Will EOS 1v be the last film SLR?

<p>I was wondering the same question a while back. And I kind of hope Canon does come out with a replacement for the 1v so that the 1v prices will drop and I can get one.</p>

<p>I think Craig and Martin hit the nail on the head. Film camera technology, for both amateur and professional users, developed to a very high level in terms of performance and durablity. For years, 35mm SLR sales were nowhere near that of what came to be sales figures of DSLRs. This is because there was really no need for photographers to go out and buy an updated film SLR model. The updated performance came with the advancements in the latest film. </p>

<p>Film can still be an excellent tool for some uses. But this is ignored. Since the money has been in advertising and selling the latest and greatest DSLRs, film bodies have practically all gone out of production. The few remaining- more power to them! A couple of years ago, I found prices had fallen so low on closeouts and lightly used models, I added to my stock of Pentax SLR bodies, so I am set for life. My DSLR bodies may go obsolete, but not my film SLRs! </p>

<p>What's film?</p>

<p>I see only Cosina and Leica producing 35mm Leica mount film bodies. For everybody else, there're too many used film cameras in fine working condition available for too little that makes the 35mm market impossible for producers. Cosina might have something for collectors' delight, like the Bessaflex M42, though.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What's film?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>it's that stuff that makes really nice photos that digicam users try to emulate in this weeks version of their varourite software vendor.</p>

<p>i'ts not in canon's or nikon's best interest to make more film cameras. the fact is that film cameras don't need updating really, they are built to last. digicams have an average failure rate of three years, so it's a pretty good rort for these companies at the moment. but the film cameras demise has little to do with it's usefulness.</p>

<p>'I can't really comment as far as Canon goes, but the Nikon F6 is still in demand.'</p>

<p>I can't imagine the demand is very high. It's rumoured that the F6 is also out of production, and Nikon, like Canon, are just selling their existing inventory. There's no shortage of F100 bodies at 1/10 of the price (or F5s for not much more), so unless money is not an issue, you need a pretty specific need for an F6 feature (like CLS compatibility) to justify the purchase. This just leaves the FM10, a re-badged Cosina, in the film camera range.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=388911">John Schroeder</a> <a href="http://www.photo.net/member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub9.gif" alt="" /></a>, Apr 24, 2010; 01:42 a.m.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>What's film?</p>

</blockquote>

 

It's the medium used in the <em><strong>true</strong> photographic process</em>.

 

<p>For the economic reasons previously mentioned, I cannot see Canon putting any more resources into further development for film cameras. So, if you want a 1 series film body, the 1v is very likely to be the last in the line. I am very happy with mine.</p>

<p>As for the AF, it was state of the art in 2000 when it came out -- but that was 10 years ago. Canon seemed content to tweak their pro AF a bit here and there and focus their R&D resources elsewhere for several years. Pressure from substantially improved Nikon AF systems built up, but the resources were still on the main sensor. The embarrassing bugs with the 1DmkIII AF seem to have compelled Canon to put more resources into AF for the 1DmkIV and the 7D.</p>

<p>If your question is whether the 1v's AF is on par with the AF for the 1DmkIV or the 7D, then no, it isn't. The new AF in these bodies is superior. I hope it makes its way into the next iteration of the 5D. Soon.</p>

<p>If the comparison is with the AF from the 1 series bodies in between, then it depends on whether the incremental improvements matter to what you shoot. For birds in motion or sports with long, bright lenses, the extra cross points can matter. I'd say the 1DmkII is a real but incremental improvement over the 1v. For less technically demanding AF circumstances, I think the differences are negligible.</p>

<p>There are enough already a huge surplus of used film cameras around.</p>

<p>Even if one breaks one can buy another used one cheaper than repairing one.</p>

<p>Thus a camera maker really has almost no reason to compete with a huge used SUPER saturated market.</p>

<p>There are enough used film cameras around to support film for as long as folks want to use film.</p>

<p>This is hard for many photo.net folks to understand; since running a business is totally FOREIGN.</p>

<p>Most all cameras bought are used my amateurs; only a few parts per million are used by pros.</p>

<p>A massive part of the DNA in amateurs in photography is the camera and lens matters; and lighting and experience means nothing.</p>

<p>Thus a halt in a film cameras model line is an emotional one; there is no lillypad new model of camera body to improve their film images.</p>

<p>The advertising campaigns in support of the latest and greatest DSLR advancements have swung consumer attention away from any knowledge of film's usefulness. Therefore, a generation has matured into DSLR owners who have never shot a film camera. Sales of new film SLR cameras took a nosedive, after being slow for years as it was. Without new generations having numerous people interested, a market for new buyers is not there. The minority of interested newcomers are able to satisfy their needs with what is available on the used market. </p>

