brennanphotoguy
Well-known
I foresee Nikon having to consolidate some of their lines a bit. They have the D3XXX and D5XXX lines that are very similar and they'll probably have to make that into one line. They should really consider consolidating the D6XX line and just letting the D7XX be their entry level full frame kit. Then have the D5 and D500 and presumably the D6 and D550 be their pro bodies and just not doing another DF as bad as people want it. I don's see Micro 4/3 surviving in the photo world but maybe sticking around in the video world. I think there will still be premium point and shoots but the lower end stuff will start to disappear.
Skiff
Well-known
Mini-labs are still being built and offered new. In addition several manufacturers have specialised on spare parts manufacturing and complete refurbishing. Such machines are like new and good for decades of work.
Come to Photokina fair this September and you will see all that! Last Photokina I was astonished to see so much companies being active in that segment. Much more than I had expected. Several companies just entered the business.
There are enough machines and capacities available to process 5-6x of the current film volume.
And mini-labs are only one part of the processing industry: In Europe there are several big mass volume industrial labs which are developing millions of films every year. They also have enough capacity to manage a significant film demand increase.
Professesional dip&dunk machines are also still available new, from several manufacturers. Refurbished ones are also available.
Therefore: Processing will definitely not be a bottleneck for the film revival.
And Jobo will introduce the new Jobo CPE-3 for precise and cost efficient home development of colour and BW film and RA-4 paper next month.
Skiff
Well-known
I am a bit more optimistc, because
1. The new film cameras will offer advanced technology compared to the former ones. There will be differences to the older models. E.g a Nikon F7 would offer the AF System of the D5, same metering system, the possibility to use E-lenses, and probably a direct read-out of the EXIF data (the F6 needs the MV-1 or meta35).
2. Almost all camera manufacturers are nowadays able to produce extremely small series / batches. Because they have to for over a decade. The top-of-the line DSLRs have all been built only in tiny volumes (because of the extremely high prices). E.g from the D2h only 7,000 units were built.
But who is going to pay $5000+ for a 35mm (non-Leica) body these days?
Skiff
Well-known
Why 5000$??
Such a camera can be offered for about the same price as the current F6. Maybe a bit more expensive. But not double so much.
The F6 has (had) the same AF and (almost same) metering system as the D2 cameras. And was also offered at less than half the price.
The F6 was even lower in price than the F5, despite being the much better camera.
What the D5 is making so expensive is neither the AF or metering system, or the mirror mechanics. Its the sensor and the needed electronics.
You can use a lot from the current F6 and from the D5, and combine that to an excellent F7. And you have extremely low development costs.
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Not really. Ferrari, Leica, Hasselblad, etc. don't really rely on the mass consumers model. They are niche and segment markets. Companies like Nikon and Canon make some segment products as well. Its all depends on the logistics and marketing models they use.
Pioneer
Veteran
You are absolutely right. Those companies do provide niche products but they also cost a lot of money. Without a high end luxury market to support them they would struggle.
Most people are not willing to spend that amount of money on a camera, whether they like them or not.
The F6 is from 2004. It was $2300 then. I would think that it will be double in 2016. Especially since it'll be in limited numbers.
Good points, but I'm not sure it is easy to just combine the two cheaply.
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Well cheap is a relative term. Take a look at the VC Bessa. They had elements from a SLR build into a Rangefinder (shutter, film wind system, etc.) , in other words, they didnt build them from scratch . They were relative cheap for a niche product.
Marcelo
Spanik
Well-known
A niche product can be for 2 types of customers:
- they have no other option than what you make
- they want your product at any price you want to sell it
Guess what custumers those brand mentioned before are catering for.
- they have no other option than what you make
- they want your product at any price you want to sell it
Guess what custumers those brand mentioned before are catering for.
But those were very simple cameras.
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Take a look at Leica MP
Bessa R2 had more features that MP and sell for less. It fulfill a niche need or a status need, you pick which suit you better.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Just wondering: if digital cameras go down to zero and film is dead and iPhone sales are beginning to slide, then maybe we are screwed....just saying.
Pioneer
Veteran
Don't worry Akiva. By that time there will be millions of used iphones on the market. They'll be cheap as chips. You will be able to buy them with pocket change, use them until the camera part dies, then toss it out (or send it for recycling) and buy another.
Aristophanes
Well-known
And if the camera is high-end, will people also pay $40 per roll of film if volumes decline to that price efficiency?
By definition if you increase the price you shrink the volume.
Right now the film camera market is 99% salvage.
Aristophanes
Well-known
You realize you just explained using equivalence why digital cameras will continue to be offered affordably. Your original post speculated that people will turn away from digital specific cameras as they become too expensive.
The reason the F6 cost less than the F5 was because the factory floor inputs got cheaper, even as the film camera market contracted massively.
That is still happening in digital. FF sensors, for example, have come down almost 60% in the last 24 months.
The D5 is priced where it is mostly because of margins, not sensors. Flagships are the cost-shifters. Most of the tech is actually not that costly, but the flagship is paying for the original development inputs. As they mature, those same tech innovations will fall in cost by factors up to 20x. They'll hit a floor (FF sensors may be getting there), but we are nowhere near done bending the cost curve on the camera side. optical may have done so because those are relatively fixed and known quantities.
Digital camera sales are not "collapsing". The tech matures, saturates, but the per unit costs continue to decline at a faster rate than put-off demand. What happened between the F5 and F6 is continuing in digital cameras.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Cameras were next after they pretty much trashed the GPS low end market.....
jarski
Veteran
Didn't we just have news that Fuji had cancelled another film type? And still it's digital that's collapsing, and some here are wondering how Nikon F7 will be like.
KM-25
Well-known
Yeah, Fuji killed a color neg film, nice stuff too, I just used some in 4x5 on a magazine piece.
But we already knew that about Fuji, killing off their films slowly but surely. Kodak has a good thing going with color neg, I can name several pros who do dynamite work with it and hopefully it will stick around awhile. I don't use a lot of color, maybe 5% of my film use but when I do use it, I enjoy the results in all formats.
Black and white is good to go, easy to make, easy to process and easy to print, very much a scalable business.
But new film cameras beyond niche players like Leica? Not so much in my opinion, certainly not a Nikon F7. People tend to not want to just blast away willy-nilly with film these days, partly due to cost and partly due to being more thoughtful about it frame by frame as a creative zen / rhythm.
As far as decline in digital? I have no idea and I realty doubt anyone else does either, too many players, too many moving parts...want to win the war, confuse your enemy, lol!
One thing is for sure though, I don't use any digital camera system that does not have a film option so that leaves me with the big players, Leica, Nikon, Hasselblad.
jarski
Veteran
Yes am appreciating also the systems that allow using same lenses on both mediums.
If scanning, the most mundane task of film process could be facilitated by some new invention and product, perhaps more people would (re)discover film. Edit: something like new version of Kodak Pakon, that would allow leave it do whole roll and deliver scratch and dust free hi-resolution results. It could include changeable pressured air capsule to de-dust frame before scanning it.
If scanning, the most mundane task of film process could be facilitated by some new invention and product, perhaps more people would (re)discover film. Edit: something like new version of Kodak Pakon, that would allow leave it do whole roll and deliver scratch and dust free hi-resolution results. It could include changeable pressured air capsule to de-dust frame before scanning it.