on Film & Digital by Chii Fei

[mike goldberg]

Hi all,
These are excerpts from the "Unofficial Cosina Voigtlander Newsletter" of October 26, 2007. Chii Fei, the Cosina Voigtlander distributer in Singapore and Malaysia, was interviewed by Brian Webb:

Q: How do you see the digital and traditional photographic mediums co-evolving in the future?

A: In the next 5 years, film will still continue to survive. But it will eventually become history slowly. There will not be incentives for major manufacturers to continue a money losing business. But there might be new smaller companies, who will buy over the technology and continue serving enthusiasts like us. I believe Ilford will continue to do what they are doing, as long as enthusiasts like us stay faithful to film and B&W. But costs will go up, to maintain a small group of diehards. In fact today, it has been considered a niche.

Q: If you could ask Cosina to produce one product under the Voigtlander badge, what would it be?

A: A digital RF body. I know many people are hoping for this. But before it can happen, full frame sensors need to be affordable and firmware needs to be stable. Cosina has always been a lenses and mechanical manufacturer. To venture into digital, they require a huge amount of capital and collaboration with someone who is strong in the digital photography world. Today, there are only a few players who can afford such huge R & D budget. Until full frame sensors become affordable and stable, I don’t see a DRF by Cosina very soon.
26 October 2007

[minor editing by MG]

You can visit Chii Fei online at http://chiifcameras.com

 

[Anupam]

I have rarely encountered such sanity over these questions. In essence, I agree exactly with him. Thanks for posting this.

-A

 

[shadowfox]

And this guy knows that film is a money-losing business .... how??

Just wondering...

 

[wgerrard]

The availability of relatively inexpensive full-frame cameras depends on reductions in the cost of the sensors. Smaller companies like Cosina won't bring out full-frame digitals until the price of the full-frame sensors that they buy drops to the right level, assuming they want to sell something priced considerably below the M8.

Is anyone conversant enough with optics to know how large a sensor can be without interfering with traditional RF lens and body size and design?

 

[Anupam]

And this guy knows that film is a money-losing business .... how??

Will, I think he says it's a money losing business for the larger players. I don't have any insiders knowledge, but it seems that companies who fancy themselves as players in the digital market at least won't find film to be their main business for long even if they aren't actually losing money just yet.

As a film user, I hope that smaller but dedicated companies take over film so it stabilizes as a niche market for connoisseurs and enthusiasts. I do believe us advanced amateurs can no longer safely tag along by the coat-tails of the mass market. I say let that go to digital, but carve out a serious and relatively large film market. Companies like Cosina and Ilford prove it can be done. And companies like Zeiss and Fuji give me hope as well.

-Anupam

PS: Let me emphasize, that this is just my opinion. I am an amateur photographer, not a market analyst. So please don't anybody jump on me, though I would like to hear our thoughts.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Will, I think he says it's a money losing business for the larger players. I don't have any insiders knowledge, but it seems that companies who fancy themselves as players in the digital market at least won't find film to be their main business for long even if they aren't actually losing money just yet.

In fact the big cameras companies no longer lose any money over film, since they no longer design or even manufacture any film cameras. Canon and Nikon still sell some of their film SLR bodies in principle, but the production lines are no longer open. The only exception is the Nikon FM-10, which is made by Cosina anyway. Olympus stopped making the OM bodies already in 2000. Olympus compact film cameras were made until 2005. I don't remember when Pentax stopped making 35 mm film cameras, but it was years ago.

The only really big companies that still have much investment left in film are Kodak and Fujifilm. For the time being they still seem to be able to continue making film profitably, largely thanks to the motion picture industry, which is still 95% film based globally. As long as most or even a significant portion of movies are shot on film, the film making business will continue to be profitable even for the big two, and still film will be available. It's the huge factories that cost money to run, not the individual emulsions or film sizes.

After movies go digital on both production and distribution ends, only the small still film suppliers will remain, making mostly B&W and perhaps some color negative. They don't have huge factories to begin with, which ironically means that they do not have to scale back production so much. Maybe Fujifilm will also find a way to scale back their still film production and keep it profitable. I would not count on Kodak to be able to do that though, but then again Kodak is the number one cine film manufacturer, which means that they can continue to make film on a large scale profitably longer than Fujifilm.

My prediction for the future of film is this:

Slide film has about five to ten years left, color negative has about 10 to 20 years left and B&W has at least 20 years left, probably more.

About Cosina DRF: I doubt there'll be a Cosina designed and Voigtländer branded digital RF within the next five years, but there may be a Zeiss Ikon or even Contax branded one, designed by Zeiss with perhaps some help from Sony. Zeiss is a significantly bigger company than Cosina and it has much more experience on electronics and digital technology.

