209 comments

[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 244 ms ] thread
Their "Specs" link at the bottom 404s! Ow.

Much more info in this blog post: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/Consumer/Press_Center/KODAK_EKTRA...

KODAK EKTRA Smartphone key features:

    * ANDROID 6.0 (Marshmallow)
    * Professional results from a 21MP fast focus camera sensor with F2.0,
      PDAF, OIS, Dual LED Flash
    * 13MP phase detection auto focus front-facing camera with F2.2 PDAF
    * Helio X20 2.3GHz Decacore processor with 3GB RAM
    * 32GB memory, expandable with MicroSD cards
    * Advanced Manual Mode – adjustable on Exposure, ISO,
      Focal Length (Manual/Auto), White Balance,
      Shutter Speed, Aperture (fixed f2.0 main camera)
    * Familiar scene selection dial experience – includes scene modes
      Smart Auto, Portrait, Manual, Sports, Bokeh, * Night-time, HDR,
      Panorama, Macro, Landscape, Film / Video
    * Integrated high quality printing app
    * Super 8 Video Recorder
    * Integrated social media sharing
    * 3000mAh, with USB 3.0 Type C fast charger

Edit: Another separate product page, this one has a WORKING "before/after" panorama example: http://www.kodakphones.com/ektra/

Edit 2: Their "super 8" is just a filter. Scroll down on the page above to see.

Their web content is really disjointed...

"Super 8 video recorder?"

The big plastic thing around the small lens to Make It Look Like A Camera is kind of silly.

No word on the either the size of the sensor nor the focal length of the lens. Not what you would expect from a camera announcement...
Sensor size is the big one since that will determine signal to noise ratio and ultimately the end result for any given computation.
It is definitely a Sony sensor, thought to be the previous-gen IMX230 ( same as in the Experia Z4 and iPhone 6). So that's 1/2.4 inches, or 5.92x4.57mm. Pretty much standard fare for Chinese mid-tier Mediatek phones.

For comparison the famous Nokia 808 had a 1/1.2 inch sensor, 10.67x8.00mm.

I was pretty interested in this, but $550 seems to steep. What is that price point supposed to compete with? To low for iphone/pixel, too high for many other android phones.
I think it's meant to compete with Kodak DSLR cameras.
Kodak sold their last DSLR a decade ago. Which is a shame, because they were the ones that pretty much invented the field.
That's at the low end of 'flagship phone' list price and I take $550 as a list price. If demand is high, then it will hold for a while.

For a person who is buying a phone in part around their interest in the quality of the camera and assuming the camera performs well, then it may be worth a premium.

I don't think 550$ is too steep, if you compare with phones like samsung s7 (670$), huwaei p9 (500$), 1plus3 (600$).
Decacore? I've never heard of Helio SOCs but I really wonder about the cores race of Android SOCs these days. Are heavier apps these days really multi-threaded?
did i miss something on the kodak site, or did they forget to mention that it's a smartphone? Or did ars get that wrong? reading through the full marketing page linked at the top here, i don't see any indication that it's anything other than a digital camera running android.
> Introducing Kodak's professional-quality, photography-first smartphone.
Scroll down just a bit: "Introducing Kodak's professional-quality, photography-first smartphone."
It's not just you, I had to hunt to figure out WTF was going on. I thought at first it was a phone case that doubled as a camera.

    > Edit photos anywhere with Snapseed™
The "before" and "after" images [0] are completely different photographs!

[0]: http://www.kodak.com/KodakGCG/uploadedImages/Consumer/Produc...

It's a continuation of scene. I think they were attempting a panorama where half was "before" and half was after, but the subject and feel of each side of the pano is just so different, that it hardly has a comparison effect!

For a true before/after, see these images:

http://kp.kinsta.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/before.jpg

http://kp.kinsta.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/after.jpg

Eww that looks like the kind of thing you find in reddit's shitty HDR sub.
Agreed, the "before" picture looks so much more natural.
It's not bad tone mapping, which is what most people think of when they think of shitty HDR. It's sharpening and increasing local contrast. This particular effect can also be created in Lightroom by pushing the "clarity" slider too far to the right.
Yeah, it's completely backwards. I thought we were past Instagram filters, but now Kodak is trying to build it into their camera?
The after is too sharp, but I don't see a problem with applying filters to a photo. If it gives a nostaligc feel, so what?
It looks like mostly local (think sharpening) and global contrast changes, based on the artefacts. In addition tonality changes.

Sharpening effect is very prominent on these examples. Hopefully there is an configuration option for this.

I've seen these things be "sliders" before. Where you slide the middle line & can see both "before" and "after" just by sliding it.

Seems like they got the two photos, but didn't figure out the tech behind it.

that comparison accompanied the mention of snapseed. wtf? It's the same set of processing potential that anyone with iOS and Android can accomplish.

Shuldnt they tout the expected superior output from the sensor compared to leading camera smartphones? Galaxy S7, iPHone 7?...

