HHPhoto
Well-known
People said the same about turntables when the CD became mainstream. What happened instead? Look at the turntable market now: New manufacturers, established manufacturers bringing new models to the market, and so much different models that most consumers have a problem to choose one...
.People said the same about instant cameras: Now Fujifilm is producing more than 7 million units a year. That is almost double of what all mirrorless camera manufacturers are producing together.
Look at Cosina Voigtländer: They saw a market gap and filled it with the Voigtländer Bessa III. If someone would have told you in summer 2008 (short before the introduction of that camera) that a Japanese camera manufacturer would introduce a new folding (!) camera some weeks later: What would you have told him? That he is an idiot? That he is crazy? That he is drunk....
?Cheers, Jan
css9450
Veteran
HHPhoto
Well-known
Yes.
Because the small market gap was filled by that camera over the years.
I've mentioned it to demonstrate how markets work: If there are market gaps, even very small ones, and a demand, then there is also a good chance that new, unconventional and completely unexpected (by the majority) niche products are produced.
I well remember the discussion in the early 00 years. "There will be no F6, the F5 will be the last prof. film Nikon. Film is dead".
In 2004 Nikon introduced the F6, and now, 14 years later, it is still in production. No one of the "experts" has predicted that.
Cheers, Jan
Archlich
Well-known
People said the same about turntables when the CD became mainstream. What happened instead? Look at the turntable market now: New manufacturers, established manufacturers bringing new models to the market, and so much different models that most consumers have a problem to choose one...
People said the same about instant cameras: Now Fujifilm is producing more than 7 million units a year. That is almost double of what all mirrorless camera manufacturers are producing together.
Look at Cosina Voigtländer: They saw a market gap and filled it with the Voigtländer Bessa III. If someone would have told you in summer 2008 (short before the introduction of that camera) that a Japanese camera manufacturer would introduce a new folding (!) camera some weeks later: What would you have told him? That he is an idiot? That he is crazy? That he is drunk....
Cheers, Jan
I know the turntables are commonly brought up for this kind of topic. Yes, they are luxury items like film cameras: you don't need black vinyl records to enjoy music just like it's no longer mandatory to use film to take photographs anymore. The main difference here is, unlike cameras, the turntables are much simpler to design and produce and are not all that expensive. There are $99 ones for beginners. $300 gets you a pretty decent one, and you may never need to venture further. How many of us could settle for a new $300 film camera? How much does a new FM10 cost? How does it compare to the millions of existing film cameras you just mentioned, price to performance wise? How much would us die-hard film shooters be willing to shell out for a new FM2 level camera? How many of us did buy a F6 new after all?
Why are the moderately priced Cosina Bessas discontinued, with film consumption seemingly on the rise? Is Mr. Kobayashi, the man behind the renaissance, lacking passion or short sighted? (Personally I'd be more than happy to see their production resumed. But will they?)
The GF670/Bessa III meanwhile, being expensive but unique, had seen very limited production, which stopped in 2014. The GF670W/Bessa 667 Wide variant lasted even shorter for only 4 years. A friend at local Fujifilm told me there were only a/an (unverified) total of 3,000 GF670W produced in one single batch; the model is discontinued as soon as the original and only stock drained. You can almost figure the annual sales revenue out - and that's the true demand figure among the 7 billion people on the planet for this type of camera. It's a good gesture that the cameras did make it; but would that be sufficient to support big companies like any of the good old camera manufacturers we know of?
Niches are niches. Very few of them could ever become mainstream, whatever level of former glory it once enjoyed. It is always possible for a manufacturer or an individual, now powered by flexible capital-raising means like crowdfunding, to release a limited production, high priced, high quality new camera. But it will never be successful on a larger scale. People would like to shoot film cameras in 2018 partly out of pure aesthetic instead of practical reasons, partly because the once so expensive pro gears had became affordable in the past decades. If the price were to inflate back to a certain point, most would just quit since not everyone - or most of us just don't - have disposable incomes. Aesthetics alone is never the main driving force behind mass-market successes, simply because beauty had never been mandatory in our trivia-filled daily life.
I'm not saying film photography is dead. It never was. It's just not quite alive either.
HHPhoto
Well-known
People are buying digital cameras for thousands of dollars in 3-5 year cycles.
