Re-starting Production of MF Film Cameras

[sooner]

I don't want this to sound like I'm trolling the "film is dead" debate, but I was just perusing auctions for cams I've owned and sold and would like to own again, and found myself wondering whether used cams that sell for $700 (Fuji 645 Zi) or $1300 (Bronica RF645) or $2000 (Mamiya 7) might not entice someone to restart production. I know, volume is an issue. But it seems like there is a sophisticated production economy today that probably didn't exist 10 or 20 years ago. How much can these cams cost in terms of materials? Why couldn't Fuji or Mamiya just license someone to do a limited production run? It doesn't cost Fuji anything because they already have the plans/schematics, right? In an age when you can get a Chinese company to make seemingly anything to demo in like two weeks, including sophisticated electronics, it seems like you wouldn't have to build some huge factory and line up all the parts that require big up front costs and a big production run, 'cause they already exist. What am I missing here?

 

[charjohncarter]

I agree, a new 6x9. Then I wouldn't have to worry about a mechanical failure every time I go out.

 

[Rayt]

It would probably be easier to get Cosina to reintroduce the Bessa III 667 than to start fresh. What is the minimum order? I’ll buy one if it is priced around US$2k.

 

[bwcolor]

Damn.. I didn't know that these cameras went for this much. I need to pull a few out of the safe. I've the Bronica and two Mamiyas.


I don't know if we need a new MF given the wealth of old, but sure could use either a high tech/cutting edge scanner, or a much better affordable copy stand with flat film holders and top level light diffuser. An A7MkIV attached to such a rig might prove preferable to a new scanner.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

MF is self-sustained on Rollei TLR cameras. They will outlast film MF.
I cold get CLA'd Cord for low 200$.

 

[Bolo Kukus]

Reviving MF production? A pleasant fantasy dream - but a dream.

As I see it, the major factors AGAINST a revival of new MF cameras are -

A declining market. This was readily obvious ca 2000 when camera manufacturers began downgrading their MF camera production - well before digital made its first major impact in the photo world. Larger cameras were not selling. Even 35mm production had stalled. New innovative camera lines (like the Contax G1 and G2) had stalled due to lack of interest. The camera sales markethad just peaked. Too many shooters already had too many cameras.

Most of the then-new cameras (1990s and early 2000s) are now well past their use-by dates and many have dodgy electronics (Fuji GA645s, Bronicas) or have broken down and cannot be repaired beyond simple tinkering work.

Used MF camera sales seem steady IF the prices are right, but whether or not there would be enough interest in new models of the same is a dark area - the few film camera manufacturers left in the market today (you can count them on the fingers of one hand with enough digits left over for a good ear-poke) saw the writing on the wall 20 years ago . None seem interested enough to want to take the plunge. If there was a market, China would be producing them.

The horrific cost of 120 film. Film in general is now expensive, I rarely buy and everyone else I know has either ceased or down-scaled their MF film use. My Rolleis and German folders sit on the shelf, get dusted occasionally and I play with the shutters. That's it. When I find expired 120 film on cheap sale, i buy a few rolls and shoot them and fire up my darkroom to process. Beautiful results, but all that scanning... That's about it for me and film.
Even online, new film prices (in Australia and Asia) rocketed to sky-high levels in 2009-2010 and are so high that I no longer buy five packs. USA prices seem okay still but with the Aussie dollar at peso-like lows, overseas buying is beyond my budget. Everyone else I know says the same.

Who would be the market for new MF cameras anyway? I think, two distinct groups. We retired duffers with a bit of spare cash who hanker for a piece of MF equipment we had in our younger days. And young wannabees with spare cash (or a high limit on dad's credit card) keen to play with film - for a while.

I would never pay 2019 prices for a Rolleiflex TLR, nor would my friends who own older Hasselblads invest again in new 'blad equipment , not even for a remake of the legandary 501. The in-the-middle group ain't interested - they are now solidly digital.

To sum all this up, the market isn't there. Even digital DSLRs is on the slippy-slope, which is a (sort of) consolation to the few remaining dedicated film-fanatics.

Me, I now shoot 90% digital and 10% film. Like just about everyone else, I suspect.

 

[Bolo Kukus]

MF is self-sustained on Rollei TLR cameras. They will outlast film MF.
I cold get CLA'd Cord for low 200$.

Yes. Ko.Fe, I was recently quoted A$350 for a CLA on my 1966 Rolleiflex 3.5E2, and friends tell me that is the best price I will get for this service in Australia.

So it's nice to know something is a bargain up there in Mooseland, other than fresh boiled lobster in Shediac, New Brunswick which until last year at least, was going for a silly low price, at least compared to Melbourne where you have to remortgage your house for a good feed of same.

Some time in the future, someone will (I hope) invest a small and portable digital back for the Rolleiflexes and Rolleicords.

I hope to live long enough to see and use one of these. :angel:

If they can be fitted only to one TLR, then I will need four...!

 

[benlees]

There have been recent MF cameras: Fuji/Voigtlander 667. Very expensive new. Certain used cameras are hyped and therefore expensive. Most of the Fuji 645 series are still affordable- get 'em while you can. Lots of TLR's are affordable. Explore the old.

