Kodak introduces EasyShare P880 / P850
By Ryan Block 
posted Aug 2nd 2005 9:45AM
posted Aug 2nd 2005 9:45AM
Looks like Kodak's updated their upper-crust Easyshare lineup with two new devices today, the P880 and P850. While neither happens to be a DSLR, the P880 shoots at 8.0 megapixels (in RAW, no less!) with a wide-angle 5.8x zoom lens, has a 2.5-inch screen, SD slot, and hot shoe; the P850 shoots at 5.1 megapixels, and has an image stabilizer and hot shoe as well. The devices will cost a decently valued $599 and $499, respectively, and are due in September.
I never really understood cameras that look like this... it looks like a DSLR, but it's really a point-and-shoot?
What's the target market here? People in the know won't buy them, they're not true DSLRs... the only people that might buy these are unknowledgeable mom and dad consumers who get swindled by the sales guy at [insert local electronics big box here]...
Dad: "I was thinking about buying one of those new Digital Rebel Canon things."
Sales: "No, no... buy one of these! They're pretty much the same camera, but this one's like 300 bucks cheaper!"
I'll wait to hold judgement on the quality of the lenses and sensor chips. Then again, I've never liked the results of the Kodak chips.
It turns out that some professionals prefer digicams to professional dSLRs: http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6468-7844&print=true
Unless you need the fastest shutter speeds and the highest ISOs, digicams nowadays are more than a match for dSLRs for photo journalism. Just plan your shot and you won't need either of the two aforementioned features.
Maybe this fits the needs of some people. They may want a feature-rich camera for well under a $1000.
(#1):
Kodak is the No.1 digicam seller in the United States. Naturally, the public is not very smart (if they were, Nikon/Canon/Sony would be No.1) and will buy something like this regardless of its value.
pls Kodak do us a favor and finally disappear from this planet. We have Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax and others.
not sure why you all are bashing Kodak so hard...they have some of the highest rated digicams on the market...and rated by both professionals and users.
"pls Kodak do us a favor and finally disappear from this planet."
Apparently you don't like motion pictures very much. (Not that that'd be surpring or anything, this year at least.)
You people want your gadgets but you don't care where they come from or what it means to buy them. Certainly quality is a top issue, but if you want China to be the next superpower then go right ahead and buy the other brands.
I get weak in the knees every time I play with a DSLR with real manual focus, the 'manual focus' on my Nikon 8700 just does not cut. But, at the time, I could not afford a DSLR. The Nikon is a great camera and I have made (and sold) a lot of great shots with it. So there is very much a point to this category. I can make great looking prints at 11”X14” and 16”X20”.
Whether you're a fan of Kodak products or not. This camera is severely lacking in one of the most important elements to most consumers...good design. This has got to be one of the ugliest Quasimoto looking things ever produced, running second only to(maybe) the Pontiac Aztec. And whats with the cyclops eye? Design can make or break a product no matter how good it is mechanically. Who would want this thing around their neck? Case in point, Ipod, good player, not necessarilly better than the competition, but the design is outstanding and that makes the difference in Apples marketshare. This may be an excellent camera, based on it's design however I don't believe most consumer camera customers will give it a second look.
i think the cyclops eye is the lens...hmmm
"i think the cyclops eye is the lens...hmmm"
On the P880, If thats the lens, whats the big round thing under it???
I think it's cool-looking, so there. The specs are nothing to scoff at either. It's only the second P&S camera to ship with such a wide lens (24mm). Hopefully the operation is faster than the last batch of 8MP cams too. Spec-wise, and feature-wise, this thing is near the top of the heap. I wonder if the manual focus ring is electronic or mechanical. I'd much rather have a mechanical focus ring than a mechanical zoom ring (but both are nice).
its another good move that will keep kodak in the game. schneider lenses are nothing to scoff at.
why use this instead of a dslr? seriously, someone in the know will get more out of this unless they have thousands of dollars worth of lenses. any salesman not recommending a rebel over a zlr like this must not be making a commission. i would appreciate advice like that.
regarding the P880, you wouldneed a 17mm lens to get the coverage of a '24mm equivalent' focal length. and forget a zoom. a nikon 17-55 2.8 is about $1300, giving you only half the coverage.
manual zoom and focus really give it an edge. if not a mechanical control, it may be similar to (what comes to mind) that of the sony HDR-FX1 or vx2000 etc. i believe its a smooth moving ring that very quickly activates electronic zoom and focus. like the click wheel.
now, on to the P850:
some of the same points regarding lens coverage: try getting 12x zoom for your digital rebel, and make sure they are IS (image stabilizing) lenses. of course there are many 5mp digicams at the $500 price point, with 12x zooms, but the kodak P850 seems to match and surpass them with a 2.5 inch scren, hotshoe, raw, and a huge range of manual ISO settings (and thats without going in to all the features it shares with more expensive DSLRs).
so to answer your question, who is the target market: anyone without a full range of 'pro' lenses, or the budget to aquire them, who wants almost the same features. it may suffer in focusing/metering speed,and the inability to throw on a fixed focal length lens.
and then aesthetics, ergonomics, and real life performance.
(oops...continued)
...aesthetics, ergonomics, and real life performance may be what ruins cameras like this.
time will tell.
oh, and 30fps video clips: very powershot S2. i might just change my mind over the S2 and its unique video recording ability.
one last thing:
if the 'cyclops eye' is actually the autofocus sensor and/or af assist light, then its in a pretty good place.
first, electronic viewfinders do not use pentaprisms, so its a good use of space. second, closer to the centre of the lens is better. autofocus may be more accurate, and you will almost never cover the sensor with your mitts. but if you care how it looks, get a camera that is small enough to fit in your bum. smooth,small and ovoid is looks much nicer than any full featured camera.
