Lack of affordable new cameras = death knell for film photography?

[Huss]

..

Hubris, and underestimating the strength and quality of the competition, IMHO, doomed Leitz, Zeiss, Rollei, etc. to the fate of buggy whip makers and video stores.​

Andy

PS: I adore my Leicas, Zeisses, and Rolleis!

And yet Leica is still making 35mm film cameras. Out of all the Japanese mfgs, I think only Nikon is making one - the F6. The Cosina made FM10 seems to be discontinued.

 

[Horatio]

Patents expire. All that needs to be copied are details from a 17 year or older film camera. Should not be too hard.

For that matter, someone could make new Barnack RFs. Patent expired long ago.

 

[Donald Qualls]

There's a very strong disincentive for an established manufacturer to continue, never mind start new production of a camera that competes against such a heavy weight of good used cameras. The very suddenness with which digital took over the professional and pro-sumer end of photography created a situation where there are literally millions of used cameras sitting in closets or bags, in good working condition except for oil hardening from age (fixed by a CLA).

That makes new film cameras, especially 35mm (which has been the most popular film format since the 1950s), a hard sell if they're not seen as a status symbol or luxury item. If digital had taken as long to take the market from film as 35mm did to take it from 120/620, there would be few enough working 35mm cameras that there might be a market for new ones below the level where gold plating and diamonds don't double the price -- a market for Fords and Toyotas, instead of only Rolls Royce and Lamborghini. As things stand, why would a "Ford driver" spend $600-$1000 on a new 35mm SLR or RF that does the same thing as their old Pentax, when they can buy a good used one and a couple lenses for less?

 

[reddesert]

Patents expire. All that needs to be copied are details from a 17 year or older film camera. Should not be too hard.

Asking a kickstarter level of engineering to copy a film camera from a couple decades ago, that was originally brought to market by an established company with several decades of manufacturing experience and a network of subcontractors that likely also vanished a couple decades ago, is not too hard. It's impossible. Don't buy into any kickstarter that promises to do this.

 

[markjwyatt]

How about starting with the Kiev 4a? Great camera based on Contax II, but modified to be more producible. Could redsign, use some better materials if needed etc. Might even be able to design in some improvements (lever advance, meter, framelines for a few lenses, etc., possibly upgrade the cocking mechanism so shutter speed can be set independently of the camera being cocked).

 

[Donald Qualls]

How about starting with the Kiev 4a? Great camera based on Contax II, but modified to be more producible. Could redsign, use some better materials if needed etc. Might even be able to design in some improvements (lever advance, meter, framelines for a few lenses, etc., possibly upgrade the cocking mechanism so shutter speed can be set independently of the camera being cocked).

And has access to a large stable of good to excellent lenses. But again, you'd be competing against tens of thousands (add another zero?) of Kiev 4 family cameras still in operable/repairable condition in and outside the FSU. Although honestly I don't see much use for a built-in meter if it isn't TTL -- I've got a 4M (with the top plate meter) and though the meter works and seems accurate if the light is above EV 8 or so, I almost never use it.

Lever advance would be nice, and probably not hard to reverse the advance rotation to make that work (the knob turns opposite the spool in this camera design, i.e. clockwise from above), but I don't see a lot of utility in being able to change shutter speed before advancing -- unless you're intentionally shooting doubles, you'd advance before you'd want to change exposure anyway (or are you one of those guys who advance before shooting, instead of after?). A larger, wider finder with frame lines for 35, 90, and 135 would be very welcome, yes.

 

[cooltouch]

Huh, 8 pages in and I just discover this thread. All I can say on this subject is, I'm glad I started collecting vintage cameras during the nadir of their value. I now own so many that if one were to expire per year (doubtful), I would still have many left long after I've shuffled off this mortal coil.

 

[markjwyatt]

Huh, 8 pages in and I just discover this thread. All I can say on this subject is, I'm glad I started collecting vintage cameras during the nadir of their value. I now own so many that if one were to expire per year (doubtful), I would still have many left long after I've shuffled off this mortal coil.

That works for you, and many of us. But, if we want FILM to remain available for the next 20-30 years, many others will need cameras also.

 

[CMoore]

The Olympus OM got it right IMHO. I never understood why people liked the shutter speed on the top deck of a camera.

Just going through this thread now....that is catching up where i left off.
Anyway.....when i first bought my OM1n a few years ago, it was weird to have the "Non-Traditional" shutter speed location.
I shot the Oly for 8-9 months....then i DID get use to it out front.
It might be as simple as that, just getting in the habit of one spot over another.?

 

[ts1000]

I listened to the video.

I am going to say that I liked how the problem is posed.