The "After" looks insanely grainy to me.
Where did you find those?
That's the first thing I noticed and it made me laugh pretty hard. Such nice editing software haha.
it's one long panoramic with the left side the before and the right side the after.
Sure. So different photographs, with many other moving parts beside the application of Snapseed wizardry.
It's a panorama image split in the middle. What it lacks to be useful is that split bar should be a slider so you can see the before after effect on that image.
It's actually a single wide shot with a bar down the middle. I agree that it's unintuitive.
It's not just unintuitive, it's useless as a comparison.

If it were of a fruit bowl, you could make the joke "they're literally comparing apples and oranges".

You can't say "look at photo X, and now see how much more awesome photo Y is that has been edited with our software!"

I noticed that as well. For the one in the article, the after photograph has fewer clouds too.
That must be a hell of a piece of software then!!
Didn't Nokia try this already?

I'm pretty sure the camera world has settled into two kinds of cameras: cell phones for people who just need to take a few snaps, and DSLRs for people who need more features than can possibly fit in a cameraphone (flash hotshoe, changeable lenses, larger sensor, etc). DSLRs are cheap enough that cost isn't really an issue.

I doubt the results here will be any better than Nokia had.

The non-phone camera market is more diverse than that; beyond DSLRs there's also mirrorless cameras (for people who want near-DSLR performance in a lighter body) and point-and-shoots (for people who want better-than-smartphone performance but don't need swappable lenses).
Maybe, but there are plenty of people with cameras like the RX100.
Was going to say, RX100 is in a class of its own :). I always have it with me when I travel and often have it my pocket just in case. I don't always use it, but it's small enough not to care. Especially for outdoors photography, an RX100 generally takes better pictures than a DSLR, because you're more likely to have it with you when a good picture opportunity arises.
The best camera is the one you have with you. :)

Now, if you have multiple cameras...

Technically Canon and Panasonic have competing models ;)

But yeah, someone on G+ asked me, "did you get rid of your DSLR?" because all I ever post are RX100 pictures these days. I did not get rid of my DSLR, I use it for "studio" stuff, but for going out and about the RX100 is the best possible currently-available camera. (It could be smaller. But that 1" sensor is just amazing, often yielding 21,000,000 usable pixels. My iPhone just yields photograph-styled noise reduction artifacts.)

First it was a Windows phone, so it is hard to compare.

Second I think that your view is too simplistic. There are more use cases than these two. Some people prefer Fuji cameras over DSLRs, some probably would like to have a potentially decent camera with them all the time, but did not bother to have a Windows phone.

We are about to find out how big is this market.

And the Nokia cameras/phones were really slow. Nearly unusable to just pull out and get quick shots off.
This can be the third product category. Samsung also had similar products like galaxy s4 zoom but it was looking like a plastic and bulky point-and-shoot camera. I really like the design and build of this Kodak camera and I am ready to replace both my DSLR and my phone with something like this. Of course it has to be a decent smartphone and the camera must be superior to any other smartphone cameras.
Compact mirrorless cameras are the big third category you're missing, I think. They're the perfect mix of quality, portability, and discreetness, which makes them excellent for travel and street photography. The Fuji X series are great examples. I wouldn't dream of taking my Canon 6D backpacking, but my X100T goes with me everywhere and produces excellent shots. My Instagram handle is @paulwithap if you want to see some examples (I rarely post there anymore, so this is definitely not a shameless plug ;)
Agreed! I used to have a Nikon D7000, which isn't even that big when it comes to DSLRs, but it was too heavy and too big and I ended up basically never taking it out, sometimes even while traveling.

About two years ago I got a Fuji X-T1 and it's honestly one of the best things I've ever bought. It's small, light enough, amazingly built, their lenses are incredible, and it's just so functional. The WiFi functionality is awesome because with only my phone I can transfer pictures and post on Instagram while traveling. The straight out of camera JPEGs are so good I never do any editing.

Yep! My next camera purchase is the X-T2. I can't wait!
I want this very badly.
wait, this is a DSLR?

Why would they do that instead of mirrorless?

There is no viewfinder. It is mirrorless.
They do, however, mention DSLR multiple times in their presentation. Probably just to get the product associated with the image quality that people expect from DSLRs, but it is a bit confusing.
Then they are lying in their presentation.
I understand that Kodak is probably "dipping their toe in the water with this model," but 32GB is not enough storage.

I'd like to know more about the phone, though. Is it a good phone? I mean, is it a good phone? The concept of a phone that's also a quality Kodak camera is cool, but at the end of the day, I'd like to know that it's also great at doing everything else I do with my phone.

Also, does it have a standard 3.5mm headphone jack?

>Also, does it have a standard 3.5mm headphone jack?

I can't tell if this is serious or not, but this continues to make me chuckle.

