NickTrop
Veteran
The Yashica Electros had a remakable long production run - something like 17 years, ending in either 1990 or 1987 (was never really clear on that), well into the period of dominance of SLRs in the pro-sumer market and plastic point and shooters took over the consumer market forcing other Japanese manufacturers out of the manufacture of fixed lens rangefinders.
I stumbled on a link last week (grrrrr... can't find it now :bang: ) that was a posting of an ad for the GSN. I thought the ad was very telling about how this camera was marketed and why it survived so long...
The ad (very fine print jpeg and I couldn't make out all of the type) essentially boasted the following:
1. No Flash Required (I recall this being the headline...)
2. Talked (and had pics) of a professional photographer's low light pics taken without a flash.
3. The MSRP of the camera - as I recall, was $117 US at the time as described by the ad. The cost with the teleconverter set was $212 - nearly equal to the cost of the camera(!), when the ad was made.
So, why did this camera survive so long? Admittedly pure inference based on the ad...
1. The camera had a modest mark-up, probably. But Yashica (along with the retailers) most likely made a nice tidy profit upselling consumers on the accessory teleconverters and finders...
2. These accessory converter lenses scratched the itch of consumers who wanted "interchangable lenses" of SLR systems, at least while they were in the camera store.
3. The camera is "flashy" - with those two lights showing over/under exposure. This had "flash appeal" (ohhhh look at the lites - kewl!) over other cameras - including SLRs that didn't come with a "light show".
4. The camera ad touted "No Flash Required". Salesmen probably sold consumers that they didn't need to purchase a flash with this camera (like is said in the ad...) and they could use that money on the profitable teleconverter kit.
5. No flash required probably also appealed to more serious hobbiests, who were interested in low-light photography just like the "pro" from the ad.
So, the fam walks into a camera store no knowing what to buy - perhaps thinking about an SLR. They look at some cameras. Boy those SLRs seem complicated. Mom (not to be sexist) doesn't like them. Look at this model - just two lights. Dad wants interchangable lenese, but the Electro has an auxilary kit that "does the same thing", has not one but two(!) "interchangable lenses" (and you'll note, you see a lot of these auxilary lens kits on eBay, so it seems they sold very well... usually add-ons like this are hard to come by but not for the Electros) for the price of a single extra SLR lens (say, a 35mm). Hey, the ad (or the salesman) says, "you don't really need a flash with this camera under most circumstances..." Flash photography is deemed complicated to consumers during the pre-TTL days, all those settings, and they also were expensive. Junior thinks the lights on the top are kewl when the salesman demonstrates the camera. Everyone futzed with the aperture ring to get the lights to go on and off...
The salesperson says, "...tellya what I'm gunna do. You can have the Electro, and the two extra lenses and finder, for $190! And you'll never have to use the flash..." Junior is still playing with the aperture ring making the Over/Under lights go off and on. By now he's figured out that if you put your finger over the meter, the "Under" light stays on!
As the market for rangefinders continues to erode, save the high-end Leicas, attacked at the lower end by point-n-shoots with a bulit in (crummy) flash (and much slower lenses), and at the high end by SLRs...
Yashica introduces the "CC" with its compact black "Leica-like" body(along with the GX and GL) along with its 2/35 lens spec to appeal to the prosumer market of folks who want to shoot rangefinder-style but can't afford a Leica, who still refused to "basterdize" their high-end kits with quality lower cost offerings.
The GSN continues to plod along, being cranked out less and less expensively in China, never really changing save some relatively minor mod between the "G" and "GSN" lines, all R and D costs for the camera long ago "paid off". Some slick marketing and an ad and a camera that sells due to "sizzle" of a couple flashing lights on the top plate, and a slick marketing campaign.
Wish I could find the link for that ad! :bang:
I stumbled on a link last week (grrrrr... can't find it now :bang: ) that was a posting of an ad for the GSN. I thought the ad was very telling about how this camera was marketed and why it survived so long...
The ad (very fine print jpeg and I couldn't make out all of the type) essentially boasted the following:
1. No Flash Required (I recall this being the headline...)
2. Talked (and had pics) of a professional photographer's low light pics taken without a flash.
3. The MSRP of the camera - as I recall, was $117 US at the time as described by the ad. The cost with the teleconverter set was $212 - nearly equal to the cost of the camera(!), when the ad was made.
So, why did this camera survive so long? Admittedly pure inference based on the ad...
1. The camera had a modest mark-up, probably. But Yashica (along with the retailers) most likely made a nice tidy profit upselling consumers on the accessory teleconverters and finders...
2. These accessory converter lenses scratched the itch of consumers who wanted "interchangable lenses" of SLR systems, at least while they were in the camera store.
3. The camera is "flashy" - with those two lights showing over/under exposure. This had "flash appeal" (ohhhh look at the lites - kewl!) over other cameras - including SLRs that didn't come with a "light show".
4. The camera ad touted "No Flash Required". Salesmen probably sold consumers that they didn't need to purchase a flash with this camera (like is said in the ad...) and they could use that money on the profitable teleconverter kit.
5. No flash required probably also appealed to more serious hobbiests, who were interested in low-light photography just like the "pro" from the ad.
So, the fam walks into a camera store no knowing what to buy - perhaps thinking about an SLR. They look at some cameras. Boy those SLRs seem complicated. Mom (not to be sexist) doesn't like them. Look at this model - just two lights. Dad wants interchangable lenese, but the Electro has an auxilary kit that "does the same thing", has not one but two(!) "interchangable lenses" (and you'll note, you see a lot of these auxilary lens kits on eBay, so it seems they sold very well... usually add-ons like this are hard to come by but not for the Electros) for the price of a single extra SLR lens (say, a 35mm). Hey, the ad (or the salesman) says, "you don't really need a flash with this camera under most circumstances..." Flash photography is deemed complicated to consumers during the pre-TTL days, all those settings, and they also were expensive. Junior thinks the lights on the top are kewl when the salesman demonstrates the camera. Everyone futzed with the aperture ring to get the lights to go on and off...
The salesperson says, "...tellya what I'm gunna do. You can have the Electro, and the two extra lenses and finder, for $190! And you'll never have to use the flash..." Junior is still playing with the aperture ring making the Over/Under lights go off and on. By now he's figured out that if you put your finger over the meter, the "Under" light stays on!
As the market for rangefinders continues to erode, save the high-end Leicas, attacked at the lower end by point-n-shoots with a bulit in (crummy) flash (and much slower lenses), and at the high end by SLRs...
Yashica introduces the "CC" with its compact black "Leica-like" body(along with the GX and GL) along with its 2/35 lens spec to appeal to the prosumer market of folks who want to shoot rangefinder-style but can't afford a Leica, who still refused to "basterdize" their high-end kits with quality lower cost offerings.
The GSN continues to plod along, being cranked out less and less expensively in China, never really changing save some relatively minor mod between the "G" and "GSN" lines, all R and D costs for the camera long ago "paid off". Some slick marketing and an ad and a camera that sells due to "sizzle" of a couple flashing lights on the top plate, and a slick marketing campaign.
Wish I could find the link for that ad! :bang:
Last edited:
Iskra 2
Kodachrome Rules!
An entry level Canon Ftb body sold in the $200's in the 70's and then you still had to buy a lens which was another big piece of change. For most general purpose pix my Electro GT compares favorably to the Canon and low light autoexposure is unsurpassed.
It would be interesting to see the sales demographics for the Electros. Regards.:angel:
It would be interesting to see the sales demographics for the Electros. Regards.:angel:
NickTrop
Veteran
Everytime I see your Avatar, I say I want that ISKRA!
Good comparison. Didn't know the Canons went for so much back then. That was some serious change at that time.
Good comparison. Didn't know the Canons went for so much back then. That was some serious change at that time.
geezer
Established
Excellent observations Nick. I'm going to join your hunt for that site cuz I'd really be interested in seeing some figures. If you locate let us know.
geezer
geezer
geezer
Established
addendum;
That $200.00 price tag was for the Canon slr. The Canonet sold at a little less than a $100.00 I believe.
geezer
That $200.00 price tag was for the Canon slr. The Canonet sold at a little less than a $100.00 I believe.
geezer
Solinar
Analog Preferred
The GSN were made in Hong Kong when it was still Crown Colony. I had the GT from the early 1970's through the mid 80's. Their attraction was that they were inexpensive, did a better AE exposure than SLR's of the 1972 era and it could be found in just about any camera shop.
At the time that I bought the GT, a US Army PFC made $140.00 a month. The Canon FTb would have been too expensive. The GT was a step up from a Yashica D TLR and was a used purchase.
At the time that I bought the GT, a US Army PFC made $140.00 a month. The Canon FTb would have been too expensive. The GT was a step up from a Yashica D TLR and was a used purchase.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Around 1974 I paid $130CDN for my first OM-1, and that was grey-market shipped from Hong Kong. I think it came with the F.Zuiko 50/1.8. I hated to not buy at the local photo dealer (Linden Photo in London, ON), but I was saving at least $100, IIRC, and I was very poor at the time. If I'd had a warranty issue with the camera, I would have eaten up any savings.
Anyway, I think your analysis is right on, Nick. Had I known of the GSN at the time, its quality, the add-on lenses, etc., I might have made that decision. My tutor had an OM kit so I was going on his recommendation, hence I didn't explore to many options. A friend had an Ftb kit, which I didn't want because the OM was so much smaller/lighter, and way sexier looking.
Anyway, I think your analysis is right on, Nick. Had I known of the GSN at the time, its quality, the add-on lenses, etc., I might have made that decision. My tutor had an OM kit so I was going on his recommendation, hence I didn't explore to many options. A friend had an Ftb kit, which I didn't want because the OM was so much smaller/lighter, and way sexier looking.
Iskra 2
Kodachrome Rules!
NickTrop said:
I do to!
Then I invent some reason to go take some pix with it. I had a Canonet and never liked the metering. Blocking the shutter if the exposure was out of range never made sense to me, if I remember correctly.
Regards.:angel:
NickTrop
Veteran
Found it! (Where else?)
http://www.yashica-guy.com/document/moonlight.html
(Think I'll post this as its own thread... )
http://www.yashica-guy.com/document/moonlight.html
(Think I'll post this as its own thread... )
easyrider
Photo addict
Present day equivalent
Present day equivalent
Never owned an Eletro but I looked at them at camera shows and they are neat. There is a parallel these days with digitals.
People often ask me what DSLR they should get. Talking with them I find they have no intention of buying multiple lenses. I suggest that they look at something like a Canon G7 or a Canon S3 which is not only cheaper but is also more likely to be taken along than a bulky DSLR.
When I first started with digital, I used a Canon G2 for a long time and got some great pix. The only reason I went DSLR was the shutter lag. Though I did eventually cope with it. The G7 does not have that and is very Leica-like. I do some pro shooting and people expect to see a DSLR -- just like they used to want to see a "pro" carrying a Speed Graphic.
I plan to expand my services to editing -- i.e. organizing and slightly improving people's digital pix, such as cropping and fixing red eye.
I am often asked for help from people who returned with from a trip with hundreds of pix on a digital medium and don't know what to do with them or, they dumped them over to a computer and now can't find them.
They miss the days of dropping off a roll of 36 at the store and picking up the prints.
Present day equivalent
Never owned an Eletro but I looked at them at camera shows and they are neat. There is a parallel these days with digitals.
People often ask me what DSLR they should get. Talking with them I find they have no intention of buying multiple lenses. I suggest that they look at something like a Canon G7 or a Canon S3 which is not only cheaper but is also more likely to be taken along than a bulky DSLR.
When I first started with digital, I used a Canon G2 for a long time and got some great pix. The only reason I went DSLR was the shutter lag. Though I did eventually cope with it. The G7 does not have that and is very Leica-like. I do some pro shooting and people expect to see a DSLR -- just like they used to want to see a "pro" carrying a Speed Graphic.
I plan to expand my services to editing -- i.e. organizing and slightly improving people's digital pix, such as cropping and fixing red eye.
I am often asked for help from people who returned with from a trip with hundreds of pix on a digital medium and don't know what to do with them or, they dumped them over to a computer and now can't find them.
They miss the days of dropping off a roll of 36 at the store and picking up the prints.
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
I think it was 'cause people liked the pretty colored lights...
Chris
Chris
NickTrop
Veteran
They miss the days of dropping off a roll of 36 at the store and picking up the prints.
-ChrisPlatt
---------------------------------
I did too! One of several reasons I went back to using film cameras. Film is still around, places to develop said film are around... Beats futzing with images in Photoshop - at least to me, then not having enough pricey ink in your inkjet to make prints. Don't get me started on HD crashes...
When I started matting things in PS to try to isolate subjects using blur effects, I know I missed my film cameras. Sure, you can get that with a DSLR but between the body and the lenses, and their ghastly size for a "35"?!?!
... so I sprung for $30 bucks on eBoy and got me a GSN (then a CC, then a Lynx 14, then a MF folder, then a Kiev 60, then a Konica Auto S3, then 3 M42 lenses for my SLR, then some more lenses for the Kiev, had to have the Gossen Lunalux, then a ....)
-ChrisPlatt
---------------------------------
I did too! One of several reasons I went back to using film cameras. Film is still around, places to develop said film are around... Beats futzing with images in Photoshop - at least to me, then not having enough pricey ink in your inkjet to make prints. Don't get me started on HD crashes...
When I started matting things in PS to try to isolate subjects using blur effects, I know I missed my film cameras. Sure, you can get that with a DSLR but between the body and the lenses, and their ghastly size for a "35"?!?!
... so I sprung for $30 bucks on eBoy and got me a GSN (then a CC, then a Lynx 14, then a MF folder, then a Kiev 60, then a Konica Auto S3, then 3 M42 lenses for my SLR, then some more lenses for the Kiev, had to have the Gossen Lunalux, then a ....)
howpow
Established
I think the production run lasted as long as it did because as the old "Mortein" ad says "When your on a good thing, stick to it" It was a fabulously successful camera because it was a fabulous camera at a reasonable price. Even today, these cameras (I have three) take great photos. Metering, Colour, Contrast and Definition are excellent by any standard. I wish they were still making them! I have to say I found your theory a little cynical NickTrop. As you say, R & D costs were well and truly recovered, but I for one don't deny Yashica a good profit on this classic.
NickTrop
Veteran
howpow,
I didn't include the "they're great cameras" line, intentionally, because I felt it goes without saying. If the camera sucked none of it would have mattered. However, during reign of the Electros, there were many other very fine Japanese fixed lens rangefinders that - while successful and /also/ had great lenses and were just as capable as taking a pic as good as the Electro, didn't last nearly as long. The Electros saw them come and go. The reasons sited for their interesting/curious longevity - relative to the others is simply "my take"...
I didn't include the "they're great cameras" line, intentionally, because I felt it goes without saying. If the camera sucked none of it would have mattered. However, during reign of the Electros, there were many other very fine Japanese fixed lens rangefinders that - while successful and /also/ had great lenses and were just as capable as taking a pic as good as the Electro, didn't last nearly as long. The Electros saw them come and go. The reasons sited for their interesting/curious longevity - relative to the others is simply "my take"...
Ashley Pomeroy
Regegisterd Ulser
"longevity"
My only field of (minor) expertise is the motor business, in which longevity is usually a sign of systemic failure. Often a manufacturer will keep a car in production for several years because it does not generate enough profit to fund research and development into a successor, which leads to a slow bleeding-out as sales tail off. Or alternatively the company is wasting money on other things, or successor designs were botched, or there has been a strategic mistake, or because the company is no longer interested in that market section any more, but does not want to kill a golden goose, and so forth. A classic example of all of these things is the British car industry.
It is a rare exception that remains in production because it is good, it is profitable, and definitive, e.g. the Mazda Miata/MX5, which has been around for almost twenty years but is hard to improve upon and still looks good today. The Electro's design looks funky nowadays because it's retro, but I imagine that in the 1980s people would have been unimpressed - it was a decade of angular black plastic with red lines, when people had orgasmic wet dreams about the Olympus AF-1:
http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/camera/popup/auto_af1.cfm
Although I am impressed with my Electro, the thought of it being in production as late as the 1980s makes me think that Yashica was in trouble, or (judging by the history I have just read) more interested in SLRs. Olympus had the right idea with their XA, and the models that followed. If Yashica had wanted to remain in that kind of market it should have have a killer XA-like clamshell-type camera in development by the end of the 1970s, from which to spin off a bunch of anonymous but competent point-and-shoot cameras during the 1980s and 1990s.
But it's easy to be a back seat driver. Especially if you have long arms. Or if you hypnotise the driver and control her mind. Or if you are driving one of Captain Scarlet's cars - the driver's seat was in the back.
My only field of (minor) expertise is the motor business, in which longevity is usually a sign of systemic failure. Often a manufacturer will keep a car in production for several years because it does not generate enough profit to fund research and development into a successor, which leads to a slow bleeding-out as sales tail off. Or alternatively the company is wasting money on other things, or successor designs were botched, or there has been a strategic mistake, or because the company is no longer interested in that market section any more, but does not want to kill a golden goose, and so forth. A classic example of all of these things is the British car industry.
It is a rare exception that remains in production because it is good, it is profitable, and definitive, e.g. the Mazda Miata/MX5, which has been around for almost twenty years but is hard to improve upon and still looks good today. The Electro's design looks funky nowadays because it's retro, but I imagine that in the 1980s people would have been unimpressed - it was a decade of angular black plastic with red lines, when people had orgasmic wet dreams about the Olympus AF-1:
http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/camera/popup/auto_af1.cfm
Although I am impressed with my Electro, the thought of it being in production as late as the 1980s makes me think that Yashica was in trouble, or (judging by the history I have just read) more interested in SLRs. Olympus had the right idea with their XA, and the models that followed. If Yashica had wanted to remain in that kind of market it should have have a killer XA-like clamshell-type camera in development by the end of the 1970s, from which to spin off a bunch of anonymous but competent point-and-shoot cameras during the 1980s and 1990s.
But it's easy to be a back seat driver. Especially if you have long arms. Or if you hypnotise the driver and control her mind. Or if you are driving one of Captain Scarlet's cars - the driver's seat was in the back.
Jon Perry
Established
Ashley Pomeroy said:
Facing sideways if I recall...
Jon
NickTrop
Veteran
Interesting perspective, Ashley. You may have a point.
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
IIRC Captain Scarlet was indestructible, just like a Yashica Electro...
Chris
Chris
Jeremy Z
Well-known
Well, I will help out you old folks and tell you what the ad says. I hope some other young punk will do the same for me some day for my Pentax K100D, hehehe.
Great ad, and very convincing to me, at least. Why is it that modern ads never try to appeal to our sense of logic like the old ones did? They want us to buy something because it will make us cool.
From my limited experience, the Electro 35 is indeed unparalleled in low light.
Yashica said:
Great ad, and very convincing to me, at least. Why is it that modern ads never try to appeal to our sense of logic like the old ones did? They want us to buy something because it will make us cool.
From my limited experience, the Electro 35 is indeed unparalleled in low light.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
By the way, I will also add that I love it when the older folks can relate stories of how things were back in those days. (ex. "a months' wage for a PFC was $140") If the Yashica was $110 then, a Canon Rebel XTi would cost about $2000 now.
Thanks for the perspective, guys.
Thanks for the perspective, guys.