Three new film photography products from Fujifilm

[Henning Serger]

Any chance it could be Gold in 120 format as Andy Church highlighted 2021 was 120 format 120th anniversary?

p.s.: I am an avid reader of your posts. Thanks for sharing with us.

Well, as far as I have understood Andy Church's explanations he was quite clear that Kodak Gold in 120 will not be one of the "new in 2021" products.
I think the second product - that one which has so far not been available in the past - could be T-Max 3200 in 120 (so far it has only been available in 135, also before its reintroduction).
Because 1-2 years ago Kodak Alaris has already talked about it, and said that they "are at least thinking of it or evaluating it". The needed R&D for that is manageable, and with Delta 3200 there is only one competitor. And Delta 3200 in 120 has been sold quite well as far as I know (well in niche product terms).

Best regards,
Henning

 

[MattKing]

As I understand it, plans to introduce new Eastman Kodak manufactured film products have been delayed (not cancelled) due to Covid related factors. While normal film production continued, other parts of their operations were closed for a significant period of time.

 

[Henning Serger]

I don't see the point of releasing this particular model in this tiny, low resolution mini film.

The market demand will show soon whether your opinion is a wide spread one, or the opinion of a small minority.
In the first case Fujifilm will sell lots of it (like all their other models so far, which are selling in the millions p.a. range; instax cameras are more popular than all current digital camera types).
In the second case, when demand is too low, they will not keep it in their camera programme in the mid or long term.
We will see.
I have just given the neutral info here (without any own opinion) for those who might be generally interested in instant film photography. Not more.

But concerning your opinion that instax film is "low resolution" I have to completely disagree. Because of my tests of this material. The film itself has a resolution of 10-12 Lp/mm, which is quite a lot for an instant film. And this resolution is only a bit less than FP100c.
You see the real potential of instax immediately when you use it in combination with a good lens. For example with the Zinstax instax square back for the Mamiya RZ 67 II. You will be really astonished how sharp and detailed the results will be. You will get high quality results, promised.

The problem with instax are mainly the lenses in the instax cameras: Two element achromats with zone focussing. And with that design you simply cannot fully use / exploit the great potential and quality of the instax film.
I am also using an instax Wide 210 and instax square SQ6. Sometimes I get quite good and sharp results, but sometimes I get less. The lenses have in their zones "sweet spots", and when your object distance is the same as this "sweet spot" distance in the selected focus zone, the results will be quite good. But this match cannot always be achieved.

For years now I am explaining to the local Fujifilm representatives here that there is a huge market potential for better / higher grade instax cameras for enthusiast and professional photographers (instant film photography is great at weddings, I have used it there with huge success).
And my local Fujifilm guys completely agree. They see it and completely understand it.
The problem is that so far the responsible Fujifilm managers in the Japanese headquarter are ignoring this attractive market segment.
Probably they are a bit spoiled by the huge success of the current instax cameras in the snap-shooter and mass market (in their 2018/19 fiscal year they sold more than 10 million (!!) instax cameras).
But after 15 years of permanent growth this market is beginning to show market saturation tendencies. And it would be wise to look for compensation by exploring further attractive market segments.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[George Mann]

But concerning your opinion that instax film is "low resolution" I have to completely disagree. Because of my tests of this material. The film itself has a resolution of 10-12 Lp/mm, which is quite a lot for an instant film. And this resolution is only a bit less than FP100c.
You see the real potential of instax immediately when you use it in combination with a good lens. For example with the Zinstax instax square back for the Mamiya RZ 67 II. You will be really astonished how sharp and detailed the results will be. You will get high quality results, promised.

Yes. I was referring to the mini film format with the primitive lens. But I have no doubt that it will continue to sell well.

 

[shutterlight]

If Kodak Gold is ever released again as a 120 film, it would immediately become my primary film. It already is for 35mm.

