Is anyone frustrated with Instax and hopes for the resurrection of FP100c?

[zuiko85]

Instax SQ is basically the same format size as any 6x6 format camera (62x62 mm image area compared to 56x56 mm negative image size on my Hasselblad) so any 6x6 format compatible lens assembly (with shutter and focusing mount) will work fine. I chose a Sekor 50mm f/6.3, which on 6x6 nets the diagonal AoV of a 35mm format 28mm lens and, wide open, will net a useful but shallow focus zone of about 3 feet depth when focused at 7 feet. Fine for zone focus!

The same lens covers 6x9 cm nicely; I'm sure it would be fine on an Instax Wide print (62x99 mm image area) with similar focus zone. This discussion is getting me hot to get back to work on making the last part of my custom Instax SQ camera...!

🙂

G

What I cannot figure is why Instax Wide is cheaper than Instax Square.
My "aluminum hat, lunatic fringe, conspiracy theory" is that since Instax Sq. is new and popular they are charging the maximum profit the market will tolerate.
Which is okay, I guess, Fujifilm is not a charity.

 

[Prest_400]

What I cannot figure is why Instax Wide is cheaper than Instax Square.
My "aluminum hat, lunatic fringe, conspiracy theory" is that since Instax Sq. is new and popular they are charging the maximum profit the market will tolerate.
Which is okay, I guess, Fujifilm is not a charity.

Instax Wide was the original format (IIRC) and has beneffited from being in the market 20+ years, so I'd say not only economies of scale but all the development costs were covered back in the day.
For square they had to do the new cameras and some finishing machinery so more incentive to charge from that.
For me, the Instax cameras never seemed very attractive to use. Always thought I'd find a thrift store instax for cheap but it hasn't happened. Got an SX70 from the forum years ago and that has satisfied my instant curiosity. Now that I'm writing, my housemate has a Mini that I haven't bothered to borrow.

I've got a GW690 and every once in a while I imagine how cool would it be if Fuji had offered an instax back in the day due to its 6x9 format that would almost cover the whole wide picture area. However, as professional level camera I think they would have veered towards peel apart film.


This year has a 29th of February, precisely 4 years after the previous 29th in which FP was discontinued.

 

[lynnb]

Is anyone frustrated with Instax and hopes for the resurrection of FP100c?

I've had the pleasure of shooting FP100C and FP3000B, loved them both.. now RIP.

I wish Fuji would release some Instax models that used better quality optics, though some other manufacturers seem to have now done that.

Meanwhile, frustration is a function of expectations. If you accept what Instax is right now, there's no barriers to creating nice pictures. Image softness can work well if you go with it... I've seen some nice Instax Wide pictures by Brad Birely, and others here on RFF and Flickr and although tempted, I was put off by the price. I'd tried Impossible film on my old Polaroid One Step and was disappointed by the quality control, and the high price. Nothing compared to the FP100 and FP3000B I'd shot on a borrowed Polaroid 250.

A week ago I bought an Instax Mini 9 at a price too good to refuse. I had low expectations. Judge for yourself, but personally I'm very happy with the results. Prints scanned on a V700 - please excuse the moire. The pictures are overexposed by about 2 stops as it was bright sun at the beach and the camera has a 1/60 fixed shutter speed and minimum aperture f/32. Film is ISO800.

Are the images soft? Yes. But that's not the point. I think they have a pleasing quality all their own. YMMV.

 

[robert blu]

I think when we speak about instant photography we must realize FP100 and FP3000B peel apart film were a different categories of product therefore cannot be compared to the actual Instant film in term of quality, this is valid both for the New Polaroid (ex Impossible) and for the Fuji products.

For what it is the Instax Mini is not so bad as pictures posted by Lynn and other members demonstrate. Frustration? More than frustration is a kind of nostalgic feeling I have when I think about the pleasure to use my (really it was my father's) Land Camera with peel apart film.

But this is life, world changes, photography changes...

I like to use the SX-70 or the i-1 and maybe one day I'll even try the fuji Instax...

 

[retinax]

Lynn, these pictures look pretty good to me, I don't think they're 2 stops ever exposed, that would have blown out the skin tones. The small Instax format benefits from the larger dof, compared to wide, where the only two focus distances are a real limitation. Anyway limitations can be good. But in any case hacking together instant cameras with better lenses isn't too hard, see my, and I believe some other, older, threads on the DIY subforum.
I would love some larger instant film, too, although I never used anything but Instax. Maybe Fuji will make a larger format one day?

 

[HHPhoto]

Anyone, please?

Resurrection is quite unlikely, because the market for packfilm is gone.
The main demand segments for packfilm were
- prof. passport photographers
- professionals who have used it for test shots in their studio set-ups.
Both market segments have gone digital more than a decade ago. The number of amateurs or enthusiasts who have used packfilm has always been very tiny.
Not to forget that amatuers want also convenience. And packfilm outside (a studio) is quite inconvenient because after the shot you also have to carry the sticky negative.

Cheers, Jan

 

[Out to Lunch]

No regrets. I bought a large stash of Instax online some 5 years ago -I think in Germany, and I am still enjoying the results.

