Post it over at PF. It'll be on the front page within days.
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Larry Colen, l...@red4est.com (From
Droid) wrote:
> I made it up, but I think I did a pretty good job. Maybe if we spread it
> around enough someone at Ricoh will decide the idea has merit.
> I did hea
I made it up, but I think I did a pretty good job. Maybe if we spread it around
enough someone at Ricoh will decide the idea has merit.
I did hear the rumor of the mirrorless 645, so I used that as some of it.
John Sessoms wrote:
>From: Larry Colen
>
>> This subject line is fodder for great
From: Larry Colen
This subject line is fodder for great fantasies around which to spin
rumors:
Ricoh is in negotiations to buy Kodak, or their sensor business, so
that they can get the 645D sensors at cost. This will enable them to
drop the price of the 645D to $7,000. Meanwhile, they are worki
On Jan 10, 2012, at 2:23 PM, David Parsons wrote:
> Don't forget that the 645E will be pocketable. Because, apparently,
> that is what sells cameras; if you can jam them into a pocket.
Only with big pockets, and the E-mount wide angle pancake lens. With the
pancake lens, it'll be about the si
Don't forget that the 645E will be pocketable. Because, apparently,
that is what sells cameras; if you can jam them into a pocket.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> This subject line is fodder for great fantasies around which to spin rumors:
>
> Ricoh is in negotiations to bu
This subject line is fodder for great fantasies around which to spin rumors:
Ricoh is in negotiations to buy Kodak, or their sensor business, so that they
can get the 645D sensors at cost. This will enable them to drop the price of
the 645D to $7,000.
Meanwhile, they are working on developing th
From: Joseph McAllister
I really don't know any more than is on the internet about the
technology in use today. My ex is still in the program, but of
course, she can't talk to me like we did when we were both cleared at
the same level. I am personally very jealous of her position. She
left the "
Google "Talent Keyhole". Optically these birds are the Hubble with the ability
to swing from one target to another very quickly using 6 gyros with disk
brakes. Pretty clever, The hubble uses the same tech to stay on a target for
hours at a time. KH-xx uses heavy braking, Hubble a finesse braking
On 2011-11-07 23:34, Joseph McAllister wrote:
Kodak received gobs of money from the dark side USG to develop the CCD sensor for their
Digital Imaging satellites, beginning with the K-11, built in 75/76, Launched in 77. I
have one here somewhere in a box with my other treasures from the day. Inc
e
and can dominant any meeting he is attending.
He is a true Car Guy.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: "Tom C"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 12:52 PM
Subject: Re: Kodak and the 645D sensor
>On 11/8/
Tom C wrote:
>It's now been a day since I read the article. It seems to me the bean
>counters are basically throwing in the towel. Due to poor management,
>market conditions, or a combination of circumstances, they'd rather
>get the cold hard cash for the assets than attempt to grow the assets.
>A
From: Mark Roberts
Rick Womer wrote:
In other words:
Kodak takes a stiff shot of whiskey, then climbs into a hotel bathtub
and cuts out one of its own kidneys. ?It's tricky, since they've
amputated their fingers and toes over the last decade.
I'm thinking that it's probably a good thing for
>On 11/8/2011 1:47 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Tom C wrote:
>
>>> From: Mark Roberts
>>>
>>> From the press release: "Kodak has previously communicated that it
>>> would sell assets that are not central to its transformation to a
>>> profitable, sustainable digital company."
>>>
>>> Because, you kn
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
>
> Because, you know, digital image sensors aren't central to a company
> that's involved in digital imaging.
At least we still have Plus-X. Wait, what...
Shit.
--
Scott Loveless
Camp Hill, PA USA
http://www.twosixteen.com/fivetoedsloth
On 11/8/2011 1:47 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Tom C wrote:
From: Mark Roberts
From the press release: "Kodak has previously communicated that it
would sell assets that are not central to its transformation to a
profitable, sustainable digital company."
Because, you know, digital image sensors a
Tom C wrote:
>> From: Mark Roberts
>>
>> From the press release: "Kodak has previously communicated that it
>> would sell assets that are not central to its transformation to a
>> profitable, sustainable digital company."
>>
>> Because, you know, digital image sensors aren't central to a company
On Nov 8, 2011, at 07:44 , Mark Roberts wrote:
> Rick Womer wrote:
>
>> In other words:
>>
>> Kodak takes a stiff shot of whiskey, then climbs into a hotel bathtub
>> and cuts out one of its own kidneys. It's tricky, since they've
>> amputated their fingers and toes over the last decade.