 

[mshchem]

I have a Fujifilm X Pro3, it can print directly to the little Fujifilm Share RGB LED printers I think the images are very nice. The printers need wifi to work from a phone, but the XPro3 will work on Bluetooth or some such thing. The printers are the highest resolution short of a dedicated back or fancy camera.

 

[mshchem]

If Kodak Gold is ever released again as a 120 film, it would immediately become my primary film. It already is for 35mm.

For the qualities of the film, or cost? Might be a good thing. I remember Ektacolor Professional type S in the 70's. Beautiful film, amazing in natural light or flash.
I also loved the consumer Kodacolor-X.
It's all about maximizing quarterly profits.

 

[Helge]

Should we not be entitled to our opinions?

Yes, but we are under no obligation to take it seriously, not laugh at it or even listen.

The free speech dictum of the enlightenment, has been grossly misunderstood and diluted by Joe public, in the usual way.

The “only” thing it promotes, is your right to say whatever you want, without getting punished or censored, as long as it is it’s not unjustly damaging/libel.
Nothing more.

 

[Helge]

Dear photrio members,

there are three new film photography products from Fujifilm on the market. Or to be more precise:
One reintroduced product and two new products.
The reintroduced product is the Fujifilm QuickSnap Waterproof 800 'underwater' single-use camera (SUC). It is loaded with ISO 800/30° Superia X-Tra 800 film with 27 exposures. Which of course also means that Superia X-Tra 800 is back in production.
https://petapixel.com/2021/03/30/fu...e-quicksnap-waterproof-800-disposable-camera/
https://www.fujifilm.com/us/en/consumer/film-quicksnap/quicksnap/quicksnap-waterproof#
This QuickSnap 800 is already available e.g. at B&H and Adorama.

SUCs are generally very popular products, especially in certain markets like the USA, but also in several Asian countries. Millions of SUCs are sold globally every year.
With this significant demand / user base for Superia X-Tra 800 via this SUC it would make much sense if this film would be distributed again globally as a normal 135 36exp. film as well.
Therefore photographers who are interested in using Superia X-Tra 800 as standard 135 36exp. should show their demand and contact their local Fujifilm subsidiary. Or contact them via Fujifilm's internet / social media channels like
https://www.ishootfujifilm.com/
https://www.instagram.com/fujifilm_profilm
https://www.fujifilm.com/us/en/consumer/support/film-quicksnap/contact#

And then we have two new instax produtcs. One camera and one new film.
The new camera is the instax mini 40 (see picture below), and the new film is the instax mini Film Contact Sheet (also see picture below).
The instax mini 40 is an entry level model with about the same technical features as the mini 11, but with a completely different cool "retro-optic". Male photographers are the main target group.
The instax mini Film Contact Sheet has a contact sheet look with a black frame and brigther letters on it.

Best regards,
Henning View attachment 271725 View attachment 271726

My immediate thought was “is it an old last roll they are maximizing profit on?”.
Certainly hope not, and also quite unlikely, but do you have any indication that that is not the case?

Also about Instax. It’s completely bonkers, that Fuji isn’t promoting Wide more.
If people actually knew the format existed, they wouldn’t shoot anything else.
The difference in size of the cameras is insignificant/or of no importance when you are above a certain threshold, and below view camera size.

The only Instax format I can really take seriously.

There is the Mint camera for the discerning and serious photographer.
It is/was very expensive though, well out of consumer pseudo-impulse buy range. And I don’t know if it is still in production.
And it’s reliant on old third-party lenses.

A good triplet would be a huge step up. And a flash shoe/sync socket would allow good results indoors at night.

 

[Henning Serger]

My immediate thought was “is it an old last roll they are maximizing profit on?”.
Certainly hope not, and also quite unlikely, but do you have any indication that that is not the case?

