Do you think there'll be further r&d of 35mm film cameras?

[dg1]

My own knee jerk answer is no. ..

Yet I just purchased a brand new, and relatively expensive 35mm SLR.

Why'd I do that?

 

Can't help but wonder if I've lost my mind(I almost feel like I've

done something wrong!), or if there are others coming from and still

involved with a digital workflow, who are second guessing that and

taking a fresh look at film from the other digital side.

 

Cosina-Voigtlander and the obstinate Leica still soldier on with

their rangefinders, even while film manufacturer's seem to be pulling

back production.

 

Fujifilm is taking out 3 page spreads in mags like PDN touting their

film line with endorsements by apparently high profile photogs. Do

they sense a trend or is it a last ditch effort to save their film

business?

 

Are any camera manufacturers continuing to develop and offer new 35mm

cameras, or might that happen once the acceleration of digital

capabilities begins to level off?

 

Just sittin' and thinkin'

[fk319]

Specificly 35 mm features, probably not. But many of the advancement in digital cameras can be aplied to film cameras. (I really mean most of the advancement made by film cameras has been aplied to digital cameras.)

[mawz]

I expect to see continuing development of 35mm cameras, but it will be restricted to niche markets, like the C-V Rangefinders and Nikon's pro bodies. I expect to see pretty much every consumer 35mm solution to be pulled off the market by the end of the decade.

[fernando lopez]

Hi Dean,

 

That's an interesting thread. What film gear did you purchase? I am completely digital now, owning a Canon EOS system with some good optics. If it were for sure that film was going to survive I'd invest in a Leica or Zeiss Ikon rangefinder. I believe that 90% of all manufacturers focusses R&D on digital. However I do believe film is going to survive, but as a niche product. Just like vinyl. You can still get in specialized shops, but the mainstream is cd's. I can honestly tell you that digital hasn't made life easier as there is quite a steep learning curve and with film, you know what you have and what it can do. I do however like digital, because in the end it's only the medium to record a photograph. The essence of photography remains the same. I remember Canon stating that they will continue producing film camera's as there is a high demand in third world countries who don't have acces to computers. I guess it's just a question of preference. Do you like to look at beautiful transparecies on a lightbox or do you prefer superb photographs on a specialed high res. monitor? Do what you like best and don't worry about what may or may not come. Enjoy the moment and enjoy your photography.

[ellis_vener_photography]

You miht check out the Nikon F6. But my guess is that will be the end of the evolutionary

line for film based SLRs from either Nikon or Canon.

[neal_shields]

What would you want a 35mm camera to do that you can't already buy one to do?

 

The FBI crime lab puts 200 asa film at the equivalent of 16-20 meg pixels. With most processing labs printing at 300 dpi there certainly isn't any reason for more resolution.

 

The latest Nikons focus automatically so fast that it seems more like mind reading and there certainly isn't any problem with the light meters that needs improving.

 

Unless you just want a camera that you can send on vacation by itself and it gets on and off the plane and takes all the pictures while you stay home, I just can't think of anything to fix. Kind of like improving the bicycle.

[eye-of-searle]

Compared to today, I could actually see a market in the future for "pure" film cameras. By pure, I mean manual/mechanical. I can see where Leica, Bessa, Nikon and some others may thrive in a smaller more niche market. With all the technology out there today, there is something relaxing and magical about just picking up a simple film rig and shooting. I love using my old Kowa 6x6. Not a electronic mechanism on it.

[dg1]

>What would you want a 35mm camera to do that you can't already buy one to do?

 

Well that's a good question and a good point. Nothing really, less is more. I guess what I meant was simply, will manufacturers continue to produce 35mm film cameras? Offer new models, small design tweaks etc. Not so much whether they'll evolve further. However I assume exposure systems and such might continue to evolve to be used both in digital and film based cameras.

[bill_thorlin]

Just a few thoughts.

 

I read a report not that long ago ( sorry cannot remember the reference ) that focused on the possibilty that 35mm film cameras had just about been developed about as far as they can go. Seemed well argued to me.

 

From a market research report ( Forbes )- film cameras achieved 96% "household penetration" ( awful term ) and it was anticipated that digital would achieve 66% penetration in the next year or so and would then level out. The manufacturers would then be chasing the replacement market which is a much more difficult and less profitable nut to track.

 

From Nikons financial report and projection - digitalSLRs will in future account for 10% of camera units sold but 30% of the resultant gross profit. You work that out and see where the money is.

 

Nearly all the camera companies have invested so much money in the digital market ( with pretty painful results financially - only Canon has avoided at least one year of overall losses, due to the strength of their other product lines ) that they cannot afford for it to fail. That would seem to preclude much R&D expenditure in 35mm film cameras.

 

Add to all the above the fact that digital is a "new" product and we all know how much the consumer loves "new".

 

I think it will still be at least two or three years before the whole market has settled down, or the companies have come to terms with what the market is, and before we will have some fairly concrete idea as to who and what is left.

[steve_levine]

At the most recent Photokina in Germany, no new 35MM SLR's were announced,( for the first time ever). IMHO, this is "the" handwriting on the wall.

[keith_van_hulle1]

>What would you want a 35mm camera to do that you can't already buy one to do?

 

Pie in the sky? All the capabilities, features, and quality of an EOS1v with a 24-70L in a package as small as an Olympus Epic (and as easy to operate).

[mark u]

I think we'll see some creep of features down into lower priced models as a way of keeping market interest alive. We may also see new body designs trialled in film cameras (the EOS 300V/Rebel Ti was just such a design ahead of the mould breaking 300D), so as to get practical experience of user appeal, manufacturing and durability. Using a film body as a test bed for some new parts - e.g. more durable shutters, which get so much more use with digital - might also offer similar benefits without risking a major warranty programme on a high volume DSLR. Most development will be dual purpose, film and digital, but very much with an eye on the latter. I doubt anyone will bother to attempt something like in body image stabilisation for film. In short, developments will be for marketing reasons, or because it is cheaper to use parts and systems in common with DSLRs where feasible.

 

It's obvious that several manufacturers will pull out of film altogether, and others may exit the camera business entirely. Making low end DLSRs threatens to become as much of a financial bloodbath as making P&S digicams has become.

 

One area that will remain is the development of lenses. Modern computerised design techniques are capable of coming up with significant advances - but again this will perhaps be more angled at lenses that interact better with sensor optics and sensor designs rather than specifically aimed at film. It can't have escaped the notice of the likes of Contax, Leica and Olympus that one of their greatest strengths lies in their lens designs. Teamed up with a mount compatibility specialist mid/lower end independent lens maker they could make some interesting inroads into the OEM lens markets.

[phyrpowr]

My pure guess is that the big guns, Nikon and Canon, will continue to tweak their top offerings some, as there is still some film money out there but I really don't see another "whole new camera" in the offing

[steven_clark]

I expect the new film camera market will shrink drasticly. There will be enough manual control SLR's produced to handle the photography classes and probably enough cameras like the Stylus Epic to handle the artistic types and a few other little niche markets, but much beyond that and most of the market can be handled by used cameras for decades to come. I also expect C41 and E6 to dissappear before silver simply because of the huge infrastructure needed to develop the stuff. B&W will stick around for a along time as an artistic material and educational tool.

[Brian]

I think the film camera R&D will follow new sales trends and thus dry up. I agree with Steven that used film cameras will change hands and so satisfy demand for some years. Also I think disposable film cameras still have some life in them, so C41 lines will go on, but I have my doubts about E6.

[bruce_appel]

I think part of the reason that digital is being pushed by the makers so hot and heavy, is because 35mm cameras had already been developed about as far as they could go.They needed something new to make sales, and minor tweaks to already advanced systems would not generate sales like a whole new product.

[robert_potts1]

There isn't much R and D for view cameras. I think 35mm is at about the same stage now. What will happen when digital hits a plateau is anyone's guess. We haven't seen a smart Dslr yet in my opinion, so I expect that we will continue to be dazzled by hot new digital developments for quite a while. An interesting thing that digital has brought us is new camera companies. Some of the old ones founded on film will probably dry up. On the other hand, a good idea is a good idea so there is some small hope for improvements as long as anybody is buying the product.

[chris_hutchins]

In ref to Neal Shields' comment - you be amazed at the amountof R&D money that has been spent recently on bicycle design!

 

With ref to the question ;) I'd be suprised if any more money goes into film camera development. Most R&D effort goes into producing high-end gear which is mostly bought by pros. Many (most?) pros now use digital because the media demand the rapid turn-around that a digital workflow can give. I think that this fact alone will mean that R&D cash will be diverted from flim cams to digital.

