New Kodak Super 8mm camera-Dead?
Old 12-31-2018   #1
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
New Kodak Super 8mm camera-Dead?

So with 2018 about wrapped up it has been nearly 2 years since Kodak announced that they were bringing out a new Super 8mm film camera. 2 years with almost no news about a release date.

Can we assume now that this camera is not going to happen?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-31-2018   #2
Dayrell bishop
Registered User
 
Dayrell bishop is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Essex England
Age: 62
Posts: 879
I did wonder who would buy it ,the prices I saw mentioned seemed very high and although now old there are still many high quality high spec cameras still on the market .
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #3
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dayrell bishop View Post
I did wonder who would buy it ,the prices I saw mentioned seemed very high and although now old there are still many high quality high spec cameras still on the market .
Yeah, upping the price from $500 or so up to $2700 didnt do them any favors.

I suspect this camera is now vaporware.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #4
jawarden
Registered User
 
jawarden is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
So with 2018 about wrapped up it has been nearly 2 years since Kodak announced that they were bringing out a new Super 8mm film camera. 2 years with almost no news about a release date.

Can we assume now that this camera is not going to happen?
Yes let's come to a consensus that it's now time for the group to start assuming things. :-)
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #5
davidnewtonguitars
Family Snaps
 
davidnewtonguitars's Avatar
 
davidnewtonguitars is offline
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 1,346
I apologize to the group for becoming the troll.
__________________
Leica M2 / 7artisans 35-f2 / Canon 35-f2 ltm
http://davidnewtonguitars.squarespace.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #6
benmacphoto
Registered User
 
benmacphoto's Avatar
 
benmacphoto is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Age: 32
Posts: 898
With the amount of quality super 8 cameras on the used market, I'd wonder why they would bother making this camera.
Sure make the film but a new super 8 camera is not needed.
__________________
Instagram

Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #7
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
The problem is that most of the Super 8 cameras out there, even the highest quality, don't have the ability to shoot modern high speed emulsions. I have a like-new Elmo C300 that can even take DS8 but no emulsions are available that allow me to use its TTL meter, so why waste $30 on a S8 cartridge when I could spend the same amount on 16mm?
THAT is why a new Super 8 option would be cool.
Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #8
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidnewtonguitars View Post
I assume stuff all the time, I think wrongly 50/50, and if it is about my wife, wrong 100%. I assume Ted is just stirring the Kodak pot, right?

Since when is asking a valid question "stirring the pot"? How many years have to pass in order for this question to be valid in your eyes? 5 years? 10 years?



Good god you are a snowflake.


Edit: Apple announced a wireless iPhone charger called AirPower last year. Since then there has been NO update at all on this. I asked the same question as I did hear in an Apple forum, where is the product announced a year ago? Thankfully, the response there were not as childish above.


This is a FORUM. You should understand that people come here to DISCUSS topics. If you dont like the topic, DONT READ IT. There was nothing at all wrong with me asking this question about an interesting camera that was wildly expected years ago. This would not be the first vaporware product (hello Ferannia!).
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #9
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by benmacphoto View Post
With the amount of quality super 8 cameras on the used market, I'd wonder why they would bother making this camera.
Sure make the film but a new super 8 camera is not needed.

Kodak Marketing must have done research to validate a new product design. Or maybe they didnt and that is why the camera appears to be stillborn.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #10
jawarden
Registered User
 
jawarden is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM View Post
The problem is that most of the Super 8 cameras out there, even the highest quality, don't have the ability to shoot modern high speed emulsions. I have a like-new Elmo C300 that can even take DS8 but no emulsions are available that allow me to use its TTL meter, so why waste $30 on a S8 cartridge when I could spend the same amount on 16mm?
THAT is why a new Super 8 option would be cool.
Phil Forrest
Exactly. The last I've read about the project was Kodak talking about the complexity of the design and the challenge of working with suppliers to hit tight tolerances. If you've seen the insides of these things they're like tiny friggin' sewing machines, lots of moving parts, etc. Just amazing. A 2+ year development cycle when starting from scratch on a design this complex doesn't surprise me a bit. (You could easily chew up a year on FMEA alone.) I've been involved in product development programs that have taken longer on far simpler products than this mechanical/digital camera. It ain't a Holga they're making.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #11
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawarden View Post
Exactly. The last I've read about the project was Kodak talking about the complexity of the design and the challenge of working with suppliers to hit tight tolerances. If you've seen the insides of these things they're like tiny friggin' sewing machines, lots of moving parts, etc. Just amazing. A 2+ year development cycle when starting from scratch on a design this complex doesn't surprise me a bit. (You could easily chew up a year on FMEA alone.) I've been involved in product development programs that have taken longer on far simpler products than this mechanical/digital camera. It ain't a Holga they're making.
With today's computer controlled manufacturing, hitting tight tolerances is not the challenge it used to be. I routinely visit tiny job shops that can hit sub micro levels of tolerance with very little rejection for failure.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #12
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
 
tunalegs's Avatar
 
tunalegs is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Good god you are a snowflake.

If you're going to try to insult people, at least use insults properly.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #13
jawarden
Registered User
 
jawarden is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
With today's computer controlled manufacturing, hitting tight tolerances is not the challenge it used to be. I routinely visit tiny job shops that can hit sub micro levels of tolerance with very little rejection for failure.
Yes, of course manufacturing has improved over the decades. This is not news, and does not remove the challenges of developing a complex electromechanical product such as this.

If Kodak releases the camera with problems the internet nerds will moan about how they rushed it through, and if they take the time to develop it properly the same people will complain about lack of communication and how awfully long it took when in many cases they had no intention of buying one anyway. Sound familiar?