No, definitely not "an old last roll". It is freshly produced film.
Superia X-Tra 800 was initially discontinued some time ago. And you can't keep ISO 800/30° colour film stored for many years on a quality level which is needed for mass market business. Fujifilm has extremely strict QC regulations.
They are not like Lomography or any other of those non-manufacturing distribution companies which are selling old expired leftover film stock.....
And even more important: SUCs for colour film are a mass market business. Overall they are selling in millions of units p.a.. For one single model you need at least several hundreds of thousands of units to make it worth and profitable. And that is simply completely impossible with only "one old last master roll". It isn't even possible with several old master rolls.
By the way, the market for SUCs has even been so big that Fujifilm has a second SUC production facility in the US beside the main factory in Japan. Until some months ago there has been a factory video about this plant on the Fujifilm US page (it isn't there anymore on the current page, but afaik this US plant hasn't stopped production).

Also about Instax. It’s completely bonkers, that Fuji isn’t promoting Wide more.
If people actually knew the format existed, they wouldn’t shoot anything else.
The difference in size of the cameras is insignificant/or of no importance when you are above a certain threshold, and below view camera size.

Concerning the camera size I have to disagree: I am using both an instax Wide 210 and an instax SQ6 (for 6x6 instax). The SQ6 is much more compact than the 210 (which has about the same size as the current Wide 300 model).
I love the Wide format, but after my first experiences with the smaller square format I was astonished how well the 6x6 works with instax film (even more so with the Zinstax back for the Mamiya, see above).

As explained above, I would definitely buy a higher grade instax camera with a better lens, be it for the wide format, or the square or mini format. The film definitely has the performance for that!
I am explaining for years to Fujifilm that there is an attractive market for that (and I am not the only one: https://fstoppers.com/gear/dear-fujifilm-please-give-us-decent-instax-camera-557961 ).
The professional wedding photography market and the film photographer enthusiast market are big enough.
The more of those who want such cameras are telling Fujifilm directly, the higher the chance that they will listen and start action.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Ernst-Jan]

Tom, if you want that product, get in contact with Fujifilm and tell them, show demand. In general the market / demand reaction has a big influence on the decisions of the manufacturers.
In the short term my assessment is that Superia X-Tra 800 in 120 is unlikely. Because there are currently more important problems and products for Fujifilm.
Most important current problem is that demand for 135 is surpassing their current 135 confectioning capacity (Eastman Kodak has the same problem, by the way). That is the reason why especially Fujicolor C200 (but also often Superia X-Tra 400) is sold out at the distributors. Therefore increasing the 135 format confectioning capacity is (or should be) certainly their most important and first priority. Developing a succesor for Pro 400H without 4th layer technology is another very important one.

Best regards,
Henning

But if coating capacity isn't the problem, this would create oppurtunities for 120 I'd say?
I assume 400H was the most 120 film, basically they only confection Velvia and Provia (and maybe some Pro 160NS - I haven't heard it's officially discontinued) takes place now. If I look at my own consumption of slide film - I bought 20 rolls in the last 3 years - I think colour negative is more shot.

 

[Ernst-Jan]

The more of those who want such cameras are telling Fujifilm directly, the higher the chance that they will listen and start action.

I'll write them. I got a response from some Dutch Fuji employee, he would forward it. I didn't even expect an answer

 

[Henning Serger]

But if coating capacity isn't the problem, this would create oppurtunities for 120 I'd say?
I assume 400H was the most 120 film, basically they only confection Velvia and Provia (and maybe some Pro 160NS - I haven't heard it's officially discontinued) takes place now. If I look at my own consumption of slide film - I bought 20 rolls in the last 3 years - I think colour negative is more shot.

For 120 you generally would have also the confectioning capacity as a main bottleneck (depending also on the demand of course). The capacity of a fully automatic 120 line is about only 1/7 to 1/8 of a 135 line. Confectioning of 120 is much slower than 135.
Pro 400H in 120 has been very popular indeed. But you should not underestimate Provia 100F and Velvia 50 in 120.
Currently the following 120 films are in production at Fujifilm
- Provia 100F
- Velvia 50
- Velvia 100
- Pro 160 NS
and probably the remaining Pro 400H film is currently finished in confectioning as well.

Opportunities for more 120 film types? From the demand side yes, definitely! For example if Fujifilm would re-introduce Superia X-Tra 400 in 120 (it was available in that format until some years ago), and would price it below the current professional 120 CN films, this film would sell very well! No doubt about that.

But for those who are looking for a lower cost alternative to the current professional colour negative 120 films: It is already there: Provia 100F.
The film itself is already cheaper than Pro 400H, Pro 160 NS, Portra 160, 400 and 800.
And as this film as a reversal film already offers a perfect picture just after developing (and surpassing all CN films in detail rendition), you can avoid all the further costs of scanning and (or) printing. With colour negative you must either print or scan your negative, and you have to bear these additional costs.
With Provia 100F you can just put your film on the light table and view it under an excellent slide loupe (like the 3x medium format loupes from Schneider-Kreuznach or Rodenstock) and have a perfect picture in outstanding quality. It is by far the easiest and most cost effective form of colour photography. With Provia 100F in 120 you have by far the lowest costs per shot of all 120 colour films.

And as Provia 100F also gives perfect results 2/3 -1 stop pulled and one stop pushed, and still good results even with a two stop push, you have also a quite flexible solution concerning film speed. And you get higher resolution, better sharpness and finer grain with Provia in comparison to all other CN films. The price-performance ratio is unsurpassed.
And medium format slide projection......well, simply amazing and a league of its own!
I am saving lots of money by using Provia 100F (and Velvia 50, as it is overall also cheaper than CN film) as my main 120 colour film.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[ChristopherCoy]

This isn't news, this is just Fuji toying with my emotions. Call me when they reintroduce FP100C and 3000B.

 

[Henning Serger]

Call me when they reintroduce FP100C and 3000B.

You should face the market reality:
No one will ever make real high-quality packfilm again. Because it is impossible. The demand for it is tiny, negligible and not sufficient at all for such a complicated high-tech product.
The demand for packfilm came almost exclusively only from two main user groups:
1. Professional photographers who used it in photo studios for test shots.
2. Professional photographers who used it for pass port / ID card photography.
The market under 1. completely vanished in the early to mid 00ies, it was replaced by digital cameras for test shots (even with those photographers who used film for the main shots).
And the market under 2. vanished a bit later also completely, and also being replaced by digital.
These two markets were responsible for more than 95% of the whole packfilm demand. The enthusiast photographers like you and me were only a tiny and minimal fraction of the demand. Not enough at all to keep the production running.
It is even a little wonder that Fujifilm has offered packfilm for so long. Kudos to them for that service.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[ChristopherCoy]

You should face the market reality:
No one will ever make real high-quality packfilm again. Because it is impossible.

People also said film would die and become extinct about 20 years ago.

 

[Helge]

People also said film would die and become extinct about 20 years ago.

Instant is a whole other ballgame.
Look at “Polaroid” who’s been faffing about for 13 years with nothing but tiny iterative improvements.
What’s more the market for packfilm is tiny and fickle.
The only bet is Fuji picking up production again. And that is very unlikely.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Man y'all are pessimistic. FP100C is coming back... and Santa is a real person dammit.

 

[Henning Serger]

People also said film would die and become extinct about 20 years ago.

I know that better than anyone else, because I was one of the first market analysts who said that that assessment is wrong, and that film will stay in the long term.
The economic models I have designed at the time of the paradigma change in photography had as a clear result that film had and has a future.
But that does not mean that all film products or all film formats can have a chance to stay. Look at 126, disc-film or APS for example, would not make sense trying to revive such formats. Not all film formats were good in the past. And not all were really needed.

With packfilm there are many hurdles. It is not only the lack of demand. It is also the extreme complexity of the automatic confectioning of the connected film sheets. Environmental issues of used chemicals. Then the problem that packfilm use is very problematic on outdoor use outside a studio, as you always have to carry around the sticky negatives after you have made the shots.
You need a dedicated box for them to carry around. As much as I like packfilm (I am still using it), but because of this I seldom use it oudoors.
There is a reason why Polaroid had developed the dry integral film as main instant film for the masses and amateur photographers.
I have visited several film factories and talked to the chemists and engineers there. Including TIP / Polaroid. They made very clear statements that they will definitely not make packfilm again. They came to the same conclusion as Fujifilm.
And that are the only two companies who potentially could make it.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[ChristopherCoy]

I know that better than anyone else, because I was one of the first market analysts who said that that assessment is wrong, and that film will stay in the long term.

With all due respect, yours is but only one opinion of millions. Correct as it may be, I'll choose to continue to hope and believe that pack film will be made again.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

With all due respect, yours is but only one opinion of millions. Correct as it may be, I'll choose to continue to hope and believe that pack film will be made again.

Henning's point of view isn't really 'one opinion of millions' - he has real expertise in this market and photography in general.

 

[Helge]

Concerning the camera size I have to disagree: I am using both an instax Wide 210 and an instax SQ6 (for 6x6 instax). The SQ6 is much more compact than the 210 (which has about the same size as the current Wide 300 model).
I love the Wide format, but after my first experiences with the smaller square format I was astonished how well the 6x6 works with instax film (even more so with the Zinstax back for the Mamiya, see above).

As explained above, I would definitely buy a higher grade instax camera with a better lens, be it for the wide format, or the square or mini format. The film definitely has the performance for that!
I am explaining for years to Fujifilm that there is an attractive market for that (and I am not the only one: https://fstoppers.com/gear/dear-fujifilm-please-give-us-decent-instax-camera-557961 ).
The professional wedding photography market and the film photographer enthusiast market are big enough.
The more of those who want such cameras are telling Fujifilm directly, the higher the chance that they will listen and start action.

Best regards,
Henning

My point was just that none of the Fuji cameras are pocketable exactly and will not fit in a small bag with other stuff.
When you bring an Instax you intent to use it.
It will need to hang around your neck, or be in a separate bag regardless of the few extra centimeters up or down in size.

The wider format is just an order of magnitude more interesting and usable.
One is a small postcard. The other is barely larger than a 6x6 negative, and looks it.
Mini is just laughable. It's photos for mice.

I really hope they will consider putting out SXT 800 in regular cassettes.
I'm not a fan of Portra 800 at all and Lomography I won't touch out of principle.
Portra 400 looks good at 800 but when you want a little more, shadows start to drop out.
One thing that could be interesting is if the onetime use camera, could be cracked and either contains a regular film cassette or the film could be reloaded.
It would be expensive for a roll of film, but a start and would signal a thing or two to fuji when the results start to trickle out.
Superia 1600 was wonderful, the one time I used it. I can only imagine how great 800 was.

 

[Sirius Glass]

If Kodak Gold is ever released again as a 120 film, it would immediately become my primary film. It already is for 35mm.

No, bring back Kodak UltraColor 400 in120 again!

 

[Henning Serger]

My point was just that none of the Fuji cameras are pocketable exactly and will not fit in a small bag with other stuff.
When you bring an Instax you intent to use it.

My instax SQ6 does fit in a relatively small bag. It takes less space than lots of my other cameras. No problem of having it with me as a lightweight snapshot / memory camera. My photo models love getting the 6x6 instax pictures as a present at the photo shoot.
And I have regularly seen that female photographers even put their instax mini cameras in their handbags.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Helge]

My instax SQ6 does fit in a relatively small bag. It takes less space than lots of my other cameras. No problem of having it with me as a lightweight snapshot / memory camera. My photo models love getting the 6x6 instax pictures as a present at the photo shoot.
And I have regularly seen that female photographers even put their instax mini cameras in their handbags.

Best regards,
Henning

It's all relative with bag space of course. But I wouldn't jam any Instax in a small carry around bag with other stuff, as I would a point and shoot in its case.