 

[Godfrey]

What I cannot figure is why Instax Wide is cheaper than Instax Square.
My "aluminum hat, lunatic fringe, conspiracy theory" is that since Instax Sq. is new and popular they are charging the maximum profit the market will tolerate.
Which is okay, I guess, Fujifilm is not a charity.

Asking questions like "why does this cost more than that...?" is a bit over the top for me. All it does is make me feel uncomfortable rather than let me think about the more important questions: "What can this stuff do?" "How will I use it?" "What kind of results will it produce?" Etc. If I have the money to play with it at all, I just buy what looks like it will do something useful (or entertaining) and don't worry about the price.

I never intended to buy into two additional instant film formats beyond SX-70 type integral Polaroid, but it happened, and I'm not unhappy about it. I don't shoot enough of any of it for it to present a financial burden... And I'm certainly not required to use it by anyone or anything. 🙂

G

 

[FPjohn]

I would like an Instax Wide Graphic "6x9" back. FPJ

 

[rjbuzzclick]

I wonder if it would work for Fuji use the existing Instax technology, but sized to fit existing peel-apart cameras and film backs. After shooting, each frame could be pulled out through the rollers with a biodegradable paper tab similar to the old peel-apart film, and then the paper tab torn off. There would be no other waste, no 'negative' and the chemicals would be remain in the pod of the integral film.

I don't know if the roller spacing is different for Instax vs. peel-apart film.

Obviously, film-speed of the Instax is different than the peel-apart film, but on automatic cameras this could be compensated for with an ND filter.

Whether or not it would be profitable would be another thing...

 

[farlymac]

I don't miss it. Only shot one pack of it shortly before it was discontinued, and was quite surprised with all the liquid mess after each shot. I guess I was spoiled from using all the different variations of Polaroid peel apart films in the original roll, and 4x5. After that I just lost interest in instant photography.


PF

 

[Godfrey]

Another entertaining Instax camera on Kickstarter at present:

Jollylook Auto - The Modern Vintage Instant Film Camera!

They've passed their largest stretch goal and will make the camera in both Instax Mini and Instax SQ formats. I might go for it, would choose the Instax SQ version because I already stock that film for two other cameras (and for my upcoming home-built).

G

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

Did you know they have yet to fulfill their backers for the first Jollylook kickstarter, even though they are selling the finished cameras on their site? I smell a jolly-scam.

 

[zuiko85]

Don't bother with Jollylook. I backed for one and the foam light seals leak light, $48 for landfill. I did save the 110mm plastic lens. If you stop it down to f64 it will make a passable fixed focus 4X5 box camera lens. They may be really trying hard to fulfill rewards but they miss target after target.
After wasting $16 on a twin pack of mini I would not even consider this tiny format. Might take a look at Instax Wide, the image area is very slightly larger than two Mini prints side by side and only cost 33% more. Trouble is, you need to hack a lens in shutter from a 6X9, say the 105mm f4.5 Kodak Anaston to have a decent camera.

 

[Godfrey]

I've read many rumors but don't see any evidence of wrongdoing. I don't know the truth of it.

Seems to be a massive amount of vitriol amongst some people with them.

That said, this is their second effort. It's not made of paper like the first, might actually work. ;-)

G

 

[Huss]

There is the new NONS m42 mount instax camera

https://www.kickstarter.com/project...stant-camera-nons-sl42?ref=discovery&term=M42

 

[Mooshoepork]

I've read many rumors but don't see any evidence of wrongdoing. I don't know the truth of it.

Seems to be a massive amount of vitriol amongst some people with them.

That said, this is their second effort. It's not made of paper like the first, might actually work. ;-)

G

How is it a rumour? It happened

 

[zuiko85]

I've read many rumors but don't see any evidence of wrongdoing. I don't know the truth of it.

Seems to be a massive amount of vitriol amongst some people with them.

That said, this is their second effort. It's not made of paper like the first, might actually work. ;-)

G

I believe they tried very hard, but that they have also been less than forthcoming on numerous occasions. Some backers have received assurances that their rewards will be shipped ‘next week’ and then not receive anything for over a month or more.

Well, at least not as bad as “The Box is Back” project. I had no interest in backing that one but have followed finally out of morbid curiosity.

I’d swore off backing any KS campaign but then Ethan Moses came along with a offer of software files for 3D printing of a 35mm panoramic camera. For ONE whole USD! That’s right, $1.
So... I backed it. No idea what to do with the files, and really no intention of ever actually making this camera. But come on, one dollar? Absolutely no way to go wrong on that one.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I like instax film: high contrast but not sharp. Did that really happen? kind of thing... A good match for memory. The cameras give you what it wants, not what you want. Straight horizons: forget about it... It is what it is. Better not to load it into your film holder to see if everything is set!

I purchased Polaroid Land camera used kit and new FP100C from BH, not so long time ago. I took three exposures and sold it with the rest in camera and spare FP100C packs. With profit 🙂.

 

[Godfrey]

How is it a rumour? It happened

The reports are conflicting as to what happened. Some say the product was never delivered, some say they misrepresented the project, others say they didn't get their money back when they decided to opt out, others were happy with the product as delivered. Etc etc. I don't know what actually occurred.

When I wrote the project on this new effort, they responded within a day with the information I requested.

On the basis of what I've read, I cannot draw any conclusions from what happened in their first project compared to the present project.

G