 

[Sarcophilus Harrisii]

Yes. Ko.Fe, I was recently quoted A$350 for a CLA on my 1966 Rolleiflex 3.5E2, and friends tell me that is the best price I will get for this service in Australia.

So it's nice to know something is a bargain up there in Mooseland, other than fresh boiled lobster in Shediac, New Brunswick which until last year at least, was going for a silly low price, at least compared to Melbourne where you have to remortgage your house for a good feed of same.

Some time in the future, someone will (I hope) invest a small and portable digital back for the Rolleiflexes and Rolleicords.

I hope to live long enough to see and use one of these. :angel:

If they can be fitted only to one TLR, then I will need four...!

Considering the work involved in doing proper servicing to a Rolleiflex that's really not a bad price at all. For instance it's not particularly complicated but can be time consuming to adjust the cam action and re-shim the lens parallelism back to factory tolerances. Quite apart from attending to any shutter or film advance issues requiring attention. There are fewer and fewer people willing or able to do really good work on Rolleis, (and unfortunately they are, in some cases being replaced by charlatans who think they're smarter than Frank & Heidecke, who will drop in bits of lenses to "tidy up" a Rollei before flipping it to unsuspecting buyers). None of these skilled repairers are ever going to get rich working on vintage cameras but they still have to eat.

 

[kram]

Fuji with a tweaked gf670 body to cover 6x9, would be great. Hell just re introducing the gf670w would be good. The used prices are more than they were new.

 

[kram]

Why is my posted text so tiny???

 

[ruby.monkey]

Sounds like another great way to drive a camera manufacturer to bankruptcy, unless you want to pay through the nose for a cheap Chinese knock-off of a cheap Russian POS.

 

[Ambro51]

The issue is that almost all vintage equipment surpasses modern gear in overall quality. Since they were well made and treated well, your average 50-75 year old camera Can work just as well as anything that can be currently made. The “make it cheaper” mentality just was not there back then. The lack of qualified technicians and limited availability of parts is the basic weakness here.

 

[citizen99]

For my very occasional photography, snapshot or rapid turn-around, the 'phone does the job. For a landscape or townscape scene on a nice big negative, a simple all-mechanical old camera with a decent lens, can be a folder, serves very well, and can be maintained indefinitely. So long as MF film is available, of course.

 

[Godfrey]

I don't want this to sound like I'm trolling the "film is dead" debate, but I was just perusing auctions for cams I've owned and sold and would like to own again, and found myself wondering whether used cams that sell for $700 (Fuji 645 Zi) or $1300 (Bronica RF645) or $2000 (Mamiya 7) might not entice someone to restart production. I know, volume is an issue. But it seems like there is a sophisticated production economy today that probably didn't exist 10 or 20 years ago. How much can these cams cost in terms of materials? Why couldn't Fuji or Mamiya just license someone to do a limited production run? It doesn't cost Fuji anything because they already have the plans/schematics, right? In an age when you can get a Chinese company to make seemingly anything to demo in like two weeks, including sophisticated electronics, it seems like you wouldn't have to build some huge factory and line up all the parts that require big up front costs and a big production run, 'cause they already exist. What am I missing here?

There's a heck of a lot more to doing a "limited production run" of any high precision mechanical device than "just license someone" can possibly express. And a huge amount of cost, even if you do happen to have all the old tooling and schematics at hand.

The price of a Bronica 645RF on a restarted, limited production line would probably be double or triple what the original price was to hit the same level of quality and reliability. Never mind the lenses...

There's an old rule of thumb in manufacturing: You can produce one or two of anything at a semi-reasonable cost, you can make 1000 or more of anything at a more economical cost per unit, but you can't make an economical run of 100 of anything at any reasonable price. 🙁

G

 

[Solinar]

Had the now discontinued Fuji/Cosina GF670 been a 6x9 - I would have sprung into action and gladly paid the original price.

With that said, I fully understand that designing a lens for 6x6 or 6x7 is much easier than for 6x9 and the market for 6x9 is very limited. I currently run at least 4 rolls of film a year through my Bessa II - which isn't that difficult at 8 frames per roll of 120 film.

 

[sooner]

Godfrey is addressing what I was trying to get at--not reinvent or produce a new MF camera but do another run of Fuji 645 Zi's, for example. I agree the lens might be the most expensive aspect. I wonder about recreating the circuit boards, but surely those services are cheaper than they used to be, no? It would be cool to hear from someone who really knows the capacity and costs of these operations in Asia. The number of buyers is obviously "niche" but surely in the thousands, so....All comes down to per unit cost. You can say I'm dreaming, but I'm not the only one, ha ha!

 

[jsrockit]

The problem is that you are looking at the most desirable medium format cameras and the relatively small market that is interested in them. There are plenty of cheap medium format cameras out there still too. That said, it appears that there is some room for someone to make a film 35mm AF advanced P&S... and if that happens, we could see others follow.

 

[stonecutter]

I have just heard on the news here that there will be more vinyl records being pressed than cds this year. If we continue with our use of film and maybe shoot a few more rolls than we did last year we could see the same kind of resurgence in film. Go ahead, buy a couple of rolls of new film and maybe we can keep the prices from soaring, and maybe a new camera or two.
Bruce

 

[CameraQuest]

What is doable, maybe, is keeping existing MF cameras working and taking pics for the next 50 years.