 

Chris

[harvey_edelstein1]

Speaking as a Nikon user the N80 could be refreshed with the newer autofocus modules that don't require a focus assist lamp and have more cross type sensors for little more money. Pentax *ist has quite a few more cross sensors and the film version costs less than the N80. Other improvements that are already developed could trickle down to these less expensive film models and should since these models still sell well here and in less computer oriented countries.

 

One must always keep in mind that a N80 with one of Nikons pro lenses attached takes far better pictures for the price then a mid level Dslr technology which sells for several times the price. My relatives who have such cameras like them because for the 2-3 dozens of rolls of film the shoot a year they can feel their cameras yield just about as good results as my system and are fun and reliable to use.

 

I think Nikon and others should enhance these products since its actually cheaper to only manufacture and stock fewer Autofocus and metering modules and flash automation modules.

[User_502260]

It doesn't seem likely that much more r&d will be done on film cameras. I am trying to have at least one mechanical body for each manual focus lens mount system I have. The electronic cameras will not work forever but the mechanical models could work indefinitely with occasional service. I have two Minolta X-700 bodies but I also have an fully overhauled STR-101. I have three electronic K mount cameras but also a K1000. Earlier this year Greg Weber overhauled a Konica FT-1 for me but I have many mechancial Konica bodies. For the types of photography which do not require very high shutter speeds or a compicated dedicated flash arrangement the older mechanical cameras can still do a fine job. Today I got two 8X12 prints back from The Slideprinter. Both were from Kodachrome 25 slides shot this past summer with a Nikkormat FT2. One was shot with a 28mm f/3.5 AI Nikkor and one with a 55mm f/3.5 Micro Nikkor-P. Both prints are very sharp and show no grain. Not bad for an old film camera.

[harvey_edelstein1]

Jeff, I would get a Nikon F5 because it is so reliable, has a self adjusting shutter and is sealed well against the elements. The f5 build quality will take the bumps and bruises and since it was made until last year and so many were produced their will be parts and trained technitions to repair it for at least the next 15 years.

[ron c sunshine coast,qld,a]

Future film cameras will gain minor improvements as a byproduct of DSLR development.

<P>Things like focus screens,autofocus modules and metering modules are allways improving .Film cameras used to get the best of these,in future they will still get them but as hand-me-downs from digital

[chris_olney1]

I have a gut feel about all this digital business. Whilst the Digitial still market is slowing down, very soon it will reach saturation level and I invisige these problems: First of all, there won't be the money about for pople to keep buying such products on the same scale as before. Digital compact cameras are iherently unreliable and if you havent had one go wrong inside 2 years or so, then you are lucky!

 

The question arises about the cost to have them repaired outside the G'tee. In most cases, it's not worth it due to the average cost/handling charges to total well over ?80. This means frequent upgrades which also means that the average consumer will end up paying a small fortune over a relatively short period for their new camera. This won't be enough to save the bacon of some dealers due to Internet sales, and many of the cheap onliners will cease to exist as they are already working on a couple of percent margin. Digital photography is not cheap when costs are weighed up.

 

Manuafacturers will go bust or Amalgamate. People such as Jessops will have a huge downturn in business and be forced to close a large number of their shops to remain profitable. Minilabs for digital will slowly disappear as home printers become better, and only a few photo dealers will survive, probably the small independent with a freehold or low rent who will have a niche and diverse market.

 

Many colleges are teaching traditional photography (the best quality with superb gradation) without the flat or false sharpness and color that small digicams tend to give. The demand for used 35mm SLR's will go up, as will the prices slowly but surely simply due to digital users 'binning' their old SLR's. It will set the market right for Cosina to introduce a small offering of good quality mechanical SLR's for under ?200 bearing whatever name fits the bill. Film sales will remain for now, and if Kodak can introduce a new Super 8 film, then 35mm is set to stay. Dealers are too reliant on Digital still cameras and will be forced to diversify or go bust. Mark my words: the film SLR industry will get a shake up before too long. They will sell, and even some of my clients have already resurrected their SLR's because they are RELIABLE AND SERVICEABLE. A lot of film media will be archived on CD-R and negs. confined to the bin. I do not own a Digicam as I prefer film and the superb saturation and gradation that film gives without the need to spend many hours glued to a PC to correct all the errors that mannifests itself through a CCD. Each to their own, eh?