It is large step towards a solution, to pose the problem in a meaningfully nuanced, yet open-ended way.
At least for me, the video invited ideation.

So, here is what I am thinking (and I apologize if this idea was brought up before, I did not read all the comments):

a) Create an open source collective covering film camera, film lenses, film and film chemicals (like Apache or Eclipse for open source software)
b) Invite contributors, create a process of contributing, reviewing, voting/disputing on individual contributions and projects
c) Create a sustainability process (where some contributors leave)… basically use Open source software as example of the process to emulate
d) The Result of the open source collectives work should be blue prints, CAD designs, 3rd printable parts, electronic schematics, etc
e) The non-free part of the people working in the collective would be productions, certification, consulting, repair, etc.

Basically, I think re-creating a camera manufacture will not re-creating a sustainable film-industry.
Instead, we would need to re-think the undercurrents of the business model.

The author of the video is thinking about emulating engineering from the 50s by a newly formed (or, perhaps, bought/resurrected corp) -- but, I think
open-source-software like model would, at the end work better.

And provide 100+ years of sustainability and innovation.

One other thing that will happen with open source collective,
is that existing (or closed by now companies) with donate into that collective their previous designs (that they no longer view as competitive advantage). This is currently happing in the software/hardware industries with the CPU/ISA (instruction set architectures)

So overall within 2 years of establishing that collective, I am sure there will be enough technology blueprints, and contributors to start manufacturing prototypes.
This would be similar to what's happening, again in software/hardware space like Arduino, Raspberry PI, etc
Given the above long term sustainability (covering servicing, innovation, certification, consulting, etc), transparent and repeatability -- I think great things can be accomplished.

Just in this forum board along, we have optics designers, engineers, mathematicians, business folks, probably lawyers, etc.​

--

With regards to specific things like type of shutter, mount (m42), etc -- overall I think I agree with the author for initial product set.
But assuming that this Open Source Film Photography collective (let's call it OSFiP ) works, the sky is the limit in terms of electronics that can be leveraged.


P.S.
Sorry it was not clear if the OP (@Horatio ) is the video author. Thank you for sharing this.

 

[blockend]

How about starting with the Kiev 4a? Great camera based on Contax II, but modified to be more producible. Could redsign, use some better materials if needed etc. Might even be able to design in some improvements (lever advance, meter, framelines for a few lenses, etc., possibly upgrade the cocking mechanism so shutter speed can be set independently of the camera being cocked).

A lovely camera. The Contax II would have been a very expensive camera in its day, and a new iteration wouldn't cost any less, especially if the original shutter design was incorporated. Shall we say £4k for a new Kiev IV?

 

[removed account4]

There was a time before lab owning that I would have LOVED to own an M10. I had an M4 and a 35/2 Biogon and made some lovely images with it (https://sperryphoto.com/an-american-mill). More recently when I wanted a mechanical type 35mm camera I did consider getting back into RFs. The cost of lenses though is just a little tough to swallow. I picked up an LX and the 31, 43, & 77mm FA lenses for basically the cost of a single decent Voigtlander lens.

you should see if the Northern New England SIA chapter is still active ( SIA >> Society of Industrial Archaeology ). If you like mills and "industrial" you'd love being a member. Lots of fun stuff all around -- lectures, field trips &c. I was a member of the Southern New England Chapter for a number of years until I ran out of $ and had to cut some my memberships to nil....

Great stuff on your website !
John

 

[Pioneer]

I listened to the video.

I am going to say that I liked how the problem is posed.

It is large step towards a solution, to pose the problem in a meaningfully nuanced, yet open-ended way.
At least for me, the video invited ideation.

So, here is what I am thinking (and I apologize if this idea was brought up before, I did not read all the comments):

a) Create an open source collective covering film camera, film lenses, film and film chemicals (like Apache or Eclipse for open source software)
b) Invite contributors, create a process of contributing, reviewing, voting/disputing on individual contributions and projects
c) Create a sustainability process (where some contributors leave)… basically use Open source software as example of the process to emulate
d) The Result of the open source collectives work should be blue prints, CAD designs, 3rd printable parts, electronic schematics, etc
e) The non-free part of the people working in the collective would be productions, certification, consulting, repair, etc.

Basically, I think re-creating a camera manufacture will not re-creating a sustainable film-industry.
Instead, we would need to re-think the undercurrents of the business model.

The author of the video is thinking about emulating engineering from the 50s by a newly formed (or, perhaps, bought/resurrected corp) -- but, I think
open-source-software like model would, at the end work better.

And provide 100+ years of sustainability and innovation.