<p>There may possibly be a renewal of interest in time. I often shoot with digital, but I still like film. One practical aspect is, when I will need multiple sets of prints. I just drop off the rolls. No time-sucking computer, so I go about other business, and pic up the pics later! Cost of prints for film vs digital around here is less too. </p>

<p>So my view is both digital and film have their own advantages, but the marketing push of digital for the big $$ it brings in has relegated film to semi-obscurity.</p>

<p>It's highly unlikely the big names in photography will release any new 35mm bodies ever again, but film sales appear to be relatively stable now and new film SLR bodies are still released once in a while by low-profile companies like <a href="http://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/products/2264/phenix-dn60-35mm-slr-body-nikon-f-mount">Phenix</a>. No idea whether they're any good. Despite the brand name it doesn't seem likely they'll resurrect the 35mm market out of its ashes, but the design is clearly very classically inspired!</p>

<p>At this point only Leica, Cosina (Voigtlander, Zeiss) and a handful of obscure companies are still making film cameras. I've read in several different places that Leica only sells a few hundred M'7s and MP's a year. Don't know how true that is and I don't know how stable Cosina is though their lenses are popular enough. I agree with Kelly that the used market is flooded with high quality cameras. Can Nikon make a better F100 and make it financially viable when a like new model can be had for $300? Will a poor man pay over $3000 for a new MP when a fine looking M6 can be had for $1200 or an Ex looking M3 for say $700-$800? A Nikon FM3a can be had for $500 in Excellent condition. If film maintains status flow and dare say gets popular again will take a long time to mop up that saturated market so new cameras could be built. I doubt it will happen.</p>

<p>What annoys me from time to time is that I know that nobody is going to buy my T1i in 50 years, but my 50 year old Rolleiflex takes amazing photographs. Also, I imagine that buying 120 B&W film via the internet from some place in Croatia is more likely than anyone making an SD card reader in 50 years.</p>

<p>Classic car enthusiasts say the same about today's cars, of course. No modern classics seem to be in the works. The Prius may be ground breaking, but it is ugly as dirt IMHO. </p>

<p>Hakan, I had no interest in the software, neither have I looked for the software or the cable. I might explore if Canon put it for free on their website, however. (At this point what have they got to lose?) I'd be in a world of data hell if I had exposure and lens info on all my film shots, since I started shooting in 1980. All this film chat I will add the 1v to the bag with the digital for tomorrow's soccer shoot! </p>

<p>I assume everyone here talking about film knows about apug.org? I'm thankful for both, them and photo.net.</p>

<p>WT, have a nice shooting with 1v! :-) </p>

<p>The economics of out-dated technology follow a J-shaped curve, with old stuff still available but hard to find and expensive. Can you still buy a new view camera? Sure. But don't expect to find all models, and expect to pay a stiff price for mid-range gear. I'm guessing the Canon 1V model will be very rare in the future, but I'll also venture that mid-range models will be available for decades to come. After all, you can still buy 32rpm vinyl records, and turntables to play them.</p>

<p>I just dropped off a couple of rolls of film today at my local drugstore.</p>

<p>They have a digital kiosk where you can plug in your memory card and order prints from the images you like.</p>

<p>You can also do the same thing via their web page. I can't see how this could be less convenient or more expensive than dropping off rolls of film.</p>

<p>I too not only have an EOS-1V, but its predecessors purchased at little expense on e-bay (New F-1, Nikon F-3). However, the sad thing was that the EOS-1V was not the greatest camera. Subsequent (digital) Canons have improved on in build (metal) and functionality (better viefinder). An EOS-1F (film) could now be the best film camera ever and I for one would be willing to pay for it. How much? Well probably no more than the EOS-1V costs today, but then I wouldn't be wanting 10fps on a film camera.</p>

<p>Over the next few weeks I will be going to Utah, Nevada, Arizona & New Mexico to shoot up my last couple dozen rolls of Kodachrome. I'll be bringing a couple of A-1's and a Mamiya 6 (yes, and a 5D). These cameras are at least 25 years old and work fine. Somehow, I feel less removed from the process of photography when using film, it forces me to think more before I click. Ironically, I feel that I understand (and <em>see</em>) the subject better when I <em>can't</em> preview exposure. Will the 1V be the last Canon film camera...probably. Will it matter to me...nope.</p>

<p>Maybe for Canon, maybe not. I don't think film will go away completely, but it's day at the top of the heap is over. At best it will be a strong second to digital imaging. I'd like to dabble in wet plate view cameras,but 35mm and 120 are a lot more accessible.</p>

<p>Artists will always choose the medium to suit their needs and taste.</p>

<p>Being a primarily a sports photographer I love what digital gives me in work flow ease; but when I get creative, I reach for my film cameras.</p>

<p>Ed</p>

<p>January 2011, I asked Canon directly if they still make film cameras and in an e-mail response, I was told "Canon no longer produces film cameras. Film camera production ceased approximately two years ago." Perhaps everyone knew that, but I didn't. Stephen</p>