 

[mike goldberg]

Hi all...
I'm delighted with the response to this Post.

I want to support "Doc Strangelove's" substantial reply with the little [very little], that I know of the motion picture industry. Here in Israel, we have access to more "foreign" films, than you are going to see in Cinema 1-2-3-4-5, etc., in American shopping malls. I've learned to appreciate some of the better Israeli movies [used to hate 'em] and films from Eastern Europe and India.
LIVES OF OTHERS and THE NAMESAKE are just two examples.

The motion picture industry, and its "foreign" counterpart, are going to continue to use film for some time to come; thus, we have little to worry about. Someone [Kodak, Fuji] or a smaller company, will supply "our niche," so long as it is profitable. For me, the fact that there are few manufacturers of film cameras [bravo Cosina!]... matters little. Their are zillions of film cameras out there in the B@y; and there's no shortage of FSU cameras & optics available from a host of Ukranian based Sellers.

Then, there's RFF, flickr, photo.net, pbase, Buy and Sell Cameras, LeicaMarket, etc. Believe it or not, there are still a staggering amount of elderly persons who do not relate to a computer, and want to bring their film to "One Hour Photo," and pick up pix of the grand-kids [watch out for Robin Williams!].

Personally, I'm not all that worried... concerned, yes, but not worried. Israel is a very technologically advanced country with no customs on most computers and on most cameras [Ruben, I've been pretty lucky :]. Although there are more P & S digicams than there are camels and donkeys, I can still get most of the films I like in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv. And recently, I ordered some Fomapan T200 from Holland.

Finally, the fact that a man like Stephen Gandy in California invested in Cosina Voigtlander, along with his colleague, Chii Fei in the Far East... greatly encourages me. Here's a small tidbit that I did not quote from Brian Webb's October interview: Among the factors that made For Mr. Fei's business decision just a year ago, was the difficulty in finding a quality, new film camera. Then, he saw a friend's pix done with a $200- film camera, and was blown away.

So, bravo Mr. Fei and Stephen, as well.
Cheers, Mike

 

[wgerrard]

I wander if there is a future market for film and film cameras in the developing world. Will people without access to computers be able to afford really cheap flim cameras as well as have access to processing? Or, will they all just jump to digital cameras, much like a lot of the world jumped from no phones to cell phones, bypassing landlines altogether?

On RF digitals: Every company that doesn't have its own sensor production facility is at the mercy of that industry re: making and pricing a digital camera. When Zeis, for example, can buy a full-fame sensor for, say, $700, everyone else will be able to buy it, too.

 

[itf]

I wander if there is a future market for film and film cameras in the developing world. Will people without access to computers be able to afford really cheap flim cameras as well as have access to processing? Or, will they all just jump to digital cameras, much like a lot of the world jumped from no phones to cell phones, bypassing landlines altogether?

I'm in Cambodia and just as a lot of the world jumped from no phones to cell phones, Cambodians are jumping from no camera to cell phones (with built in camera). 😛

Actually, there are a few film photographers around here using old SLR's. They typically hang out at popular public places waiting to be hired by locals with money to spare wanting their photos taken. Afterwards the customers get the film.

 

[Nikon Bob]

I have rarely encountered such sanity over these questions. In essence, I agree exactly with him. Thanks for posting this.

-A

I agree with the both of you.

Bob

 

[Trius]

Kodak has pretty much consolidated all (edit: MOST) film manufacture back to Rochester. They further automated production with advanced robotics, so the operation has shrunk in terms of footprint and human resources, but is far more efficient than ever. They can run a long time and still make money.

Mary Jane Hellyar has done a damn fine job, IMO, of getting Yellow's film production in good shape, even coming out with new emulsions and packaging them for the still market. The cine market has made that possible, and Mary Jane is smart enough to know the value of passing the technology on to those who shoot film in still cameras.

 

[40oz]

seems to me a person has to have something wrong with their head to make claims about the pending death of film production, then comment on the lack of digital cameras in a successful company's line-up. What kind of mental disconnect is taking place here? If C-V cameras sell well enough to support the production of new models, Leica can still justify large sums for their film bodies, Zeiss feels confident enough to release a film rf body and lens line-up, Kodak releases new emulsions, etc., etc., one has to seriously question the judgement of a person who can't stop talking about how nobody is using film anymore.

Just my humble opinion, of course 🙂

 

[Trius]

40: Nobody important. If they ain't on the cover of Pop or Digital Photo for Morons, they ain't really photographers. 😉

 

[40oz]

40: Nobody important. If they ain't on the cover of Pop or Digital Photo for Morons, they ain't really photographers. 😉

lol :bang: