"I actually find this linking of Olympus and Kodak rather disquieting. The
Kodak name has been synonymous with cheap, execrable quality, disposable
photo toys for 50 years."
Kodak is basically a film company, not a camera company. You don't sell film
by making expensive cameras that people can't afford. Kodak was a pioneer in
designing inexpensive products that weren't junk. Note especially their
recent single-use camera that's claimed to match the image quality of a good
SLR.
Damn. I spent too much money on my OM4T.
That said... Kodak has produced some classic cameras, including the
Medalist. A Modern Photography (I think) reviewer writing 20 years ago said
that he considered its lens the best lens ever put on any camera of any
kind. The Super Six-20 was the first camera with automatic exposure control.
Then there was the Ektra, Kodak's "answer" to the Leica, which failed mostly
because of an unreliable shutter.
All more than 50 years in the past I believe except for, possibly,
the Ektra which by your description seems to fit the execrable
quality characterization. Wasn't the Medalist about 80 years ago?
Long time to coast on past glory.
I still have a pocket instamatic 60. Regardless of what you think of the
format, this is a well-made camera with a high-quality lens. And it was made
in the US.
Well, that is a special interest camera and thank goodness Kodak had
all those other manufacturers making cameras that people wanted so
they could buy the film.
Kodak does make nice copy machines, much more reliable and easier to
use than Xerox.
--
Winsor Crosby
Long Beach, California
?
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|