One of Kodak's struggles appears to be with marketing. They started marketing Ektachrome early and then had delays, and that frustrated those that are easily frustrated and delighted the trolls. (Thankfully the film is great.) With P3200 they got it about right, announcing the product a reasonable time before availability. (And again, the product is great.) This camera though - assuming the project is still active - another example of marketing the product too soon IMO. It gives them a black eye unnecessarily, and makes threads like this appear.

It's an audacious thing they're doing with this product. I wish them the best.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #14
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,317
Nothing wrong with assumptions. They're usually based on experiential knowledge. Besides, no 8mm camera on earth is worth $2700. No matter what you do, it's gonna look like an 8mm film.

I never had an 8mm camera, but can we..... assume..... that the negs would be 1/3 the area of a 35mm neg? Talk about small prints and grainy images. The resolution would be too low and look crappy. It worked for Warhol, but who here is Warhol?

Speaking of Warhol, if you have kiddies you'll want to shoo them out of the room at the 4:20 mark for this montage. No nudity, no profanity, but, well, you know. It's that method acting thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_iJFcSgXss

I like the idea of being a snowflake. I've heard that no two are alike, so one would be totally unique. Good stuff!

This was shot on 16mm. and looks really good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG9pmEAO6q0&t=134s
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #15
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawarden View Post
Y This camera though - assuming the project is still active - another example of marketing the product too soon IMO. It gives them a black eye unnecessarily, and makes threads like this appear.
That's just it. Is this camera project still alive? That was the entire point of my OP. I dont follow everything so I was asking if there was news. It is VERY rare that a company announces a big splash product and then two years later, two years, fails to give even the hint of an update.

Kodak may have prematurely announced this camera, but that still does explain why they dont provide updates. Remember, the whole point of bringing back Ektachrome was for Super 8. That was a huge part of the announcement of this film. The volume of Super 8mm Ektachrome was going to help make the still version of this film possible.

Is Kodak even selling a Super 8mm version of the new Ektachrome?

If Kodak wants to prevent speculation, they have to fill the information gap.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #16
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,904
16mm is still an entry level professional quality format. The Hurt Locker and Black Swan are recent movies shot on 16mm.
As for the size of 8mm the image is about 1/5 the size of the 35mm motion image (which is ~half of 35mm still.)
8mm is still a great format for hobbyists but I dont think Super 8 is. Old standard (double run) 8mm can deliver excellent results because there are many extraordinary cameras out there with equally good lenses. That kind of package wasn't really put into Super 8 since it was foolproof home movie making for everyone. The carts don't really have good preasure plates and film steadiness is always an issue. It takes an investment into a working Canon, Nikon, Elmo, Nizo, etc plus a few parts bodies and the $$ and/or skill to repair them in order to sustain that expensive lo-fi hobby and get results which aren't the best in the firat place.
Just my opinion though. Anything that gets people buying Kodak is good in my mind.
EDIT: Yes, Kodak has sold S8 Ektachrome. Juat like the 35mm offering, it was all gone in several days.
Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #17
jawarden
Registered User
 
jawarden is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
That's just it. Is this camera project still alive? That was the entire point of my OP. I dont follow everything so I was asking if there was news. It is VERY rare that a company announces a big splash product and then two years later, two years, fails to give even the hint of an update.

Kodak may have prematurely announced this camera, but that still does explain why they dont provide updates. Remember, the whole point of bringing back Ektachrome was for Super 8. That was a huge part of the announcement of this film. The volume of Super 8mm Ektachrome was going to help make the still version of this film possible.

Is Kodak even selling a Super 8mm version of the new Ektachrome?

If Kodak wants to prevent speculation, they have to fill the information gap.
Their last update was Jan '18, so one year rather than two.

Their marketing is strong in some areas and weak in others. That lack of consistency hurts them as people lose interest in projects that feel like vaporware, even though the product may not be vaporware. Time will tell. They have a "contact us" link for super8 camera IIRC, and you can also be put on their email list for the latest news but I'm not on the list as I don't shoot video.

I think the answer to your question about whether the project is still alive is "yes", because I doubt they would keep that section of the web site active otherwise. Just a guess.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2019   #18
davidnewtonguitars
Family Snaps
 
davidnewtonguitars's Avatar
 
davidnewtonguitars is offline
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 1,346
I apologize to the group for becoming the troll.
__________________
Leica M2 / 7artisans 35-f2 / Canon 35-f2 ltm
http://davidnewtonguitars.squarespace.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2019   #19
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawarden View Post
Their last update was Jan '18, so one year rather than two.
Maybe we are due for a Jan '19 update then.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2019   #20
Dralowid
Michael
 
Dralowid's Avatar
 
Dralowid is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,573
I wonder where the digital Bolex project went...

Super 8 was always restricted by using the gate in the cartridge which is why Standard or Double 8 still has followers. 8mm film is still around but as said, the new Kodak stuff has all gone. Ferrania is promising some sometime too.

The one format that has I believe finally disappeared is 9.5mm.

None of this can be called cheap and adding the costs of scanning makes for an expensive medium.

I have many, many movie cameras, all still with their lenses, I'm occasionally tempted to use one but instead spend the money on buying another obscure camera...they, at least, are cheap!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2019   #21
Pistach
Dilettante artist
 
Pistach's Avatar
 
Pistach is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rome, Italy
Age: 74
Posts: 450
I argued that using Single 8 would be a good idea, because is larger than 8mm, and has none of the disadvantages of Super 8.
Unfortunately to find film and Labs is practically impossible!
Fuji should resurrect somehow Single 8 (in Provia)
Don't know if technical hurdles would arise for the substrate
But this would give new life to affordable film moovie taking!
I would really like it!
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:20.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.