Kodak intros the C913, M1073 IS and M1063 cheapcams

We're not certain why Kodak is trickling out these middle-of-the-road digicams instead of announcing them all at once, but here we are. Joining the M1093 IS are the new M1073 IS (pictured) and M1063, while the C813 get a new friend in the C913. As you'd expect, almost nothing about these is all that spectacular: the $179 M1063 and M1073 IS are both 10 megapixel units with ISO1000 sensitivity and face detection, while the $120 C913 is a 9.2 megapixel unit with a 2.4-inch display and digital image stabilization. Expect to see these all in October, and check out the C913 after the break.

Read - M1073 IS
Read - M1063
Read - C913

[dubbbya @ Jul 12th 2008 6:45PM]

Who cares, lets all fight!

[Wolfticket @ Jul 12th 2008 7:30PM]

I have an idea.
Wait for them all to come out, and then only have one post, preferably on boringmiddleoftheroaddigicam.com

[Korrupzion @ Jul 12th 2008 8:22PM]

Well, 9.2 megapixels should be enough for everybody.

[deyanimay @ Jul 12th 2008 8:20PM]

NEED MORE MEGAPIXELS!

[Korrupzion @ Jul 12th 2008 8:23PM]

No you don't :@

[AlekZander @ Jul 12th 2008 8:31PM]

That's like 7.2 more than the iPhone has!

(Mwa ha ha, mandatory iPhone comment insertion successful)

[deyanimay @ Jul 12th 2008 8:53PM]

I don't but _____ does.

[Plothole @ Jul 12th 2008 9:36PM]

Anything over 6MP should be enough for most people. In fact all those extra megapixels tend to do on a compact camera is produce more noise, which mostly negates any resolution benefit that they might have given you. It can also cripple the dynamic range.

[Shoumik @ Jul 12th 2008 8:54PM]

I always have looked at Kodak as the company with the disposable camera due to it's cheap build.
Kodak
You have stood up to your word.

[sikantis @ Jul 12th 2008 10:03PM]

Thanks for the information!

[KilgoreTrout @ Jul 13th 2008 8:33AM]

These are the sort of devices that will be buried by new cell phones (and even not so new like my N95 8GB)

[DarkLight @ Jul 13th 2008 2:38PM]

No they're not going to.

No cellphone can record HD video...

And, let me insist, combining all those devices into a single "phone" is not the solution... Some day you will regret droping your separate gadgets for a single one

(Namely when you can't get a phone into a place, and without the phone, you will be "naked".... Or when battery runs out, you're left out in the cold without music, internet, camera, PDA, games..)

[Wolfticket @ Jul 13th 2008 5:59PM]

@Darklight

Name a budget digital camera that can record HD video.
Also, saying it is a bad idea to combine devices into a single solution, because you might drop it or I might run out of battery is a bit silly.
It's not like most people neeeeed music/internet/photo-taking/games, and if they did, probably wouldn't be using elcheapo products like this. They just find it handy, and if it is on one device it's handier. It's not like they are on an expedition, they can charge them in the office/at home.
BTW: I bet most people drop gadgets while putting them away/taking them out of where ever they have them concealed on their person.

[DarkLight @ Jul 14th 2008 3:08AM]

No it isn't silly, I've been on those situations myself..

And yes, I'd like to be using something better, but I have no money.. Not everyone is rich

And budget digital camera that can record HD video?

Dude, LTFP. Look at The F'ing Picture... What do you think the "HD" symbol on they all mean?

All the cheapcams you see in this article can record HD video.. And quite decently, if they're anything like the Z1275

[DarkLight @ Jul 14th 2008 3:21AM]

BTW, you're right about charging at home or office... However, on the "home" part, you're assuming that between leaving home and coming back home you will not drain a device (I would totally drain my PDA if I didn't have a separate mp3 player.. I can't be in "standby" mode without listening to music, but I need my PDA to do my job)... And for the office part, well, that's assuming you work at an office in the first place... Most of us in the lower part of the wealth scale, don't. We are, in fact, like in an expedition, just without leaving the city...

[Wolfticket @ Jul 14th 2008 3:18PM]

Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't call 640x480 HD video.
Maybe the HD symbol on they all means they can connect to HDTVs.
Dude, RTFA. Read at The F'ing Article...

[DarkLight @ Jul 15th 2008 4:11PM]

Dude, (yeah I'm a little late)

"The new Kodak EasyShare M1073 IS camera is HD-capable, capturing still pictures and video in high definition"

From the "Read - M1073 IS" link

[Wolfticket @ Jul 15th 2008 7:49PM]

Yes, it states that. But in the actual spec of the camera (M1073 IS), it states that the maximum video resolution is 640x480 (VGA in my book, not HD).
I'll buy camera I'll send you a file and we can check for sure ;-)

Peace man.

[DarkLight @ Jul 16th 2008 12:30PM]

Never mind dude, I just realized that it is the only one that says HD video.. The others don't.. And yes it might be wrong

You win this round of the internets :-)

(But still, the Z1275 is a nice cheapcam wich in fact does HD)

PS. I wonder how much people on engadget holds discussions this long after the thread is dead XD