Brand new film SLR in devopement, the "Reflex"

I guess kids have discovered film, however I think I will stick to my faithful FTb.

 

Back to the darkroom: young fans reject digital to revive classic film camera

Interesting article. I will also stick to my current "stable" of film cameras, but if the new "Reflex" attracts more film users, so much the better.

That new "Reflex" looks like it was designed by a Praktica user. And unless I'm mistaken, that Yashica lens mounted to the front standard is an M42 mount lens. A real blast from the past. I'm not sure I understand the point of it having a removable front standard, though.

 

I do like the idea of it having a removable back, a la many medium format systems.

 

Like Mike, I have many 35mm SLRs that are still in excellent mechanical and electronic condition. I'll continue to use these. But, as Mike mentions, if the makers of this new camera can find a market for it, hey great.

That new "Reflex" looks like it was designed by a Praktica user. And unless I'm mistaken, that Yashica lens mounted to the front standard is an M42 mount lens. A real blast from the past. I'm not sure I understand the point of it having a removable front standard, though.

 

I do like the idea of it having a removable back, a la many medium format systems.

The removable front standard so that you can use different front standard with different lens mount.

But I don't need the Reflex, I need film for my Reflexes.

The removable front standard so that you can use different front standard with different lens mount.

 

OK, that makes sense. Not a bad idea, either. Sort of a Tamron approach to cameras instead of lenses.

But doing so the camera has no coupling to the lens and thus has to be used with stop down metering and one has to stop the lens down after focusing and before taking the shot.

This camera has been discussed a few times on here.

 

I see it as a solution looking for a problem. Interchangeable backs are a great thing on my Hasselblad, Mamiya, and Bronica as they are smaller than the camera body and just seamlessly integrate into them. 35mm SLRs are small enough that it's easier-to me-to carry two or more bodies to carry different film stocks or have a reload ready. An RB67 film back takes up a LOT less space than an RB67 body. An FM2N looks smaller than one of the backs for this camera.

 

Plus, with an FM2N, I get full aperture, fully coupled metering.

Didn't Rollei introduce a box-like 35mm camera with an interchangeable back? A solution for a non-existent problem.

This camera has been discussed a few times on here.

 

I see it as a solution looking for a problem. Interchangeable backs are a great thing on my Hasselblad, Mamiya, and Bronica as they are smaller than the camera body and just seamlessly integrate into them. 35mm SLRs are small enough that it's easier-to me-to carry two or more bodies to carry different film stocks or have a reload ready. An RB67 film back takes up a LOT less space than an RB67 body. An FM2N looks smaller than one of the backs for this camera.

 

Plus, with an FM2N, I get full aperture, fully coupled metering.

 

And I can carry a Nikon FM2n, A Canon A1, A Minolta XD-11, A Minolta Maxxum 7, An Olympus OM-2, A Pentax KX and I don't care for the interchangeable front standard.

".. young fans reject digital to revive classic film camera."

 

And by the time this gets to market (if ever) those young fans will have moved on to the next fad.

 

I can't see this being a viable product at less than £400, which is way too high to make it popular. And when those young 'fans' see how crappy commercially processed 35mm film can look, they'll just as quickly turn away from it.

I can't see the camera setting the world on fire and as Joe said it may never get off the ground anyway. I'm not excited about interchangeable backs either - unless you were talking about a 250 back, a data back, or something on that order. Having to manually stop down the lens? Yikes, back to the old pre-set days. I did it back in the 60s, but would anyone stand for that now. Unless I had no other choice, NO.

 

But the real point of at least trying to introduce this camera is that it MIGHT induce a major manufacturer to give film another try. If Ektachrome (yes, but when???) can come back, who knows.

I think one of the founders got the interchangeable back bug, and FORCED it as a "feature."

I would rather have a fixed back, and lower the complexity and price.

 

This has a totally manual lens mount, no aperture coupling or automatic aperture (so you can focus and compose with the lens wide open). From a practical point of view, the reverse DoF idea is dumb. I've used the old pre-set lenses from the 1950s and 60s, and much prefer the auto aperture lenses.

I would rather have a factory fixed mount and couple the lens aperture and make it an auto aperture. Put the money and engineering into a coupled lens mount instead of the interchangeable back. Too modular (the user changeable mount), means lowest common denominator. And in this case it means, no aperture coupling or auto aperture, and you are back to the 1950s. To me, this is the biggest fault of the design. The auto coupled aperture is of much more value to me, than an interchangeable back.