The prices were in UK pounds....not USA dollars
no they weren't. why would they be anyway?
"People in the know won't buy them, they're not true DSLRs". I disagree - I'm almost salivating over this camera, and I'll be watching the reviews closely. If it's what I expect it to be, I will have found my first serious digital camera. No, it isn't everything I've hoped for, but it's the closest thing I've found. And personally, I think SLRs are a throwback to the film days, and LCD viewfinders should replace them (if they can).
I consider myself an avid hobbyist, but so far I've felt abandoned by the digital world. There are lots of point & shoot cameras for snap-shooters, and a few very expensive options for pros (D2X), but there is absolutely nothing to replace my good old manual focus FM2. To me, going digital simply means that I want to replace the film. The D70 is the closest thing, but $800 for a 6 Mpix camera seems outrageous. But I would actually consider paying it if it wasn't for two things: 1) It can't meter with my $1000s worth of AI/AIS lenses, and 2) The 1.5x tele-converter effect effectively kills my 24mm & 28mm lenses - totally unacceptable for landscape photography. So the bottom line is: Even if I buy an $800 Nikon DSLR body so I can keep using all my great lenses, I will still have to buy (expensive) new lenses! But the $600, 8 Mpix P880 sounds like it already comes with a pretty decent lens (which sounds perfect for landscape photography, I might add).
As for DSLR's, I think the SLR is a throwback to film days, and the sooner we replace that complicated, expensive apparatus the better. Think about it - the whole point of an SLR is so you could see exactly what the film was going to capture (with various lenses). There's no way to get around that in a film world. But in the digital world there is - the LCD, which is looking through the same lens that the CCD will use to capture the image. That means virtually every digital camera is performing like an SLR when you're looking at the LCD. I'm assuming the P880 is using some kind of hi-res LCD in the viewfinder. I have no idea if it will adequately replace the SLR viewfinder (I've never tried one), but I hope it does. Why? Because the complicated SLR apparatus will always keep the price of serious cameras high. But LCDs will get better and cheaper.
Plus the D70 is considerably larger than my FM2, while the P880 is a little smaller. Smaller is good.
Say Jeff, can you please translate into English, "that that'd be surpring" for me? I await more of your intellect with bated breath.
Posted Aug 2, 2005, 11:42 AM ET by Jeff
Apparently you don't like motion pictures very much. (Not that that'd be surpring or anything, this year at least.)
sony just came out with a camera similar to the P880 and i am sure others will follow. the sony has 10 megaoixels, but costs $1000 to the Kodak P880's list of $599. plus, kodak has the great colors and easyshare system. one poster said that he could not understand anyone buying these semi-pro cameras. well, this segment of the market is heating up for people who don't want to carry around tons of lenses and who fear dust on the the dslr sensors that ruin pictures. good job Kodak!
I understand all the "snobby" DSLR folks (I use to be one of them), but open your minds and be thankful that there can be a very decent point and shoot digital camera with a Schneider lens (remember Canon gives you their "cheaper" kit lens). The Kodak's ease and multiple functions (mini video camera) does help an in-the-know photographer that doesn't have the time to change lens or to reach for a camcorder every time. I happen to have a Canon and a Kodak and they each get great shots, but the ease of the Kodak makes it a much easier camera to take around. There's no perfect camera, but let's give the Kodak it's due props.
I don't understand what all the upset is? I am waiting for the camera simply because I don't want to buy a bunch of lenses, I don't care to worry so much about the settings yet, and I absolutely love the Kodak Color. And the price is affordable for an 8 mega pixel. I am selling beautiful portraits taken with a 4 mega pixel Kodak Easy share now with a waiting list of customers. Honestly, I love the camera I am using, it is not huge and heavy to handle, I am hoping to have the same experience with the p880 with just more pixels for editing etc.. I am in no way a camera tech person and have no aspirations to be one, so I am waiting for the P880 just to improve my poster sized image clarity.
There are lots of point & shoot cameras for snap-shooters, and a few very expensive options for pros (D2X), but there is absolutely nothing to replace my good old manual focus FM2. To me, going digital simply means that I want to replace the film. The D70 is the closest thing, but $800 for a 6 Mpix camera seems outrageous. But I would actually consider paying it if it wasn't for two things: 1) It can't meter with my $1000s worth of AI/AIS lenses, and 2) The 1.5x tele-converter effect effectively kills my 24mm & 28mm lenses - totally unacceptable for landscape photography. So the bottom line is: Even if I buy an $800 Nikon DSLR body so I can keep using all my great lenses, I will still have to buy (expensive) new lenses!
To those elitist snobs who are putting down this camera, I assume that you just want to brag about your equipments. Sounds like a bunch of posers. No amount of money can make someone without talent a good photographer. This is more than a decent camera for its price. It doesn't claim to be an SLR camera. You only need a minimum of 6.1 mp to get a good blow up, anyway. The lens is nothing to laugh at. Lighten up, not everyone can afford or would want to spend a lot of money. -- Why use a cannon to kill a fly?
Kristin, I agree with your comments regarding the Kodak P880 and I'm also very interested in viewing some of your portrait work. I use a lower end dig at the moment for my work also but will be upgrading to either the 880 or 850 soon.
cgrant54@hotmail.com