Canon exodus from film photography

[2framesbelowzero]

Agfa is the first down; and I understand that Ilford's survival has been a near-run thing.

Here is a quote from some correspondence with Agfa..(Aug 2005)

Scala 120 will be phased out this year. Scala 135-36 will be phased out during 2006. AgfaPhoto will continue to produce the following 35 mm films: Agfacolor Vista 200 & 400, Agfacolor Optima Prestige 100, 200 & 400, Agfacolor Portrait 160, Agfachrome RSX 100, Agfachrome Precisa 100 and Agfapan APX 100 & 400.

-------

And the deal from Harman Technology ...


Ilford Photo plan for B&W future
(18:03:51 - 10th Mar 05)

As well as continuing production of established products Ilford Photo are also planning to re-introduce some discontinued items




Howard Hopwood, one of the six members of the management team that have taken over Ilford Imaging Group’s UK arm, told Ian Andrews of ePHOTOzine today that Ilford would be ‘The last man standing’ where black & white products are concerned. Between the six members, there is over 130 years of experience in the business. Now trading as Ilford Photo, the management have formed the company Harman Technology Ltd, named after the Alfred Harman, who founded Ilford in 1879. After negotiations with the old company’s Swiss branch, whose own buy out should be completed in early May, Harman Technology will retain the Ilford name for all their B&W products.

The good news for photographers is that Ilford Photo will continue to produce almost all of their list of film stock, and have re-introduced their chemical products after the receivers stopped production. All of the liquid products are now available, and the powder products such as ID11, Microfen and Perceptol will be in constant supply within three months. “The one notable casualty is SFX200, which had a very low turnover anyway” said Howard.
Howard was keen to emphasise that the new company was free from debt and therefore free of pressure. “This gives us a good platform to focus on the right things” he said. The company have retained the 350-380 staff that were kept on by the receiver and they have a business plan that is robust enough to survive.
The company’s strength lies in thin layer coating, and there are many applications where this can be exploited. This type of thing will have to be marketed under the Harman Technology banner, following the agreement with the Swiss arm.
Ilford Photo are also contracted to supply coatings for the Swiss branch for the moment.
Ilford Photo are also planning to re-introduce some discontinued products and have been asked to produce coated Glass Plates as they are one of the only companies in the world with the technology to do so.
After only three weeks since the takeover, Howard is pleased with the way the future was shaping up.

 

[2framesbelowzero]

I think Ilford and Fuji-film will become THE de facto source for film products and will supply them for many years yet.
---

 

[Cuervo79]

I feel the same, and have been hearing the "film will die" topics ever since digital came out

 

[2framesbelowzero]

I really think so. I mean I do read some expert info posted on the net by digital photographers who are also experienced with MF film AND they are very knowledgeable about printing and papers and they have good things to say about digital cameras of a certain spec, printing at a certain size.

I also read things like this post at photo.net..

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00ACXA&tag=
Neal Shields , nov 23, 2004; 11:55 a.m.
Take a good 35mm camera with a prime lens; focus very carefully on a scene with diminishing detail like a shopping center parking lot from a hill; where you can see lots of license plates. Use F8 for your aperture setting. Place the camera on a steady tripod and lock the mirror up, and release the shutter with a cable release. Use a film like Fuji Reala. Have a portion of the resulting negative scanned at 12000 dpi on a good drum scanner. It will cost about $30. Shoot the same picture with a digital camera. Compare results. Throw digital camera in lake.


Check out this .gov webpage about using film and using digital in the context of field operations..
(it's a bit old - 2001)
http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/april2002/swgitfield1.htm

 

[Don Simon]

Hmm, I'm not sure whether thay guy actually said anything remotely constructive. He doesn't specify which 'digital camera' to compare with, he does specify using a 35mm camera with mirror lockup (most don't have this) and he also says to scan at 12000dpi. Which is a very expensive way of doing things.

P.s. zeabned I just read your sig... cool, I didn't think anyone else had seen that film! :thumbup:

 

[Zeabned]

P.s. zeabned I just read your sig... cool, I didn't think anyone else had seen that film! :thumbup:

One of my faves that flick. :heart: Quite a few references to the graphic arts ("We are involved in the creation of memory") and their significance, particularly the very end, which suggested the original title of the film, later discarded: Burned to Light. I guess that pretty soon we may be feeling about film like Schreck (the vampire not the ogre) felt about the sun. I hope not. "The woods decay, the woods decay and fall..." That's another good quote from the movie, from Tennyson's poem 'Tithonus.'

 

[2framesbelowzero]

Still, they no longer manufacture cameras that mere mortals can afford..

Well market-forces dictate that if there is little or no demand for something, the price collapses.

 

[Zeabned]

Well market-forces dictate that if there is little or no demand for something, the price collapses.

Then it will probably be a question of just how elastic demand proves to be, in the short or medium term, in reaction to the ever-steepening fall in those photofilm related prices. Depending on whether low or high elasticity, the result will probably be one of two: either a lower market niche for film (good) or the complete collapse of the established leaders of that industry (bad). If the latter, diehard film lovers will be left to seek out irregular after-market providers, who will probably be hard to find, understocked, and unreliable. Yukkk.... :meh:

 

[Luke]

well, there are some very obscure hobbies out there, but theres still a market and film is not yet obscure, considering that its still pretty even between filnm and digi users, so id say film should be cool for a while at least, theres more than enough second hand cameras to go around
and think how happy fuji will be when theyve got almost total monopoly over c 41 film.

