Kodak releases Snapic A1 film camera for $99

This is a bit of surprise, Kodak just released a semi-disposable 35mm film camera for $99. And for that money, the feature looks quite decent.

• 25mm 3-element glass lens
• Zone focusing
• Multiple exposure mode
• Hand-grip
• LCD screen

Enlighten us as to why you label it "semi-disposable"? Are you suggesting that people who spend $100 + tax + shipping will throw it away?

I like the Ricoh GR-esque styling, and 3-element lens, but the fixed, f/9.5 @ 1/100 sec exposure, somewhat less so. Should nevertheless be a good sunny-day snapper.
https://www.kodak.retopro.co/products/kodak-snapic-a1-35mm-film-camera

With the cost of film and processing, I don't know how it can complete with the Kodak H35 & H35N -- both of which are similar in features but since they are half-frame they get TWICE as many shots per roll -- for HALF the price ($49).

I've got to assume that they have the same manufacturer.

I think it looks pretty sweet.

I like it.
But it isn't Kodak who has released it.
It is something called RETO Productions, who have licensed the name.

I would have taken a faster lens over auto-winding, but that is just me...

Hey, if Pentax can sell its 17 half-frame for $500, why can't "Kodak" sell a full-frame look-a-like for $100?

From my perspective this sits in a weird spot where it doesn't seem much more capable than something like an Ilford sprite, but it's twice as expensive.

Another licensing win for EK that will drive film sales. Looks pretty cool. Should deliver crisp shots for the kiddies.
Same people producing this, Retopro, as the charmera keychain digicam.

The lens is too wide!

Certainly a better "reusable disposable" than most. Manual zone focussing is perfectly fine (and reasonable) at this price point, but without some form of variable aperture and shutter control, results outside of an f9.5 @ 1/100s exposure are probably going to disappoint the new film shooters attracted to such a camera.

For ~100 american bones you can get a secondhand EOS300/500 and a couple of rolls of film - a far better option for someone starting out. Alas, just not one you can buy new in a store.

George Mann said:

The lens is too wide!

Click to expand...

Assuming it assists both in (a) a very inexpensive lens design and (b) the simple near-far zone focussing control.
And probably in keeping portrait subjects close enough for the flash to properly expose at the single aperture/shutter combination?

Basic but I think it's a smart design. They stuffed in a lot of features for the price, the double exposure thing seems to be especially popular these days, I think they tried to get as many "premium" features in as they could for that price. Shame about the fixed shutter speed but, if you're going to this from a disposable or toy camera, it's an upgrade for sure.

benderscameracorner said:

Certainly a better "reusable disposable" than most. Manual zone focussing is perfectly fine (and reasonable) at this price point, but without some form of variable aperture and shutter control, results outside of an f9.5 @ 1/100s exposure are probably going to disappoint the new film shooters attracted to such a camera.

For ~100 american bones you can get a secondhand EOS300/500 and a couple of rolls of film - a far better option for someone starting out. Alas, just not one you can buy new in a store.

Click to expand...

I don't think that the people that could buy this are cross shopping vintage SLRs. To me, this appeals to the casual shooter that wants something nicer than a disposable, and it's more rich in features than most toy cameras without being a ton more money, like the Pentax 17 or Lomo MC-A. Something good for fun snapshots and film vibes, to share with friends or post on social media. Yes, you can get a better camera from a technical perspective if you buy vintage/used, but the effort required to learn how to use one probably gatekeeps most from ever making that steps. It's why the Contax SLRs are still dirt cheap, while the G and T camera prices are stratospheric.

It's competitors are going to be the H35s of the world, and to a lesser extent, the legion of 80s and 90s P&Ses that are halfway on their way out due to failing electronics. Against them, I think it gives a good showing of itself.

Anyways I hope it sells well. The more people buying film, the better for us all.

$99 for a new camera with 3-element glass lens sounds like a pretty good deal to me in 2025: The old Soviet Smena cameras offer more user control (aperture, shutter speeds, focus) but film advance and shutter-cocking are separate operations, and it's longer focal length and minimum focus distance make it less selfie-friendly.

polaromar said:

I don't think that the people that could buy this are cross shopping vintage SLRs.