One other thing that will happen with open source collective,
is that existing (or closed by now companies) with donate into that collective their previous designs (that they no longer view as competitive advantage). This is currently happing in the software/hardware industries with the CPU/ISA (instruction set architectures)

So overall within 2 years of establishing that collective, I am sure there will be enough technology blueprints, and contributors to start manufacturing prototypes.
This would be similar to what's happening, again in software/hardware space like Arduino, Raspberry PI, etc
Given the above long term sustainability (covering servicing, innovation, certification, consulting, etc), transparent and repeatability -- I think great things can be accomplished.

Just in this forum board along, we have optics designers, engineers, mathematicians, business folks, probably lawyers, etc.​

--

With regards to specific things like type of shutter, mount (m42), etc -- overall I think I agree with the author for initial product set.
But assuming that this Open Source Film Photography collective (let's call it OSFiP ) works, the sky is the limit in terms of electronics that can be leveraged.


P.S.
Sorry it was not clear if the OP (@Horatio ) is the video author. Thank you for sharing this.

I do like this thought process. I particularly like the idea of re-thinking the entire idea of the primary manufacturers being the ones to build these cameras as they are already struggling to maintain a presence in the digital camera industry. I also like that the Kickstarter idea is not the foundation for this. A lot of Kickstarter projects seem to spring up and then die quickly again. This isn't true of all of them of course; Intrepid Camera is a great example of a group who have managed to build an entire product line from their initial offering and appear to be making a decent go of their kick start.

 

[4season]

open source collective...CAD designs, 3rd printable parts...innovation...Arduino, Raspberry PI...

Yes I've heard those popular buzzwords too, but think you left out the parts about "Heavy Industry", "Mechanical Engineering" and "Metallurgy". I suspect that building a camera similar to Zenit E from scratch would actually be incredibly difficult if not impossible for a collective of enthusiasts.

 

[BradS]

I guess any such new camera would need to sell for a price that, at very minimum, covers the cost of materials and shipping. Given the current situation where perfectly good used cameras often struggle to sell at price that covers shipping and fees and a trip to Starbucks, how is it viable (or even necessary) to design, manufacturer and market a new camera?

 

[Helge]

I guess any such new camera would need to sell for a price that, at very minimum, covers the cost of materials and shipping. Given the current situation where perfectly good used cameras often struggle to sell at price that covers shipping and fees and a trip to Starbucks, how is it viable (or even necessary) to design, manufacturer and market a new camera?

But they don’t.

 

[Pioneer]

I disagree with all this BS about the price of cameras. If you are looking to sell something that is 30 years old and was a consumer camera from the start you will find very low prices. But from what I can tell right now cameras that are relatively new and in excellent condition are going for prices much, much higher than shipping and a trip to Starbucks. High quality gear still commands pretty high prices from serious buyers.

 

[BradS]

I disagree with all this BS about the price of cameras. If you are looking to sell something that is 30 years old and was a consumer camera from the start you will find very low prices. But from what I can tell right now cameras that are relatively new and in excellent condition are going for prices much, much higher than shipping and a trip to Starbucks. High quality gear still commands pretty high prices from serious buyers.

I said ‘perfectly good’ not Leica.
I have a few ‘perfectly good’ 40+ year old Pentax Spotmatics, some in beautiful cosmetic condition. Not one of them would fetch enough to cover postage, fees and a $5 trip to Starbucks.

When things open up again I’m taking them all to glass key in the city and offering to trade them for however many rolls of 135-36 tri-x or fp4plus that they offer....and doing so will involve me driving about 250+ miles round trip and paying $6 to cross the Oakland bay bridge and feeding a parking meter and, yes, stopping for coffee and a pastry. Otherwise I’m gonna toss em in the trash because even if I add a nice super takumar lens, it’s not worth it to sell them.

 

[reddesert]

Rather than try to start up an entire company and manufacturing line, if there is a pent-up desire for good quality film cameras, it would make sense for retail and repair services to sell and repair the large existing stock of film cameras.

That is, if people want to buy and something similar to eg an Olympus OM or Nikon without having to take a chance on ebay or whatever, they could buy a camera or lens in a real physical store that gave good advice and guaranteed their product. And if they needed repairs, to repair them (subject to availability of repair people and donor cameras for spare parts).

There are stores that currently do this. But not many of them. A large metro area with a decent concentration of new or old film users can likely support such a store. But customers would have to expect to pay a premium for the guarantee and the physical presence. I'm not sure that enough customers are willing to do that.

If there aren't enough customers to support more than a handful of retail outlets, I don't see how the economics of actually manufacturing new film cameras could work, unless an existing manufacturer took it on as a loss-leader / prestige item.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Certified and reparied / serviced equipment has a value, especially if relying on these older cameras for "serious" work.

 

[BradS]

Rather than try to start up an entire company and manufacturing line, if there is a pent-up desire for good quality film cameras, it would make sense for retail and repair services to sell and repair the large existing stock of film cameras.

That is, if people want to buy and something similar to eg an Olympus OM or Nikon without having to take a chance on ebay or whatever, they could buy a camera or lens in a real physical store that gave good advice and guaranteed their product. And if they needed repairs, to repair them (subject to availability of repair people and donor cameras for spare parts).

There are stores that currently do this. But not many of them. A large metro area with a decent concentration of new or old film users can likely support such a store. But customers would have to expect to pay a premium for the guarantee and the physical presence. I'm not sure that enough customers are willing to do that.

If there aren't enough customers to support more than a handful of retail outlets, I don't see how the economics of actually manufacturing new film cameras could work, unless an existing manufacturer took it on as a loss-leader / prestige item.

I strongly agree. I was very encouraged to learn of a company organization in, iirc, Norway that buys used 35mm SLR cameras on the open markets repairs them and resells them at a modest profit. They’re also training young people to be competent repair technicians. Something we need.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Certified and reparied / serviced equipment has a value, especially if relying on these older cameras for "serious" work.

Very much so. And it seems to me someone is already doing this (if not in the USA). The two cameras I've bought this year, a Kiev 4M and an RB67, appear to have at least been checked over for proper function by someone familiar with the models in question. I could wish they'd refoamed the film backs with the RB67 (it's got a leak at the hinge on at least the 6x7 back; don't have film processed from the 6x4.5 yet) -- but the body and lens appear to be 100%, and the Kiev, nearing fifty years old, not only works but has a functioning and reasonably accurate meter.

 

[ts1000]

I was suggesting that the Open Source Film Photography Collective would host open-sourced designs/blueprints.

Not complete manufacturing facility.
The designs would have to be outsourced to existing for-profit manufactures and final assembly plants.

The designs would have to be in machine readable form.
I think if some elements of the designs will require explicit manual labor and adjustments (eg shimming, etc) -- those would have to be done by for-profit entities.

So things like mineral excavation, steel creation, and furnaces to make gears and springs would not need to be part of the Collective.

I used the successes of this approach in software and hardware, to demonstrate viability. Those projects do not excavate raw materials, produce silicon or build machines that manufacture memory chips. Those parts of the process are in layers outside of the respective open source collectives.

I might have been wrong with the idea, of course.

Yes I've heard those popular buzzwords too, but think you left out the parts about "Heavy Industry", "Mechanical Engineering" and "Metallurgy". I suspect that building a camera similar to Zenit E from scratch would actually be incredibly difficult if not impossible for a collective of enthusiasts.

 

[Pioneer]

I said ‘perfectly good’ not Leica.
I have a few ‘perfectly good’ 40+ year old Pentax Spotmatics, some in beautiful cosmetic condition. Not one of them would fetch enough to cover postage, fees and a $5 trip to Starbucks.

When things open up again I’m taking them all to glass key in the city and offering to trade them for however many rolls of 135-36 tri-x or fp4plus that they offer....and doing so will involve me driving about 250+ miles round trip and paying $6 to cross the Oakland bay bridge and feeding a parking meter and, yes, stopping for coffee and a pastry. Otherwise I’m gonna toss em in the trash because even if I add a nice super takumar lens, it’s not worth it to sell them.

I really wasn't referring to Leica cameras though they do seem to retain their value quite nicely. I am certainly not complaining

There are others that are also holding their values. Nikon, Pentax LX and MX. A lot of medium format cameras are holding value pretty well. In fact I think medium and large format are a better value proposition than 35mm right now.

I think you are letting your concern over the value of your Spotties color your perception of what is happening. I too own a couple of Spotties and enjoy them for what they are. And you are right with them, I doubt they will ever gain in price again. Part of the reason are that there were a lot of them built and they were built like tanks. A lot like the Nikon F these days.

 

[4season]

I was suggesting that the Open Source Film Photography Collective would host open-sourced designs/blueprints.
...
The designs would have to be in machine readable form.

Right, and I imagine that the crowdfunded "Reflex" project is too, so why has it not made the transition to reality? Will the likes of Fusion 360 help you to determine how much spring force you need to accelerate your shutter to the desired speed within a specific interval, reveal how parts deform when force is applied, and how best to dampen vibration? What sort of alloys shall the springs be made from, and do they require any special treatment in order to withstand thousands of cycles? If you can't figure out some of these details, you'll have no way of knowing whether your design can be translated into a working camera.

Consider the time-honored method of learning the art of camera-building: Start by copying someone else's design!