So what exactly should Kodak have done?

[Xmas]

Hi Ken

DSLRs are on their last legs, when I'm on a computer train everyone in the crowded carriage is hanging from a strap with an android or iPhone in other hand sextining... Listening to audio or putting on make up, girls do not have mirrors any more, Manques take selfies,...

My chum who wrote our previous PM briefs destroys a mobile in front loader and gets a iPhone 6 replacement his complaint is the low light pictures are better than his >>$ mirror less!

'Yes'

He is not slow... do you need a picture?

Noel

 

[Henning Serger]

Hi Ken

DSLRs are on their last legs, ....

With all respect Noel, but reality is looking completely different. Please look at the numbers, please look at the facts.
The sales numbers of DSLRs are declining from the 2012 record level. But that is not surprising, market saturation is going on.
Last year 10,5 million units were sold. That is indeed still even a bit more than film SLR sales in the film SLR record years (which was about 1980).
And it is even more than double the volume of film SLR sales at 1999/2000, when we had the record in photo film sales.
So DSLRs are definitely not "on their last legs".
Here is the official data:

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

Best regards,
Henning

 

[RattyMouse]

"The digital age was coming no matter what, and it should not be regarded as a crisis but as an opportunity."

Shigataka Komori- CEO Fujifilm

 

[Xmas]

With all respect Noel, but reality is looking completely different. Please look at the numbers, please look at the facts.
The sales numbers of DSLRs are declining from the 2012 record level. But that is not surprising, market saturation is going on.
Last year 10,5 million units were sold. That is indeed still even a bit more than film SLR sales in the film SLR record years (which was about 1980).
And it is even more than double the volume of film SLR sales at 1999/2000, when we had the record in photo film sales.
So DSLRs are definitely not "on their last legs".
Here is the official data:

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

Best regards,
Henning

Ok I understand the sales figures but

- in my high street shops the ratio of new DSLR to new smart phone is 0 : 200 (or larger)
-- used is about 20:500 ignoring tablets
- in my commuter trains the ratio is larger 0:big
- at weddings the pro has a DSLR and everyone else a smart phone including ankle biters

Don't worry I've only got a film camera (or three), iPhone & iPod.

In the street markets I take photos DSLR: other digital non smart phone 1:1 about

In 1980 it was rare to see any camera.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Though not Ken I will say that over a 2 year period we saw film process and contact drop from 200k per year to around 20k per year. I attribute this to photographers moving to digital cameras.
Not many businesses can survive this type of drop.

Ken, can you expand on this? I agree with some of what you said in your most recent post regarding unforeseen stuff happening and needing to adapt etc., but in my mind the digital evolution was a much, much bigger thing, one of those massive changes akin to the effect of the automobile on the horse and buggy.

 

[Henning Serger]

Ok I understand the sales figures but

- in my high street shops the ratio of new DSLR to new smart phone is 0 : 200 (or larger)..........

Noel, anecdotical observations are irrelevant. The real global numbers count.
Example:
I am living only two kilometers away from one of the most prominent tourist hot spots in Northern Germany. A very lovely place with ten thousands of tourists from all over the world, but especially from Asia.
I am quite often there, taking my test shots for new photo stuff and materials. I have always an eye on the photo equipment the tourists there are using.
Guess what?
About 95% of the cameras offered today I've never seen there. Never, ever.
So from my observations I would have to say these cameras do not exist. Which is of course nonsense, of course they do exist, and are selling, dependent on the type, often in hundreds of thousands of cameras each year.

So, anecdotical "evidence" ist just no "evidence" at all.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

Ken, can you expand on this? I agree with some of what you said in your most recent post regarding unforeseen stuff happening and needing to adapt etc., but in my mind the digital evolution was a much, much bigger thing, one of those massive changes akin to the effect of the automobile on the horse and buggy.

Just as a side note to the horses topic:
When automobiles were gaining success the outlook for the future of horses was: They don't have a future, they will disappear.
What happened in the long run?
Exactly the opposite: Here in Germany for example we now have more horses than 100 years ago.
What changed was just the role of the horses.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Ai Print]

Just put in an order for Pan-F and TMY2 in 120...dunno man, things seem pretty great for 2015 to me. Use it while you can at the price we get it all at now.

Or just keep beating these well attended dead horse sessions to the point that the question you ask from your death bed while thinking what a waste this truly is would be "What exactly should I have done?"

 

[RattyMouse]

I was talking about Ken's thought that digital didn't necessarily have to be the end of film, and I assumed we were talking mostly about a specific utility - imaging. My car/horse-drawn-buggy thing had to do with transportation utility (analogous to imaging), so it wasn't about horses but the horse and buggy as a mode of personal transportation. I could have left out the horse and just asked how many people would eventually have wanted an unpowered buggy/cart following the advent of affordable motor cars.

Digital was/is a "watershed" event. It changed virtually everything. I understand the positive attitude approach ("crisitunity") but it was too big a change to accommodate everyone no matter how clever the company.

I'm intrigued by your view regarding digital SLRs. I wonder how long they can remain viable.

Digital has demolished EVERY industry it has touched. Film had no chance as a mass medium once the digital image was perfected. Few technologies, if any, have left a trail of wreckage the way digital has.

That's why I dont blame Kodak for anything other than failing to re-invent itself away from imaging the way Fujifilm did.

Fuji was smart to recognize that their entire profit stream was drying up before their eyes and they simply had to move away from imaging.

Today's Fujifilm is largely an office/medical/B2B/pharmaceutical company.

 

[RattyMouse]

Just put in an order for Pan-F and TMY2 in 120...dunno man, things seem pretty great for 2015 to me. Use it while you can at the price we get it all at now.

Or just keep beating these well attended dead horse sessions to the point that the question you ask from your death bed while thinking what a waste this truly is would be "What exactly should I have done?"

I just received a case of film from B & H. 30 rolls of Acros, 20 rolls of Ektar, and 20 rolls of Portra.

I'm capable of buying film, shooting film, AND discussing film in a forum. None of these activities prevents the other from happening.

 

[RattyMouse]

On balance I'd have to agree with this. One simple and obvious example in the recent evolution of digital is the smartphone. Just look at how many consumer devices and technologies that has replaced and/or consolidated.

I'm still 100% film/darkroom when it comes to photography, and will do it for as long as I can, but I often wonder about how much longer this will be.

Music, books, magazines.....digital has laid waste to them all.

Film never had a chance except to adapt to a much much smaller size. Ilford seems to have done it, Fujifilm *might* have done it, Kodak is still just as large as they were in the past and so ultimately unsustainable.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Music, books, magazines.....digital has laid waste to them all.

Film never had a chance except to adapt to a much much smaller size. Ilford seems to have done it, Fujifilm *might* have done it, Kodak is still just as large as they were in the past and so ultimately unsustainable.

We don't know this for a fact!

If it happens, then we will know it.

PE

 

[Xmas]

Noel, anecdotical observations are irrelevant. The real global numbers count.
Example:
I am living only two kilometers away from one of the most prominent tourist hot spots in Northern Germany. A very lovely place with ten thousands of tourists from all over the world, but especially from Asia.
I am quite often there, taking my test shots for new photo stuff and materials. I have always an eye on the photo equipment the tourists there are using.
Guess what?
About 95% of the cameras offered today I've never seen there. Never, ever.
So from my observations I would have to say these cameras do not exist. Which is of course nonsense, of course they do exist, and are selling, dependent on the type, often in hundreds of thousands of cameras each year.

So, anecdotical "evidence" ist just no "evidence" at all.

Best regards,
Henning

Hi Henning

I accept your point but would describe it as statistical samples.
However if you review

iPhone
Android
Microsoft
Mirror less

Production yearly on year with DSLR that would be objective evidence I don't think we need to bother do we?

Apart from volume the smart phones are impacting some environments, a hot news chum bemoanes that girls with iPhones are getting videos and text to picture editors desk before he gets to the hot news event.

So Canon Nikon and Fuji are late to market... Not just Kodak.

 

[Ai Print]

I'm capable of buying film, shooting film, AND discussing film in a forum. None of these activities prevents the other from happening.

Keep puffing tough man, lol!

 

[Henning Serger]

Hi Henning

I accept your point but would describe it as statistical samples.
However if you review

iPhone
Android
Microsoft
Mirror less

Production yearly on year with DSLR that would be objective evidence I don't think we need to bother do we?

Smartphones have a huge impact on digital compact camera sales (which have collapsed in the last 5 years; lots of Asian OEM manufacturers had to leave the market). But not on DSLRs.
And mirrorless cameras have (at least so far) less impact than expected: No real substantial overall growth in this market segment in the last three years.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Xmas]

Hi Henniger

We have different statistics I agree.
In the streets I live I see users.

Few people don't have smart phones pocket, bra, to hand, headsets, or on cellular call.

The ratio of
compact, mirror less, DSLR about
20, 5, 75%
Ignoring Leica M, RD1, and x100

A compact, mirror less or phone is easier to carry than typical zoom DSLR, a bias.

This is biased heavily as ladies normally use large sling bags rather than carry in view.
And the expensive cameras are more likely to be hidden, a second bias.

These are from big samples as last months record for film cameras in one day was 18, mainly SLRs, and they would be below 0.2% ignoring smart phones.

In 1980 these areas would not have had a camera all year, cept for mine.

 

[Henning Serger]

Hi Henniger

We have different statistics I agree.

Noel, there are no "different statistics". Concerning digital camera sales the CIPA data is by far the best data you can get. The whole photo industry is referring to this data (and to nothing else), because all major camera manufacturers are members of the CIPA delivering their sales data to them.
For all who want to know the situation and trends of digital camera sales, best source is here to go:
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Xmas]

HiHenning

Sales is different from use eg lots of Leicas are shelf Queens.

The last lady that asked our group to fix her film camera had sourced it from a trash can.
We did not ask what she was doing in a trash can, we just fixed it.

For medical/hazard reasons we told her to wrap her iPhone in cling film and refit in bumper case.

Apple had enormous bill board photos everywhere this late summer before they announced the 6s megapixel increase. Only the manufacturers are interested in sales.

More film cameras are being carried today than a decade ago, don't know that all have film in them...

Noel

 

[Henning Serger]

HiHenning

Sales is different from use eg lots of Leicas are shelf Queens.

From the about 35 million cameras which will be sold this year most probably only a tiny, negligible fraction is bought for collecting purpose.
That lots of Leicas are only "shelf queens" is often written in photo forums (by people who don't have one ).
Perhaps that's the case, but real, hard evidence for that? No.
I've never seen any really reliable data how much Leicas are used only as a collectors item. The special edition and anniversery models, yes, they are certainly mainly for collectors. But they are only a tiny part of the total production. And the Leica's market share of total camera production is also tiny.
I know quite a lot photographers with one or more Leicas. All are real photographers, using their Leicas regularly. But from this non-representative, anecdotical observation I would of course never derive a generalisation.

More film cameras are being carried today than a decade ago, don't know that all have film in them...
Noel

You mean a film camera maybe carried as a fashion accessoire?
Never ever watched this here in Germany.
When I see film cameras out here in the field, then they are always used for taking pictures.
Maybe that's different in other countries (although I've never seen it on my journeys), Germany has never been the avantgarde in fashion.....

Best regards,
Henning

 

[DREW WILEY]

The genius of the consumer electronics market is simply in line with the general massive trend toward rapid obsolescence. I a few year every
kid on the block will be howling with laughter at how stupid old people were by sending messages texting with their thumbs. Selfie sticks will
be as idiotic as hula hoops. No different than what has been done to shop tools. I'm using some of my great-grandfathers pliers. The same
company today makes pliers that will dull out in a week. That was deliberate.

 

[Xmas]

From the about 35 million cameras which will be sold this year most probably only a tiny, negligible fraction is bought for collecting purpose.
That lots of Leicas are only "shelf queens" is often written in photo forums (by people who don't have one ).
Perhaps that's the case, but real, hard evidence for that? No.
I've never seen any really reliable data how much Leicas are used only as a collectors item. The special edition and anniversery models, yes, they are certainly mainly for collectors. But they are only a tiny part of the total production. And the Leica's market share of total camera production is also tiny.
I know quite a lot photographers with one or more Leicas. All are real photographers, using their Leicas regularly. But from this non-representative, anecdotical observation I would of course never derive a generalisation.



You mean a film camera maybe carried as a fashion accessoire?
Never ever watched this here in Germany.
When I see film cameras out here in the field, then they are always used for taking pictures.
Maybe that's different in other countries (although I've never seen it on my journeys), Germany has never been the avantgarde in fashion.....

Best regards,
Henning

hiHenning
There are not that many film Leicas made in a year any more or even in Leitz hayday.
Our processing labs used to have films they called two Xmas tree and a bikini film. It depends how one defines the term shelf queen to a greater extent than the number of film Leicas you have?

If not my statement would be very credible.

All my M2s have had more than one film through each this October, they are not shelf queens.

If Leicas that have not had a film through them in the interval are shelf queens then the greater % will be Royal?

If you carry a film camera without a case on a shoulder all day and don't take a photo then in my distorted world it is a fash accessory more so than a handbag or manbag, some may not have film loaded.

I think most film cameras are concealed in a shopping bag by our ladies, they are cautious.

Noel

 

[Xmas]

The genius of the consumer electronics market is simply in line with the general massive trend toward rapid obsolescence. I a few year every
kid on the block will be howling with laughter at how stupid old people were by sending messages texting with their thumbs. Selfie sticks will
be as idiotic as hula hoops. No different than what has been done to shop tools. I'm using some of my great-grandfathers pliers. The same
company today makes pliers that will dull out in a week. That was deliberate.

Confirmed smart phones don't last long in a front loader.

My Grandfather made his own tools as an apprentice.
Me mum had to operate the foundary bellows and rake from 9.

The world has gone round the sun a few times since.

 

[Henning Serger]

hiHenning
There are not that many film Leicas made in a year any more or even in Leitz hayday.

Yes, the film Leicas have always been a niche product in relation to the total camera production.
Current production numbers:
I've talked about that with the responsible Leica manager at last Photokina. He said that they've seen demand levelling out in 2012 for the classic film M models, and since then a slight but significant increase. That's why they introduced the new M-A as a third model in addition to the M7 and MP last year, presented at the Photokina.
In 2013 they produced about 1,000 film M cameras.
So this year most probably significantly more.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Prof_Pixel]

Yes, the film Leicas have always been a niche product in relation to the total camera production.
Current production numbers:
I've talked about that with the responsible Leica manager at last Photokina. He said that they've seen demand levelling out in 2012 for the classic film M models, and since then a slight but significant increase. That's why they introduced the new M-A as a third model in addition to the M7 and MP last year, presented at the Photokina.
In 2013 they produced about 1,000 film M cameras.
So this year most probably significantly more.

Leitz Leica is to cameras as the de Beers Group is to diamonds - they control the price by controlling product availability

 

[Ian Grant]

Leitz Leica is to cameras as the de Beers Group is to diamonds - they control the price by controlling product availability

That's sort of what they wanted but it slid for a few years as values dropped.

To be fair I've not dealt with a more honest company, I broke a view finder window on my M3 a few years ago, sent it to Leitz in the UK who'd told me the minimum was a repair and full service. I was very surprised to get the camera back and a charge way below the estimate cost with a note it'd been serviced (recently enough) and wasn't in need of another.

Ian