RSSKodak Unveils PC-Free Digital Camera
By Ed Oswald | Published September 30, 2005, 3:35 PM
Kodak earlier this week unveiled a wireless digital camera, and announced a partnership with T-Mobile Hotspot that would allow the unit to e-mail pictures without the need for a computer. The camera was initially scheduled to debut earlier this summer, but engineering and marketing issues delayed its release.
The new camera has a resolution of 4.0 megapixels with a 3x optical zoom. 256 megabytes of internal memory will allow users to store up to 1,500 pictures depending on resolution. Also, a three-inch LCD touch screen enables users to navigate the camera's features.
However, the most notable feature of the camera is its ability to connect to the Internet through a Wi-Fi connection. The user will be able to access the Kodak Easyshare Gallery through either a home network for free, or the T-Mobile Hotspot network in the United States for a $4.99 per month service charge.
"The Kodak EasyShare-One camera combines the power of sharing, taking, organizing, and printing pictures into a single, highly innovative product," Greg Westbrook, vice president of Eastman Kodak Company said.
Although Kodak is not the first company to provide Wi-Fi access in a digital camera -- Nikon did so earlier this month -- the EasyShare-One is the first to not require a computer to transfer pictures.
The camera will retail for $599 USD and will be available shortly in most major electronics retailers, including Circuit City, CompUSA, and Ritz Camera in the United States.
I've been using one of these sweet cameras for a couple of days now. I'm taking it to the next Red Sox game and I'll be sending live pictures to my loser Yankee fan friends! (Yes, you can reach an open hotspot from Fenway)
Score: 0
|Did anyone at Samsung ..er Pentax..er Kodak.. ask WHY anyone would want this feature? And to want to do it often enough to pay $4.99 a month for the privilege. Personally I wouldn't give my s*** buttons to T-Mobile, never mind money.
T-mobile is losing customers rapidly (at least it is in Europe) and it is clear from their products and pricing why this is the case. This technological gimmick nonsense is not going to halt the exodus.
Score: 0
|Kodak should really spend a little more time on its engineering for picture quality, hardware efficiency and optical precision than waste it's time on this stuff.
People buy digital cameras primarily for their quality and functionality. If a camera is proud enough to boast a reputation for superior engineering in this field (as do a few of the camera giants ie. NIKON) then it would most certainly have earned the right to play with "additional features" as this.
I actually wonder who manufactures the internals for the kodak digital cameras. Does anyone know?? Is it samsung?
Score: 0
|Samsung (80% of their cameras, almost all their popular models) and Pentax (around 20%, mainly the higher models).
Score: 0
|I was going to say the same thing. My old Kodak was junk (allbeit it was a 1MP, but it still took horendous pictures for that resolution). The Canon I have now cost less than half as much as this thing and has the same resolution.
Score: 0
|Camera doesn't have a "camera" feel. as in it doesn't look like it was meant to be held, just displayed. Cameras should hold to a person's hand ... especially at this price.
Score: 0
|Cooooool....
What a useless feature.
Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do it.
Hey, there's a sucker born every minute. Probably every one of them will buy one of these.
Score: 0
|Did anyone else rush over here to get your free digital camera? Ahh man - color me red...
Score: 0
|DOA. If you have a wi-fi in your home, you have a computer. Is this aimed at the huge crowd of affluent picture-takers that have no computer so they hang out at Kinkos to do their email?
Don't get me wrong; I wouldn't mind my camera being wi-fi instead of plugging it in, but don't expect me to pay some big premium so I can share them from a T-Mobile Hotspot.
$600 for an average 4mp? How about a $550 Dell laptop with wifi and a $150 camera? That's a whole lotta features for the $100 difference.
Score: 0
|like you mention...weird...who would spent $600 on a camera and have no computer ? ( to edit, enhance, modify, create, and store your photo's)...
Score: 0
|That's really expensive for a 4.0 megapixel camera. The Wi-Fi feature isn't that great, is it?
Score: 0
|Nice looking Samsung (the lens made by Schneider, a brand of Rollei)!
Score: 0
|