Click to expand...

True, they're not, and that's the frustration I have - that they're forking out decent money for extremely limited (and cheaply made) cameras that struggle to take acceptable images unless you really know what you're doing... which of course the target audiences for these cameras generally don't.

Instead they get a packet of mostly underexposed photos that look grainy and muddy, once the lab tech eeks out a printable image. That's not really encouraging newcomers to film photography to stick with it long term.

My Gen Z niece went through all this a while ago, was completely frustrated at her "new film camera" (one of the Ilford branded reusable disposables) producing generally lousy images and costing her a small fortune. She had no idea why - I doubt she'd used a camera that wasn't built into a phone before this point.

For literally the price of a roll of Portra 400 I found her a late 90s EOS300 with the kit zoom lens, gave it a good clean, told her to keep it on the "green square" and have at it. Immediately her photo quality - and happiness with them - improved 1000%. I'd love to think she'll further develop her interest, develop an understanding of aperture and shutter speed etc. and start taking more manual control - something the SLR will of course allow - but for now she's at least getting reliable images.

The market really needs something new in between the fixed exposure plastic reu-disposables and the US$500+ compacts like the Pentax and Lomo... Fujifilm manage to make semi-automatic Instax cameras with variable shutters for $100-$200. Just need the same for 35mm film.

George Mann said:

The lens is too wide!

Click to expand...

It's the main reason I'd consider buying it.

benderscameracorner said:

Fujifilm manage to make semi-automatic Instax cameras with variable shutters for $100-$200. Just need the same for 35mm film.

Click to expand...

Since only Fuji makes film that can feed an instax camera, I do wonder if the cameras are sold at a loss to generate film sales?

I want one!

It's something I might be interested in buying if the image quality of the lens is good enough.

I bought an Olympus Mju Wide with 28mm lens to fit a similar niche for a similar price. The image quality on that one is great if you use the lens at the widest setting, zoomed in it's terrible. The Olympus Mju would eat more batteries than this camera as it has to uncollapse and focus, which also causes a delay in taking it out of your pocket and shooting.

It's something I considered in order to A) have a pocketable backup camera and B) not have to carry a wide lens on travels. Walking around with a big camera and a tiny camera can be a winning combination.

The 22mm lens is probably perfect for selphies and group photos at parties.
And it would make more sense for me than to buy a 21mm lens for my 35mm SLRs.

A camera like this could be great for group projects.

Fixed aperture and shutter speed.
Cameras like that were so frustrating to use when I was 11 years old, maybe today’s consumers are more tolerant.

I did recently test a Nikon with 28mm lens and fixed aperture and shutter speed that I think might be in the same class as this Snapic.

Not something I need, but something I could afford to buy....and I bet a lot of people new to film and weighing up spending that sort of money on a 30+ year old used camera or something new would consider it.

Yes, it's fixed shutter speed and fixed aperture. But it might just have a decent lens and some basic focus control. As such it covers the bases when used with film like Kodak's Kodacolor line of films which don't mind some over or under exposure...or something like Delta 400, HP5+ or even Kentmere 200.

I probably won't buy one. But I probably know people who will. Looks better made than some of the Reto products too, though that could just be styling and marketing photos.

I'm certainly not going to complain that it doesn't have full auto and manual control over the shutter and aperture at that price in 2025.

abruzzi said:

Since only Fuji makes film that can feed an instax camera, I do wonder if the cameras are sold at a loss to generate film sales?

Click to expand...

I have wondered that myself. Perhaps not a loss-leader per se, but definitely willing to take more of a hit on margins for the camera in lieu of (presumably) healthy margins on film packs, than anyone attempting to sell a 35mm camera these days. It may explain the lack of a middle-weight affordable option.

Or just maybe an electronically controlled leaf shutter costs a lot more these days when they're only being made in the 1000s, rather than millions as would have been the case throughout the 1980s and 1990s?