But they don't have 300$ for a film camera that even lasts much much longer?
Sorry, that is ridiculous.
And it is not the case in reality, see the following comment:
Just look at the current used camera market: People are already paying very high prices for cameras like the Contax 645, Contax T2 and T3, Yashica T4 and T5, Minolta TC-1, Nikon Ti 28 and 35, Olympus Mju II, Pentax 67, Pentax 645 NII, Mamiya 6 and 7 / 7II, Plaubel Makina 67, almost all Hasselblads, Fuji TC1, Rollei TLRs, Rollei SL66E, Fuji GW 690, Fuji GX 680, Fuji GX 617, Linhof Technika, Nikon Fm3A, Nikon F6, Voigtländer Bessa III and several others.
As the interest in film is increasing, the prices for popular cameras, and seldom cameras (cameras produced in low volumes) are increasing.
The current price level just shows you that there is high demand for these cameras and that people are paying these prices.
The longer this trend is continuing, the higher the price level, the more attractive it will be for manufacturers to enter the market.
I know from the industry that first studies are currently made concerning re-intering the film camera market. But as all this takes time (market research and camera developing) I expect new cameras not in the short term, but in the mid and long term.
By the way: MINT will introduce its new higher-quality folding camera for Instax Wide film this year.
I did it. Several others on this forum, too (see the threads about the F6). So far about 35,600 customers have bought a F6 new (clearly indicated by the current shipped serial numbers).
Reality is proving you wrong for years: If you were right it would be impossible that meanwhile about 30 millions of people are using instant film.
There are so much more reasons to shoot film than you've mentioned.
And people are different, and make different choices.
Cheers, Jan
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Your usual FUD postings. You act like a robot. Boring, nothing else. Neither is Fujifilm exiting (you know that they are by far the biggest film manufacturer with booming instax sales and just recently introduced new 3-packs for C200 and X-Tra 400), nor is there any evidence that Kodak is going away from film production.
People like you are saying film is dying for 15 years now. But the opposite has happened: With Instax a film product is a mass market product again, even much better selling than mirrorless digital cameras. There are even new film manufacturers on the market like Adox and Film Ferrania (something what the doom and gloom prayers always have declared to be absolutely impossible). There are new films on the market, lots of new labs, film shops and used film camera shops.
The situation now is much much better than most thought ten years ago it would be!
And in ten years from now the situation will even be significantly better for film users than today.
About how much should we bet, 1,000$, 10,000$?
No problem for me to go in for 10,000$. Very easy earned money
Cheers, Jan
You insulted person who, if I'm not mistaken, has stock shares with Kodak.
Well, I was not keen by calling one of you two as hipster and communists, I guess it is my fault. Let's do it again.
Instax has nothing to do with film photography most of us are into here. But you are dumping this Instax card every time we are talking about film photography. You are like LP with broken record.
And you are acting here like bot who scans the web and dumping it here without reading and understanding. Just keywords recognition rudimental algorithm. And dump it here with another key words. It is boring indeed.
Ferrania is not ADOX. Ferrania name using bunch can't make anything as stable product. It is obvious for any person like me, who has basic knowledge in production and manufacturing received in university and on practice.
http://www.filmferrania.it/news-articles/2018/the-lrf-is-ours-again
Arrested development season 5 indeed.
This guy in Moscow is using some old coating machine and one operator. One guy, plus one operator makes more film than "Ferrania" bunch.
OOPS I did it again, call me as you want in return.
Dektol Dan
Well-known
Analog is Forever
Analog is Forever
Our brains are analog computers. To assume analog is passing is to assume music and most art forms are passing too.
As far as film goes, I can see it's many advantages and I will use film as long at it remains available. Photography to me has always been a craft aspiring to be art.
Long live quarter wave harmonics!
Analog is Forever
Our brains are analog computers. To assume analog is passing is to assume music and most art forms are passing too.
As far as film goes, I can see it's many advantages and I will use film as long at it remains available. Photography to me has always been a craft aspiring to be art.
Long live quarter wave harmonics!
HHPhoto
Well-known
And why do we have a subforum for instant film photography here?
Lots of rff members are using instant and Instax film and enjoy it.
And you don't understand the importance of these product type for film production in general. It was explained here in detail several times by several members.
