I am going to buy one as soon as they hit the market in early Novemeber. I hope I get the 1987 edition. It's fire. Which one are you hoping to score?You are going to be getting one right /p/?You aren't gonna be a contrarian try hard no Charmera /p/haggot are you /p/? ISHYDDT
the whatnow?
>>4470128I bet you buy 7 of these and 4 of them are that gray onealso>No IBIS
>>4470128Yes. I was considering it. The blue one or the clear one is pretty cool. A modern digishitter may be pretty fun. It's actually difficult to find old digishits with such low MP.
>>4470128I'll wait until one shows up at the thrift store.Which is where I get all my cameras from.
>>4470131>. It's actually difficult to find old digishits with such low MPAgreed. The price is right too for a new snapshitter. Most of the old ones are busted/will be busted soon.I had an old Fuji that was 3.1mp that was fun. Sold it when old snapshitters went up in price. Wished I hadn't sometimes. Saw one in a 2nd hand store recently for cheap. Bought it and found the sensor was cooked.Few days later I saw an article about the Charmeras and decided to get one. They won't be actual vintage aesthetic but at least it will function correctly.
>>4470135You'll be waiting a long time. Charmeras are gonna be big. Collecting them will likely be a thing.
Good luck, they sold out within 8 minutes.Cruise eBay I'm sure a bunch were bought up by flippers and scalpers.
>>4470128I wasn’t keen until I saw it’s a keychain, that sold me.
>>4470137I'm in no rush. I'm not chasing trends.And if I need a tiny digishitter, I got my U20 in the meantime.
>>4470138That was just the presale to build hype. BHPhoto says they'll have them in stock sometime in November. Kodak needs to get their name out their for sales and pump profits. Doubtful the company won't be flush with stock heading into the holidays. These are gonna be a hit for stocking stuffers. Kodak is probably making a killing on them. Profit margin on a Charmera has got to be huge with an msrp of $30. Having them produced can't cost more than a few bucks.
>>4470141What's the pink one?
>>4470145Shitty kids camera that started turning up a few years ago. They've since evolved to include thermal printers, and more polished versions are available at Target and such now.Look up "kids camera" on your favorite China shopping site.
THEY DO ANYTHING BUT BRINGING KODACHROME BACK
>>4470152Film is dead. Let it go.
>>4470152Film is alive. Continue asking kodak to bring it back.
>>4470154>>4470155The duality of filman
>>4470152bro just get a z50ii and install a picture control preset with the exact color timing
>>4470155based>>4470154>>4470157fuck off retard
>>4470158Seethe filmlette.
>>4470158>The manchild can't let go of his nostalgia toysFilm is gone homie. It exists soley because of hollywood and one day your freezer-stored collection will run dry
>>4470158Film is here friend. Kodak, ilford, and other companies will continue making film in all sorts of formats. We will see a film resurgence!
>>4470131>It's actually difficult to find old digishits with such low MP.why not photoshop resize to 10% then resize back to 100%? same as shooting low MP
>>4470145kid's toy. my son has a based dino-themed one. it's pretty fun to shoot those. they lack a flash but I guess you shouldn't give a flash to 4yolds
>>4470189When most people goon over low MP what they normally mean is they want a CCD that caps out at ISO 1600. Also, resizing down then up can be extra destructive if you don't use the right methods.
>>4470189I would rather not use photoshop. I don't think it would have the same look as this either lol.
>>4470128totally the opaque one and park my bicyckle on grass
With all the nostalgia stuff going on these days I have to wonder if anyone will ever be nostalgic for anything in our current era.
>>4470287Depends what the future has to offer.
>>4470128OH NO NO NO NOhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-SCkC74_VE
>>4470323Image quality looks like something you'd get from a 2004 budget phone.
>>4470323is this a fucking joke?
>>4470327It is. They could have made something that was actually usable, but this is just a shameless cash grab trying to capitalize on the nostalgia/digicam craze. It is e-waste from the get go.
>>4470328by OP's pic I had assumed they were the size of a classic 35mm point'n'shoot - maybe a little smaller. but fuck me - they really took that chink toy camera from above and put it in a kodak branded plastic case. it's literally the same. i even recognize the "filters/effects" from my kid's toy camera. this is a fucking webcam.
>>4470338It's what the people want.
>>4470338nah the chink toy camera its closer to 3MP so it give better and sharper images lmao.It also comes with games like tetris!
Just get the Camp snap camera instead
>>4470342>just get a huge coolie brick with a high resolution sensor and no rear view screen for more than twice the costNah. I'll stick with the affordable tiny charm sized low rez full featured snapshitter that can hang from my keychain. Thanks anyway.
>>4470323What an annoying bastard to listen to
>>4470340>gearfagging over toy cameraskek
>>4470323This just seems like more garbage to pollute the Earth with. What a waste.
Let me guess, you need more?
>>4470130KEK
>>4470128>I am going to buy oneHow about you buy an ad?
>>4470435WHAT ARE THOSE
>>4470128The marketing and design team did a great job. It's also well priced, not in the sense that recycled plastic with a 2005 flip phone camera is a good deal, but in the sense that people don't mind $29. I actually might pick one up for the pixel filters because the photos look like they were made with the photocopy degradation technique.
>>4470451Forgot to add that it sucks absolute fucking ass that it has no internal memory.
>>4470338>took that chink toy camera from above and put it in a kodak branded plastic case.AND, they blind-boxed the things with one "rare" design