I couldn't tell if I was serious or not when I made the comment!
They do provide a microSD card slot. 32GB onboard may not be stellar (for photography in particular), but the ability to easily get the data off to a memory card easily offsets that limitation. And makes it more useful for travelers who may not be able to (frequently) sync up with a laptop or cloud service.
"Oh, you can just" is usually not good enough.

I specifically made that comment because I upgraded my phone with an SD card. It's nowhere as good as having enough storage built in; and I'll never buy a phone where I have to augment storage again.

Given that they're featuring "edit with Snapseed" on the page, they might have a Pixel-like deal with Google for unlimited original-quality uploads to Google Photos.
Doesn't look like it'll be able to do anything that any good Android phone with a good sensor/lens can't.

BTW some Mediatek chips were meant to be able to do 480fps 1080p video with certain Sony sensors.. did it ever work out beyond marketing promises?

This is actually an interesting product, but is there a reason they wouldn't make the aperture f/1.8 like the iPhone?

I'm not aware if there may be downsides or hardware limitations to that. If cost is the only issue, it would seem worth it if you're making a photography-focused camera just to get as much light as possible into that sensor.

Edit: Thanks for the information, fellow HNers :)

A 1/3 stop is ... not much. With different cameras with different lens designs and most importantly different sensors it's unlikely to be a significant contributor to a difference between two products.

The difference in transmission between two lenses with one having few (eg 50/1.x) and the other having a lot (eg superzoom) elements can get that large.

This is why cinema lenses report t-stops ('transmission') in addition to f-stops. The t-stops tell you about exposure, and account for losses between surfaces and absorption within the media. The f-stop tells you about depth of field, etc.

With modern lenses, they're usually within a small fraction of a stop, but older lenses could vary by a stop or more. That said, the difference between this camera and an iPhone camera, in terms of relative transmission, is probably negligible.

(comment deleted)
My knee-jerk reaction was to want this, but the more I thought about the product, it really would be for someone wanting a good camera on the go, but not enough to warrant a better separate camera, AND willing to deal with a worse smartphone experience.

That's not me unfortunately.

Hehe, yes. Me neither.

But my girlfriend would probably like it.

She always has junk smartphones, but high end cameras.

(comment deleted)
I like the subtle f*ck you to MGMT 101 classes here .... or the attempt to.
(comment deleted)
While it may seem an irrelevant detail, the camera-like leatherette case that flips or snaps open like the old camera cases did, not only made me smile but gave me hope that they were clued in enough to their market as to make it a success.
To me it's a huge drawback and makes it a no buy. No way I'm going to vote with my money and award them for using inefficient, unrecycled, inferior material instead of abundant recyclable non-animal sourced material.

Edit: Thanks for the flags and downvotes, hate is so fresh here.

Something tells me you wouldn't have gotten it anyways...
I'm a huge fan of customizable camera firmware. Playing with software controlling visual input brings me joy, have bunch of cameras and lack of leather is not a problem at all.
Actually I used "leatherette" in the generic sense of "looks like leather". TBH I have no idea what material it is made of.
It's animal leather, at least that's what can be concluded from a quick Google search.
The arstechnica article linked in another comment calls it "artificial."
I don't understand... how is this different from any other large-screen Android 6+ device being built right now with a similarly high-res spec camera?
It will be buggy and poorly supported and probably have sub-par QA. Also your friends will laugh at you for buying a Kodak anything.
Odd choice for the name, since Kodak also has a color negative film called "Ektar" [0] which is just a single transposition away from this new phone's name.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ektar

How's it odd? It looks like they've already repurposed Ektar once before. Ektra sounds better (to me, anyway) and there's no chance that film purchasers will be confused.
Yes, Ektar used to be their lens brand.

Ran out of words that started with "Eastman Kodak" I guess.

I'd call it apt rather than odd.
Yeah, honestly it sounds like a misspelling.
I think they are doing the right thing. Taking pictures is a core feature of smartphone usage and smartphones took a lot of camera-marketshare. Vacations have become much more enjoyable since people don't have to carry the international sign of gullibility around their neck, the tourist's camera, that also weighs more than a phone, costs at least as much and has a terrible OS.

I too think though that Kodak can't be superior on smartphone stuff. At least not on their first iterations. But having the stomach to pursue such a dramatic and pragmatic shift in as how to perceive their product says a lot. Either about the company's future prospects or of how much they are on their last legs.

You mean vacations became nightmare since everybody is taking pictures everywhere, you can't enjoy nice views anymore easily
I went a gallery recently that actually had a rule printed near the artist biography:

"No selfie sticks"

(comment deleted)
It had better have superior photog specs than the newest iphones otherwise it's dead in the water
If Kodak really wants to make a killer product, they should focus on battery life at the expense of size (within reason, of course).
Which would also give them the thickness to add a nice deep camera.
Seems cool. But they cant do very good mobile page. Laggy scrolling and jumpy loading on G4.
What is the camera sensor model and manufacturer? So far based on hardware features list it doesn't look like a photo oriented smartphone, but more like a regular Androind based phone.
No mention of sensor size?
How much does it cost?