Again, for you:
1. Instant film is a film product with a negative film base. Produced on the same machinery as standard film (emulsion and coating).
2. By producing instant film companies like Fujifilm and Inoviscoat (they produce the film base for Polaroid films) can run their coating lines at proper capacity. That keeps other film products in production! At Fujifilm their standard films, at Inoviscoat film products for Lomography (Lomo Purple) and Bergger (Panchro 400) and photo paper products for other companies.
3. Instant photography attracts lots of people who have so far never shot film. Especially young, digital natives. With instant film they "overcome their first hurdles in using film". And lots of them gets hooked and also start using standard film.
Therefore it is very important as a "get-in drug"
into using film. Because it is easy and a lot of fun. Perfect for first steps.Correct. Adox is in a much better position delivering very high quality.
So far, yes. The quality is not up to the standard we are used to. I've tested their P30 film, and was dissappointed.
We have to wait and see how they will improve. They certainly will improve, how far is the question.
But, If you would have read my postings with attention, you would have seen that I've never said Film Ferrania will be a company on the same level as Kodak, Ilford etc.. I've just said that some years ago almost all "experts" said it is absolutely impossible that such a venture can happen. But the FF people just do it. Despite all the enormous difficulties.
Cheers, Jan
Archlich
Well-known
You're still comparing used prices to new while mixing the budget ones with the expensive. The 35mm luxury point & shoots were products of the Japanese bubble age, cost an average $1,000 when new 20 years ago, and were never meant for the mass. The medium format cameras: the Contax 645, Pentax 645N and 67, the Mamiyas were all multi-thousand dollar professional gears. Not many people could afford them then, still not many could now. There are people willing pay for them doesn't mean there's a lot of them, in a number large enough to support a budget-demanding industry. There are always people willing to pay any price for anything. Each Minolta TC-1 was made possible by perhaps a thousand Freedom sales. The Instax meanwhile enjoys mass-market success because a new Instax camera sells for as low as $60 and a twin film pack for $12. It's a price deemed acceptable by the ordinary people for an instant, tangible print, which is an affordable luxury. It's the same for consumers who are paying $$$ for a digital camera: the price is deemed OK for the quality and convenience it offers. But there had been always much fewer of them and we all know that number is in fast decline: many more people would pay $$$ for smart phones which depreciate even faster. Just for the convenience.
People surely are different and make different choices. But there is one thing I can firmly put my faith in: as long as economics goes, those who can and are willing to pay $$$$ for a new film camera will always be a tiny, tiny minority. Let us not judge by the specific examples in our daily lives lead us to believe, but use common sense: 36500 F6 buyers in 14 years (how many per year in the last 5 years, since we all follow the serial number thread?), that's it. Hardly profitable, yet Nikon still makes it out of good will. But does a company run on good will alone? If the used F6 price is pushed up to the $2,000s, will Nikon suddenly have a lot of new customers?
I'd not be counting on that minority to breathe life back to the film camera industry. Unless the average wage suddenly boomed for some reason...but then we'd be having different desires, and different troubles.
FujiLove
Well-known
My point was 'analogue photography' does exist. It's a slightly broader term than 'film photography' because it includes processes where you don't insert film into a camera (i.e. an emulsion dried onto a plastic film base). Examples would be wet plate processes, photograms, using paper negatives etc.
Peter_S
Peter_S
Good, affordable scanners, which also take 120 format and produce at least the same output as certain Nikon`s with firewire (even spelling check does not recognize this word) and awkward film holders...that may help.
FujiLove
Well-known
+1
Kodak should really start making the Pakon again. At £300, they'd shift a billion units a year!
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Easy Peasy. Shoot. More. Film. These industries are the result of millions of people making independent decisions. So keep pressing that shutter button.
Edit: or looked at another way, if it ain't dead at this point, can anything actually kill it?
Edit: or looked at another way, if it ain't dead at this point, can anything actually kill it?
santino
FSU gear head
Hipsters! They are the reason for increased film sales .
miha
Established
Hi Roger, I'm sure you've heard of carbon print before.
Ted Striker
Well-known
If you time it right, the Plustek OpticFilm 120 often sells for $1500. While that isnt exactly cheap, it's very affordable to the dedicated hobbiest who may shoot film instead of digital. It is a VERY good scanner with fantastic film holders. And it's brand new.