x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA

Say hello to the first Kodak smartphone ever made

Posted: , by Chris P.

Tags:

Say hello to the first Kodak smartphone ever made

Several decades ago, photographic film-making company Kodak was so influential that its "Kodak moment" tagline became synonymous with "stuff you absolutely have to take a shot of". With the advent of the digital era, however, Kodak quickly lost steam and later had to file for bankruptcy and re-organize the business, not to mention sell half a billion worth of patents to major tech players like Google, Samsung, Apple, Microsoft, and HTC. 

But enough with the history lesson – back in December, we heard that Kodak is planning on releasing a smartphone that will bear its brand at CES 2015, but the device itself will be built by Bullitt, the company that manufactures CAT's ruggedized smartphones. It turns out, the duo wasn't kidding, for the Kodak IM5 is now a reality.

The Kodak phone is a respectable, upper mid-range device, with a manageable, 5-inch display (720 x 1280 pixels, 294 ppi), an octa-core MediaTek MT6592 processor, 1GB of RAM, 8GB of microSD-expandable internal storage, and a set of 5MP/13MP cameras at the front and back, respectively. The device showcased at the CES floors ran Android 4.4 KitKat, but Kodak is promising an upgrade to Android 5.0 Lollipop later in the year. Speaking of Android, don't expect a stock-looking interface. Rather, Kodak and Bullitt have created a pretty simplistic UI that is obviously aimed at newcomers to smartphones, and has also included a separate (supposedly easier-to-use) app store alongside the Google Play Store.

Kodak says that the IM5 is for "consumers who appreciate the value and heritage of the Kodak brand", but don't go thinking that it has any serious photographic chops. The camera software is pretty down-to-the-point, and users can't fiddle with manual settings and the like. That said, according to CNET, the first Kodak phone will cost just €229 in Europe, where it will launch in the first quarter, and eventually make its way to the US with a tag of $249. 


source: PR Newswire, CNET

28 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:10

1. Fallen1 (Posts: 283; Member since: 14 Nov 2014)


Specs are a little disappointing by dam this phone is sexy

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 15:07 7

22. Enddo (Posts: 50; Member since: 26 May 2014)


And here I was thinking "wow, that's one ugly phone"

posted on 07 Jan 2015, 09:39

28. dorianb (Posts: 592; Member since: 24 Oct 2012)


I thought it looked like the mutated loved child of an old iPhone 4 & an even older Galaxy S 2.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:10 3

2. Anshulonweb (Posts: 430; Member since: 07 Feb 2014)


In short- it has not special....

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:12 4

4. Anshulonweb (Posts: 430; Member since: 07 Feb 2014)


*nothing....( never rely on auto correct)

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 14:21 2

20. Johnnokia (Posts: 1074; Member since: 27 May 2012)


Kodak licenses their name, you know. Some chinese company buys the brand name, sticks it on their crap, and sells it. And your mom goes "oh kodak!" and buys aforementioned crap.

It seems like that might be the story here..

Read the press release on kodak’s website. Under each market segment, you’ll find an email.

For smartphones, it goes to an address not at kodak.com, but bullitt-group.com.

Go there, and you’ll find the statement:

"Bullitt Group designs, manufactures, markets and sells mobile phones and consumer electronic products in partnership with global brands".
So this isn’t a kodak smartphone. This is a smartphone from a company you’ve never heard of that stuck kodak’s logo on it.

Shame on you Nokia... If you went to Android since 2011, no one would have ever been worry about the smartphones' camera.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 16:25 1

24. Crispin_Gatieza (Posts: 1615; Member since: 23 Jan 2014)


"Shame on you Nokia... If you went to Android since 2011, no one would have ever been worry about the smartphones' camera."

How does Android make Nokia's, or any body else's, camera better? I haven't seen any smartphone camera better than the Lumia 1020. Or 1520 for that matter.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 18:47 2

26. Manti123 (banned) (Posts: 207; Member since: 10 Apr 2014)


Probably, most of people want Android smartphone with a great or extraordinary camera that only Nokia could produce, and by the end Nokia does not have a real Android phone yet.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:11 1

3. ryq24 (Posts: 698; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


There are too many brands already in the smartphone market!