 

[DocFrankenstein]

So, is canon leaving ANY bodies in production?
Nikon left two - their famous F6 and a lower "first photo class camera" of sorts.

I am hoping canon will leave the 1V and maybe an elan in production?

Even if they stop manufacturing them competely - it does not mean you should stop shooting film. There are boatloads of used film bodies floating around for pennies. If you are a "film nut" like myself, there should be no problem getting ahold of a toppest pro body very cheaply.

 

[JamesD]

Hmm, I'm not sure whether thay guy actually said anything remotely constructive. He doesn't specify which 'digital camera' to compare with, he does specify using a 35mm camera with mirror lockup (most don't have this) and he also says to scan at 12000dpi. Which is a very expensive way of doing things.
:

By not specifying which digital, I think he's intending to leave it open for any and every digital, or at least the equivalent of which film body you're using. And mirror lockup isn't hard to get; I believe all the Canon models except for the low-end Rebel series have ML. I know my Elan7n does, and it's not a high-end body, although it certainly isn't cheap. It was in the $200 price range, which, for most who are serious enough and able to put decent glass in front of the body, shouldn't be out of reach.

As for the drum scan, I believe that the point was not that you have to do every photograph this way, but that you obtain the highest-possible resolution for this test. 12000 dpi is small enough that the pixels will be smaller than the grain, if I'm not mistaken. Seems that when I scanned at 3600 dpi, the grain was clearly distinguishible. I believe the idea here was that in order to compare a film image to a digital image (which is always going to be available at it's maximum resolution) you need a reasonable degree of oversampling to ensure that you're getting maximum resolution out of the film as well--fair enough, I believe.

 

[brassring]

I think Ilford and Fuji-film will become THE de facto source for film products and will supply them for many years yet.
---

Perhaps I am just getting old and with fewer years to worry about, the less I worry. But does anyone recall the 101, 103 or 124 and other weird sizes? You can still get them from specialty houses. Granted, a roll of 101 will set you back $30.95 but you CAN get it. We mention a lot of film companies here but I do not see TURA (Germany), one of the world's largest film producers, hinting that they will get out of the business and most photographers have never heard of them. I love their film, especially the B&W. They are just one major company that produces film (including for Agfa). There are others.

To say film will die is, in my humble opinion, wrong. There may be a point where we will not be able to get the wide range of film proucts we have access to today but to say film is dead is to look 30/40 years ahead.

Heck....everyone tells me my Canon A1 (1971) (35 years) is outdated but I will match that box with my ten or so Canon lenses and with a good film take pride in and have no difficulty selling my photographs. Of course I use other cameras including digital and I will continue to upgrade all of them occasionally. But the A1 is my pride and joy.

You folks are welcome to argue the do's and don'ts of film vs digital and everything else we talk about on these forums. It is fun and I enjoy all of the comments. All of you folks are very talented and I learn something new everyday. But....film dying in my lifetime is not one of them.

 

[DocFrankenstein]

You are misinforming some people here.

Canon is not stopping the production at all. They will keep making the film cameras, but are considering stopping development of new film bodies.

Read from here:
http://news.com.com/Canon+to+halt+development+of+film+cameras/2100-1041_3-6076876.html

Canon, the world's largest maker of digital cameras, said it made the decision to freeze development of both compact and single-lens reflex film models because the markets for both are shrinking. Canon said it would continue to produce and sell existing models and make a final judgment on the business in the future while monitoring market demand.

And from here:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0605/06052501canonfilmcameras.asp

What a difference a word can make, in this case it's the word "considers". An earlier Reuters UK news article stated "Canon to halt film camera development", shortly afterwards Reuters were forced to correct this and replace the word 'to' with 'considers', hence "Canon considers halt to film camera development". With this subtle change (and some edits in the article itself) the news is, well, nothing definite. A Canon spokesman has essentially stated that they are currently trying to decide if there is a need to keep developing compact and SLR film cameras because of the shrinking market.

 

[Zeabned]

I just read an online article (dated 05/25) reporting that Canon has "joined the exodus from film." It has announced that it is progressively getting out of the film camera market. It will still be selling its existing line of film cameras, but producing no new ones. In doing so, Canon is joining other camera manufacturers who have already moved out of film.

This is a segment of my original post. The article I quoted flatly stated that Canon had announced that it is progressively getting out of the film camera business. As you can see, I did mention that they will continue to sell its existing line, but producing no new models. That was a textual quote, not editorializing. If the news release was in error...well... that's another thing then.

 

[LWW]

If there is a niche market of buyers at $31 a roll for film there will be a niche supplier. I am sure that a tidy profit can be had at even very low volumes at this price point.

Film is still superior at the maximum limit to digital and probably will remain so for some time.

To peeps making nothing larger than an 11X14 this won't make any difference.

Film cameras are still being produced in abundance in China and Russia and will likely be available new for many years.

LWW