 

The tread mount is a really really obsolete mount. Changing a thread mount lens is a slow and delicate operation, or you could cross thread the lens or drop the lens. My first camera was a Mamiya/Sekor with a thread mount, so I know the issues first hand. And that was THE reason that I sold the camera, the thread lens mount. There is a reason manufacturers switched from the thread mount to the bayonet mount. Both Pentax and Mamiya/Sekor had thread mount cameras in the 60s and 70s, which they later replaced with bayonet mount cameras.

The only reason I can see to include a thread mount, is a HUGE source of inexpensive thread mount lenses in Europe.

 

Jack of all trades, master of none.

 

The initial idea is good, but the execution is flawed.

Given the camera as designed, I would instead get an old Nikon, Canon, Minolta or Olympus and have it serviced. And even after a CLA, it would be way cheaper than the 399 GBP ($560 USD) Reflex. And I would have auto coupled aperture.

If any of the kids in the neighbourhood were to ask, I'd gladly assist. Thankfully I've kept my stable pretty intact.

I've had interchangeable backs for my Contaflexes for maybe 25 years, and while I don't use the Contaflexes as often as I should, I can't recall ever having used the backs, other than on an experimental basis. I guess, back in the day when you might have wanted to change between Kodachrome and Kodacolor or B&W, the facility would have been useful, but expensive and a little complicated and clumsy.

 

This project looks capable of disenchanting the most enthusiastic young novice photographer. Is Shanghai General Camera Factory still producing the Minolta clones? If I wanted a new film camera I think I'd rather go there...

I'm not sure I understand the point of it having a removable front standard, though.

I suppose it is a film based measurebator's wildest dream ever? - Finally a chance to shoot your various brand's lenses against each other on the same roll of hard to get TechPan, AP25, whatever...

For everybody else an ability to mount any odd lens might safe a few pennies or permit faster turn around times, when you don't have to wait for the roll in an umpteenth body behind a speciality lens to get finished.

But still: I don't see a need to buy into that product.

I agree with [uSER=2105396]@Gary Nakayama - SF Bay Area, California[/uSER] upon thread mount in general; there have been moments when I looked too excited to successfully shiver another k-mount lens into my Pentax. Thread mount has 3 benefits: It teaches "Interchangeable lenses are cool but jugging them in the field isn't." IMHO

a HUGE source of inexpensive thread mount lenses in Europe.

is maybe history enough to no longer deserve capital letters? - But I could have been too focused on Takumars in the pizza range, that I never spotted...

The greatest thing about it seems adaptability to a lot of other SLR mounts. If you loose aperture coupling you are probably glad to have the manual / auto switch for stopping down faster than counting clicks. And if you like a ens it might be worth leaving an inexpensive adapter with an aftermarket rear cap on it forever.

But yeah, those facts look like another nail in the Reflex' coffin.

The Reflex specs may or may not attract people who never used film before but for old timer the specs is very wrong. We don't need a built in flash, we don't need meter. Interchangeable back and front standard are interesting but not needed. Losing the ability of automatic stop down is much worse than no meter.

Here's an issue I see-

 

On a traditional fixed-mount SLR, the mount is rigidly fixed to the body both to keep the registration distance correct and to keep the lens parallel. Take a close look and you find that the mount its both pretty substantial(plastic mounts excepted) and also firmly fixed to the camera body.

 

At the price point, I wonder just how firmly the mount is fixed to the body. If I hang an 80-200 2.8 off of it, for example, do I have to worry about the mount flexing or even falling off?

A solution in search of a problem indeed. There are plenty good film cameras available second hand for loads less money that are well-made, reliable and proven. Unless it's another attempt to address the Holga/Diana/Lomo market, in which case the features of dubious value and execution, combined with an excessive price suddenly make sense again.

A solution in search of a problem indeed. There are plenty good film cameras available second hand for loads less money that are well-made, reliable and proven. Unless it's another attempt to address the Holga/Diana/Lomo market, in which case the features of dubious value and execution, combined with an excessive price suddenly make sense again.

 

I certainly wouldn't want one but I don't know about the market. Sometimes the worst products are best sellers.