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:14 7

5. CanYouSeeTheLight (Posts: 1116; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)


"Let's make a deal with Kodak because their name is known and ignore the reason why Kodak is known."

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:29 6

11. Fallen1 (Posts: 283; Member since: 14 Nov 2014)


No kidding I was expecting them to trump Sony and or at least offer something like Nokia

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:18

6. TimCook (banned) (Posts: 450; Member since: 23 Oct 2014)


Hello..

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:19 2

7. AME85 (Posts: 41; Member since: 16 Dec 2014)


Is it an iphone?

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:22 1

8. Crispin_Gatieza (Posts: 1615; Member since: 23 Jan 2014)


If the camera is worthwhile, it could be a good choice for those who need a smartphone for basic things like email, web browsing and Facebook. Not everybody needs or wants a flagship.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:30 5

12. Martin_Cooper (Posts: 1373; Member since: 30 Jul 2013)


250$ for a phone with mediocre mediatek cpu? Moto G 2014 wants to have a chat for around 180$. 13mp camera means nothing as I can point you quite few phones that have a big sensor that sucks cause of bad optimization.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:59 3

15. hurrycanger (Posts: 1557; Member since: 01 Dec 2013)


He already said "if the camera is worthwhile".

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 13:02 1

18. Crispin_Gatieza (Posts: 1615; Member since: 23 Jan 2014)


Do they even bother teaching reading comprehension anymore?

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:23 2

9. Sharky (Posts: 233; Member since: 24 Jun 2008)


$249? Laughable.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:26

10. SaintHelena (banned) (Posts: 397; Member since: 05 Nov 2014)


The UI/icon is so damn huge

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:43 4

13. surethom (Posts: 612; Member since: 04 Mar 2009)


I'm sorry but in 2015 NO android phone even if it is a budget phone should have less than 16gb of storage & 1.5gb ram.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 11:56 3

14. iOSLMFAO (banned) (Posts: 290; Member since: 15 Dec 2014)


First flop of the year. 1GB RAM, Mediatek processor, no manual settings for the camera (the f*ck?)...ugh. At least the price is somewhat appropriate, as opposed to the Fire phone.
I'd still take it over an iphail though.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 12:01 2

16. CreeDiddy (Posts: 623; Member since: 04 Nov 2011)


Kodak why waste your time in a crowded Android market? Go with big specs or nothing at all.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 12:07 1

17. Nebice (Posts: 48; Member since: 05 Jan 2015)


do they know which year it is??? 1gb ram 249$ are they crazy? someone like jiayu/elephone have phones with 3gb ram for about 200$....

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 14:18 2

19. xtroid2k (Posts: 515; Member since: 11 Jan 2010)


I find the fact that Kodak didn't incorporate awsome camera features into the device unacceptle. Kodak you are a Fim/photography company. What is wrong with you? This phone is just going to be another phone in the pile. Infact Kodak didn't even build which makes it worse. I think we have really entered the era of good enough computing. Where companies roll out stuff thats good enough for the masses.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 15:04

21. Crispin_Gatieza (Posts: 1615; Member since: 23 Jan 2014)


I don't understand why anyone would wax nostalgic over a Kodak camera. They made great film products but their best cameras were Instamatic 110s and 126s. The digital cameras they had around 2001 were absolute garbage.

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 15:12

23. fzacek (Posts: 2486; Member since: 26 Jan 2014)


Should've kept the interface stock...

posted on 06 Jan 2015, 18:39 1

25. Rhinoface (Posts: 176; Member since: 05 Dec 2014)


Does this remind anyone else of the original Droid? Looks wise.

I have to agree though that they should've went all out with the camera.

What has Kodak even been doing for years? Nothing substantial, seeing as how I nearly forgot they existed. This could've been a new market for them, dominating the Android cameraphone.

posted on 07 Jan 2015, 08:34

27. tokuzumi (Posts: 946; Member since: 27 Aug 2009)


That's a whole slab of nope. 1GB of ram? That's a low end device. Not mid-range. The overall design looks kind of iPhone-ish, but if they were going to use the Kodak name, they should have at least put a real camera on it, like that panasonic (lumix) phone. Oh, well....

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories