willie_901
Mentor
The demand will rise.
But in economic terms the increase will be trivial compared to the digital market share for still photography as a whole.
It seems to me, a rise in used film-camera prices would be a negative for Cosina. If there is a significant, long-term increase in used film-camera prices it just makes things worse for companies who can produce new film cameras. That's the problem. Film cameras have a very long life time. Why buy a new film camera... or even new lenses?
The increase in Instax usage is a reason to buy a new film camera. People get a photograph (admittedly a low-quality photograph) immediately and it is a tangible thing. But I can buy an Instax camera at WalMart for $37. The best Instax camera you can get (Lomography Lomo Instant Camera) costs $120. How can Cosina make a profit from this trend?
HHPhoto
Well-known
1. The market share of new film cameras in 2016 has already been above 20% (mainly due to Instax cameras which alone had 6.5 million units).
2. For a potential / future film camera manufacturer it is completely irrelevant how much digital cameras are sold. The only question is: Can we sell enough film cameras of a certain type profitably.
For example, if Nikon / Cosina / Pentax see the possibility to sell 50,000 35mm SLRs with a profit, they will do it.
No matter whether the market for DSLRs is 2, 4 or 7 million units.
Look at Nikon:
They introduced their completely new designed F6 together with their D2x. Nikon has sold more than 35,000 units so far.
Completely wrong. It is just the other way round: The higher the prices for used film cameras, the more attractive new film cameras will be for potential buyers.
If I have to pay 1,000 bucks for a 20 or 30 year old camera, and 2,000 bucks for a completely new one, lots of people will prefer the new one.
We have already seen that:
In 2008 prices for about 30 year old Plaubel Makinas were in the 1,000 - 1,500 $ range (dependant on condition).
Cosina / Voigtländer saw that and got to the conclusion, that at such prices new cameras of the same type have a market:
Someone who is willing to buy such a 30 year old camera for more than 1,000 bucks, will also be open minded to buy a completely new one for about 2,000 bucks.
That led to the Voigtländer Bessa III / Fuji GF 670.
And the assessment was completely right: AFAIK more than 10,000 units (in total) were sold.
Quite a lot for a "niche in the niche in the niche" like a folding camera.
In total (worldwide) millions of used film cameras are traded each year. The higher the price level, the more attractive new (with guarantee) and improved (there are lots of things which can be improved to former film cameras) film cameras will be.
That is very easy: Just make a really good Instax camera (like the former Fuji Fotorama) for Instax Wide. The potential of the Instax film is not exploited at all by the current cheap cameras.
The film is excellent and can deliver much better results with better lenses and cameras.
Cheers, Jan
Mackinaw
Think Different
You got that right. Why Fuji only makes cheap cameras for Instax film is beyond me. They’re on to something, with Instax film, and they don’t seem to know it.
Jim B.
I'm pretty sure they know it based on the cash coming in.
traveler_101
American abroad
Good point about Nikon's success with newer film cameras. Usually when I think about this question (is there significant demand for new camera production?) I am confronted with the Cosina Voigtländer debacle. The rangefinder used market commands the highest prices of any used film camera segment, but CV still couldn't make a go of it with their RF series. All we have left now is Leica's M7 which is too expensive for most of us. I was really disappointed and depressed about the prospects for film's future when CV announced that its Bessa cameras were going out of production - just a year and a half ago now.
daveleo
what?
A friend dropped in last weekend with his X-Pro2 and four cases of instax prints that he made via Wi-Fi to his little travel size Fuji Instax printer.
HHPhoto
Well-known
Well, I think that is (a bit) unfair.
Please consider the following points:
1. There are now even three (!) new Leica film rangefinders: M7, MP and M-A. AFAIK there have never been a time in Leica's history at which three rangefinders were in production at the same time.
So best situation ever now for Leica film rangefinder fans.
2. The whole rangefinder market is extremely tiny compared to the SLR market. A Zeiss rep. told me it is only 1/1000 of the SLR market when I asked him about the Zeiss Ikon RF sales (that was in 2008).
So I think the whole CV rangefinder thing from 1999 - 2015 was just a big miracle.
Who would have thought that such a Cosina RF "career" could happen in 1998/99?
3. There are also some other used film camera segments with quite high prices, some even higher than the 35mm RF segment. In these segments new cameras can be succesful in the next years.
Therefore I think it makes sense for Cosina to have a look "out of their current" box.
There is much more than 35mm rangefinders........
Cheers, Jan
uhoh7
Mentor
Film will be ultra niche from here on out. Sure it may support a few products and some new twists.
I imagine what is more interesting to anyone at cosina with their eyes open is the reception of the M10, which, in context, is spectacular. DPR, who trashed the SL mercilessly, famously exaggerating it's size by placing it in the hands of a petite model, and posting OOC images as drab as possible, loves the M10 to death. The M10 has wide positive media coverage.
A 6600 price tag leaves considerable leeway for a new RD-1, but more polished, and of course full-frame.
Somebody is going to step into that gap sooner or later. Hilariously, Sony has shut themselves out with a ridiculous filter stack, but their base sensor is fully competitive with Leica, given equal cover.
Here is what the latest 42mp sony BSI sensor can do with the notorious red-edge making ZM 21/4.5 Biogon, if you just keep the glass over the sensor down to a Leica level:
Testshot by Charlie Webster, Sam Lee Test
That's with no lens profile, no cornerfix, and very little editing.
Fuji GFX will strain to compete, and it won't be cheap, or small. Oskar Barnack must be screaming in his grave: WAKE UP!!!!
Digital Bessa, Digital Barnack, Interchangable Q, FF Nex, the market already has been drooling over "it" for years now. A small, light FF camera for the great short register lenses. So far beyond obvious, I expect it will actually appear within a year or two.
I imagine what is more interesting to anyone at cosina with their eyes open is the reception of the M10, which, in context, is spectacular. DPR, who trashed the SL mercilessly, famously exaggerating it's size by placing it in the hands of a petite model, and posting OOC images as drab as possible, loves the M10 to death. The M10 has wide positive media coverage.
A 6600 price tag leaves considerable leeway for a new RD-1, but more polished, and of course full-frame.
Somebody is going to step into that gap sooner or later. Hilariously, Sony has shut themselves out with a ridiculous filter stack, but their base sensor is fully competitive with Leica, given equal cover.
Here is what the latest 42mp sony BSI sensor can do with the notorious red-edge making ZM 21/4.5 Biogon, if you just keep the glass over the sensor down to a Leica level:
Testshot by Charlie Webster, Sam Lee Test
That's with no lens profile, no cornerfix, and very little editing.
Fuji GFX will strain to compete, and it won't be cheap, or small. Oskar Barnack must be screaming in his grave: WAKE UP!!!!
Digital Bessa, Digital Barnack, Interchangable Q, FF Nex, the market already has been drooling over "it" for years now. A small, light FF camera for the great short register lenses. So far beyond obvious, I expect it will actually appear within a year or two.
HHPhoto
Well-known
Wrong.
Partly it is already a very successful mass market product again. Last year the sales of instant film cameras have been more than double (!!) compared to the mirrorless digital camera segment.
It would be no problem at all for Cosina to make a quality camera with a very good lens for both the Instax mini and wide format.
They can fill a real, big market gap.
They have all the technology needed, and the needed investments are relatively low.
But they don't have any capabilities in digital technology. The digital technology in the former RD-1 was made by Epson, not by Cosina.
A digital FF rangefinder would be
- expensive
- entering a strongly declining market
- a big investment product
- a tiny niche product compared to a quality Cosina Instax camera.
We will not see a digital Bessa rangefinder. And that is good news!!!!
Because the very high investments and very low sales numbers of such a product would probably kill Cosina.
The current digital camera market is very brutal. See for example Samsung, and the severe problems Nikon has published yesterday.
And look at the market data:
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html
Cheers, Jan
willie_901
Mentor
Why bother to make a good Instax camera? The media is terrible because it is so small. With this film format and lens focal length the cameras don't even have to focus. The whole point is a simple minimalistic experience. The Lomography Organization got it right. Lomography could have easily made a more sophisticated camera. How come they didn't.
willie_901
Mentor
Nope, he's right.
Very few people are willing to tolerate the inconvenience of digitizing film media. Even fewer are willing to adapt a pure analog workflow. Those who are willing to do either represent a niche.
Do you really think Instax photograph would be popular if people intended to digitize the prints?
Supply and demand is balanced for a niche market. There is no need whatsoever for new film bodies (Instax excepted).
Time will tell.
I await your announcements of new film camera production as they are announced.
HHPhoto
Well-known
Maybe for you. But millions of Instax camera users don't think so.
And you have currently two formats, a small one and a big one.
This year even a third format (Instax square) will be added.
The film itself is excellent, and can deliver much better results with better lenses and cameras.
I know lots of enthusiasts and professionals who want better Instax cameras. Many professionals are already using the wide format at weddings very successfully. They would like to improve that business by using better cameras with better end results.
Cheers, Jan
Jan, don't you think that when people talk about film here they really mean roll film and not instant film?
HHPhoto
Well-known
Sorry, but you don't know the market.
I've talked to all the manufacturers at Photokina.
You are already proven wrong, because
1. The scanner manufacturers have increasing sales for years.
2. The mail order labs with good scanning services have increasing demand.
3. Scanning is only an option with film, there is absolutely no need for doing it.
4. Second trend: More and more film shooters are rediscovering the joy of having a direct positive image (slide) and making prints in their own darkrooms. Excellent quality in both cases and no need for scans at all.
These pure non-digital workflows are the best ways for the increasing number of people who suffer from a "digital fatigue". People who must sit in front of computer screens at work the whole day. These people don't want to be forced to also sit in front of computers in their free time. They need a completely different experience, and film in a complete non-digital workflow can offer them exactly that.
Cheers, Jan
css9450
Mentor
I'd never even heard of Instax and had to Google it to see what it is. So its sort of like Lomo, but with instant film?
Lomo and Instax.... There's probably a smartphone app that will give you that kind of look, if that's what you're after.
Lomo and Instax.... There's probably a smartphone app that will give you that kind of look, if that's what you're after.
HHPhoto
Well-known
No, it has nothing to do with Lomo.
Fujifilm Instax instant film system is a classic integral instant film with dedicated cameras (similar to the former Polaroid integral film).
It was introduced to the market in 1998/99.
Since 2004 it has increasing demand, every year. Last year alone about 6.5 million Instax cameras were sold. It has been for years one of the most successful photo products in the whole photography market.
Cheers, Jan
daveleo
what?
Cannot understand why people want "better" cameras to use Fuji Instax film.
Use your Fuji X-whatever camera & lens and print on the Fuji SP-2 printer using Fuji Instax film.
Maybe I'm missing something?
Use your Fuji X-whatever camera & lens and print on the Fuji SP-2 printer using Fuji Instax film.
Maybe I'm missing something?
HHPhoto
Well-known
Yes, you are missing the following very important aspects:
- the SP-2 is for Instax mini only, Instax wide format is not possible; and Instax wide is the format enthusiasts and professionals who want better cameras / lenses are going for
- an Fuji X camera + the SP-2 combination is very expensive, the "better camera only" option would be much cheaper
- the X / SP-2 combination is more inconvienent compared the the 'one camera only' option: The charme of instant film photography is to have the image directly out of the camera (without need for additional equipment).
Cheers, Jan
Like who and what are they using to print, Ilfochrome? I haven't seen this trend at all.
HHPhoto
Well-known
For color:
1. Using reversal film and the best imaging chains:
a) Using an excellent slide loupe and a lighttable. With that you are getting a much much better image quality than using a computer monitor with its very limited resolution and limited half tone rendition.
b) Using a slide projector. Much much better image quality compared to the extremely expensive digital projectors with their extremely low resolution, problematic color rendition and flat look.
2. Using negative film and printing on classic RA-4 silver-halide paper in the darkroom. It has never been so easy and cheap as today.
Cheers, Jan