDTV. OK, she can't do post-processing, but I can always help her do that on my wife's laptop, and email images to my tame camera shop for printing when she wishes, or she can take them on a disk.

'So-called-Easyshare' had a lifetime of less than a day on my PC when I got my first Kodak digicam, and was rapidly expunged. It's a blatant attempt to lock users in to the brand. That's better done by marketing good cameras at excellent prices.

mtclimber May 18, 2009 10:25 AM

Well said, Alan-

Most folks would be much better off never installing the EasyShare software and using an inexpensive card reader.

Sarah Joyce

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:05 AM.