>
> From: Mark Roberts
>
> From the press release: "Kodak has previously communicated that it
> would sell assets that are not central to its transformation to a
> profitable, sustainable digital company."
>
> Because, you know, digital image sensors aren't central to a company
> that's involved in
Bob Sullivan wrote:
>And if you want to worry about somebody, how about Olympus!
>Can they survive this latest scandal.
Judging by today's news Olympus could be soon be at such a low point
that they could be bought *by* Kodak!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mai
>>> Stock price rises 6% today
Woo hoo! A buck nineteen a share! It's over a dollar now!
>From the press release: "Kodak has previously communicated that it
would sell assets that are not central to its transformation to a
profitable, sustainable digital company."
Because, you know, digital ima
And if you want to worry about somebody, how about Olympus!
Can they survive this latest scandal.
Regards, Bob S.
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:26 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
>> Actually, now I am sure about that point on the stock price.
>> http://w
Rick Womer wrote:
>In other words:
>
>Kodak takes a stiff shot of whiskey, then climbs into a hotel bathtub
>and cuts out one of its own kidneys. It's tricky, since they've
>amputated their fingers and toes over the last decade.
I'm thinking that it's probably a good thing for Pentax that Kod
Kodak's history is pretty long.
George Eastman understood what he had as a company in 1912.
He was an early, silent benefactor of MIT.
http://museum.mit.edu/150/72
Kodak's stock was a bluechip for a long time,
but nothing lasts forever!
100 years is a pretty good run!
Regards, Bob S.
On Tue, Nov
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
>
> My first digital camera in 1995 was a Kodak DC-40. Couldn't afford Apple's
> QuickTake camera at the time.
Mine was the DC25 i bought in 1997. I think it held 16 internal
640x480 file sand a 2 meg card was $280 at the time. Used it t
rk Roberts
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Cc:
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2011 8:25 PM
Subject: Kodak and the 645D sensor
Kodak has just sold their digital sensor division (who make the sensor
for the 645D)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/08/us-eastmankodak-idUSTRE7A70872008
http://betanew
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> Actually, now I am sure about that point on the stock price.
> http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/chart?symbol=EK.N
>
> "Stock price rises 6% today on the news" is an example of how
> statistics are like bikinis:
> What they show you is reve
On Nov 8, 2011, at 5:34 PM, Joseph McAllister wrote:
> Incredibly fine CCDs, considering the resolution they provided for 9", then
> 5" film, where an image of a 20 mile wide swath would resolve a 1 foot item
> 190 miles below.
You're not about to "disappear" now, I hope...
Dave
--
PDML Pe
Kodak received gobs of money from the dark side USG to develop the CCD sensor
for their Digital Imaging satellites, beginning with the K-11, built in 75/76,
Launched in 77. I have one here somewhere in a box with my other treasures from
the day. Incredibly fine CCDs, considering the resolution t
On Nov 8, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> IMHO, Kodak's stock probably rose because this is an indication that
> they are making solid moves to avoid bankruptcy... possibly
> positioning themselves for a takeover instead. Kodak shares plummeted
> when they retained a law firm that specializ
Actually, now I am sure about that point on the stock price.
http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/chart?symbol=EK.N
"Stock price rises 6% today on the news" is an example of how
statistics are like bikinis:
What they show you is revealing, but what they hide is VITAL.
Darren Addy
Kearney, Nebras
Kodak is the new Polaroid.
Darren Addy
Kearney, Nebraska
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
IMHO, Kodak's stock probably rose because this is an indication that
they are making solid moves to avoid bankruptcy... possibly
positioning themselves for a takeover instead. Kodak shares plummeted
when they retained a law firm that specializes in handling
bankruptcies. A 6% rise today is probably
Well don't that beat all. Kodak spends the last 10 years or so trying
to become a force in digital imaging to the neglect of all other aspects
of it's business then sells one of it's flagship digital imaging
divisions. To top that it's stock goes up 6%. The stock market is
crazy. Kodak is s
Kodak has just sold their digital sensor division (who make the sensor
for the 645D)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/08/us-eastmankodak-idUSTRE7A70872008
http://betanews.com/2011/11/07/kodak-sells-off-its-ccd-image-sensor-business-to-private-equity-firm/
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/
34 matches
Mail list logo
