If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
MATT WILLIAMS wrote:
I have been using and learning about MF now for about five years. I started out with a Seagull and after reading about them and their limitations I sold it and in the past few years I have picked up a Mamiya 645 with a couple of extra lenses, A Yashica D with the a Yashinon lens, A very nice Agfa 6X6 with a Solinar lens folder that I had reconditioned with new bellows and takes great pictures. I also own a Canon 7n 35mm camera and a Digital Rebel 300 that my wife bought me for Christmas last year. This is not meant to be a thread on digital vs. MF. I use both and I like to use the histogram on the Digital Rebel to give me a better idea on exposure for my MF pictures, especially sunrises and pictures of mountains with snow on them. I take mainly landscapes. I have been watching for years the prices of MF used equipment fall 30-50% on ebay and KEH. Check EBAY prices on 11 MP and 12 MP digital backs for medium format cameras. Many in the 24 mm by 36 mm or even some 37 mm square CCD digital backs are around the $2000 price level now. These backs offer active cooling to greatly minimize noise, and many are also capable of four shot and sixteen shot modes. Mamiya zoom lenses are now with in my reach to purchase for my M645. I should be happy about this , but I am wondering how long Fuji and Kodak will continue to make 120 film. Since 620 and 127 film are still available, and some other really odd sizes are still available, I would imagine that 120 film should not be a problem. As for Fuji and Kodak, I would expect future film from Kodak to come mainly from Lucky Film in China, and that Fuji might adopt a similar strategy. Anyway, going with what everyone else is posting, I would guess that 20 years should be fairly accurate (Kodak and Fuji), with smaller companies probably never stopping production. I still love MF and want to keep using film. I have a Epson 2450 (I know it old, but it works) and can scan my slides and can have them printed or blown up locally. I just purchased a 35mm slide scanner so I do the same as the local photo shops don't want to take the time to set up their mini labs to scan 35mm slides correctly. I have a lot of money invested in MF and am thinking about a few more purchases. Yet, if I can not get the 120 film in a few years it will be a waste to buy more lenses or another camera (been thinking about a Fuji GA645) . You might need to mail order your films in the near future, and then refrigerate them until use. While that is not as convenient as just a short trip to the store, I think mail order is becoming the norm. You might also consider getting more into systems with removable backs, so you could get a used digital back in the future. Looks like Kodak has stopped all research on developing new film. Wrong, only "consumer" films. Their professional films continue to be developed, and there should be at least one new release next year. Where is Fuji at ? I have heard many times that there will always be film made, but I am wondering at what price ? In theory, moving production to China, or other locations, might save some cost. However, competition will really drive costs, so as long as neither Kodak nor Fuji have a monopoly, prices should be even with inflation. There has been some speculation on Wallstreet that film prices might see a sudden drop in the near future to gain back market share, or volume; though this might not happen. If the demand goes down these companies must make a profit. Tough to find good figures on profits, though the recent public documents provided by AGFA indicate that all film and photo finishing products generate around 40% to 45% profits. Compared to most other products, especially electronics, that is quite good, and leaves room to reduce prices and retain some profits. I would also imagine that Fuji and Kodak might be more efficient than AGFA, and their profits might be better with film and photo finishing products. In other words, a 1/3 or 1/2 price reduction on film would still generate a profit for those companies . . . I honestly cannot think of any other product that could fit such a price reduction and still generate profits. Bronica just stopped making most of their MF cameras. Tamron announced only the RF645 will continue, and all SLR Bronica cameras will only have new parts and service for the next seven years (required by law). While it might not be a good idea to buy a Bronica, if that worries you, the reality is that your AGFA folder is even older, and can still be repaired. You might actually look at some Bronica products used for some large discounted prices. In the longer term, the loss of Bronica competition will make it easier on the other new medium format products still being sold. Does anyone know what the "official" or public statements that film companies have make on there continued support of 120 (or 220) film. Mostly, it seems that 220 film has been a lower volume that 120, with some 200 films being discontinued. If Kodak and Fuji abandon poorer selling emulsions, there might be replacements from Eastern European companies, though that is more of a wait and see approach. Mostly, announcements from Kodak could happen each quarter, while Fuji tends to announce mostly on an annual basis. Check investor information on either company to see forward looking statements. Will Agfa photo (just spun off from the main company in a management buyout) continue to make 120 film ? The initial indication is that they will continue. The only rumour I have heard is that Scala might be discontinued, though that has been stated in many places for a few years. Sorry for the long post, but I still want to be shooting film ten years from now. Any feedback would be appreciated . Matt A worse case scenario is that the major film companies see more demand for lower ISO films (either 50, 64, 100, 125, 160 and 200), and light demand for high ISO films (320 to 400, and above). The theory behind that is those who stay with film would do so because of the perceived quality, a judgement better made on slower films than faster emulsions. You might see some high speed films become unavailable in 120, and fewer choices near ISO 400. Mostly, it is too early to tell, so I would not worry about any of this being possible for another four years. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
MATT WILLIAMS wrote:
I have been using and learning about MF now for about five years. I started out with a Seagull and after reading about them and their limitations I sold it and in the past few years I have picked up a Mamiya 645 with a couple of extra lenses, A Yashica D with the a Yashinon lens, A very nice Agfa 6X6 with a Solinar lens folder that I had reconditioned with new bellows and takes great pictures. I also own a Canon 7n 35mm camera and a Digital Rebel 300 that my wife bought me for Christmas last year. This is not meant to be a thread on digital vs. MF. I use both and I like to use the histogram on the Digital Rebel to give me a better idea on exposure for my MF pictures, especially sunrises and pictures of mountains with snow on them. I take mainly landscapes. I have been watching for years the prices of MF used equipment fall 30-50% on ebay and KEH. Check EBAY prices on 11 MP and 12 MP digital backs for medium format cameras. Many in the 24 mm by 36 mm or even some 37 mm square CCD digital backs are around the $2000 price level now. These backs offer active cooling to greatly minimize noise, and many are also capable of four shot and sixteen shot modes. Mamiya zoom lenses are now with in my reach to purchase for my M645. I should be happy about this , but I am wondering how long Fuji and Kodak will continue to make 120 film. Since 620 and 127 film are still available, and some other really odd sizes are still available, I would imagine that 120 film should not be a problem. As for Fuji and Kodak, I would expect future film from Kodak to come mainly from Lucky Film in China, and that Fuji might adopt a similar strategy. Anyway, going with what everyone else is posting, I would guess that 20 years should be fairly accurate (Kodak and Fuji), with smaller companies probably never stopping production. I still love MF and want to keep using film. I have a Epson 2450 (I know it old, but it works) and can scan my slides and can have them printed or blown up locally. I just purchased a 35mm slide scanner so I do the same as the local photo shops don't want to take the time to set up their mini labs to scan 35mm slides correctly. I have a lot of money invested in MF and am thinking about a few more purchases. Yet, if I can not get the 120 film in a few years it will be a waste to buy more lenses or another camera (been thinking about a Fuji GA645) . You might need to mail order your films in the near future, and then refrigerate them until use. While that is not as convenient as just a short trip to the store, I think mail order is becoming the norm. You might also consider getting more into systems with removable backs, so you could get a used digital back in the future. Looks like Kodak has stopped all research on developing new film. Wrong, only "consumer" films. Their professional films continue to be developed, and there should be at least one new release next year. Where is Fuji at ? I have heard many times that there will always be film made, but I am wondering at what price ? In theory, moving production to China, or other locations, might save some cost. However, competition will really drive costs, so as long as neither Kodak nor Fuji have a monopoly, prices should be even with inflation. There has been some speculation on Wallstreet that film prices might see a sudden drop in the near future to gain back market share, or volume; though this might not happen. If the demand goes down these companies must make a profit. Tough to find good figures on profits, though the recent public documents provided by AGFA indicate that all film and photo finishing products generate around 40% to 45% profits. Compared to most other products, especially electronics, that is quite good, and leaves room to reduce prices and retain some profits. I would also imagine that Fuji and Kodak might be more efficient than AGFA, and their profits might be better with film and photo finishing products. In other words, a 1/3 or 1/2 price reduction on film would still generate a profit for those companies . . . I honestly cannot think of any other product that could fit such a price reduction and still generate profits. Bronica just stopped making most of their MF cameras. Tamron announced only the RF645 will continue, and all SLR Bronica cameras will only have new parts and service for the next seven years (required by law). While it might not be a good idea to buy a Bronica, if that worries you, the reality is that your AGFA folder is even older, and can still be repaired. You might actually look at some Bronica products used for some large discounted prices. In the longer term, the loss of Bronica competition will make it easier on the other new medium format products still being sold. Does anyone know what the "official" or public statements that film companies have make on there continued support of 120 (or 220) film. Mostly, it seems that 220 film has been a lower volume that 120, with some 200 films being discontinued. If Kodak and Fuji abandon poorer selling emulsions, there might be replacements from Eastern European companies, though that is more of a wait and see approach. Mostly, announcements from Kodak could happen each quarter, while Fuji tends to announce mostly on an annual basis. Check investor information on either company to see forward looking statements. Will Agfa photo (just spun off from the main company in a management buyout) continue to make 120 film ? The initial indication is that they will continue. The only rumour I have heard is that Scala might be discontinued, though that has been stated in many places for a few years. Sorry for the long post, but I still want to be shooting film ten years from now. Any feedback would be appreciated . Matt A worse case scenario is that the major film companies see more demand for lower ISO films (either 50, 64, 100, 125, 160 and 200), and light demand for high ISO films (320 to 400, and above). The theory behind that is those who stay with film would do so because of the perceived quality, a judgement better made on slower films than faster emulsions. You might see some high speed films become unavailable in 120, and fewer choices near ISO 400. Mostly, it is too early to tell, so I would not worry about any of this being possible for another four years. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Gordon Moat wrote:
... In theory, moving production to China, or other locations, might save some cost. That won't help. The main cost is due to distribution, not manufacture. ... A worse case scenario is that the major film companies see more demand for lower ISO films (either 50, 64, 100, 125, 160 and 200), and light demand for high ISO films (320 to 400, and above). I doubt that. In terms of performance, the fast emulsions are still far ahead the digital detectors that get noisy above ISO400. And all disposable cameras are loaded with ISO400 or faster. -- Lassi |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Gordon Moat wrote:
... In theory, moving production to China, or other locations, might save some cost. That won't help. The main cost is due to distribution, not manufacture. ... A worse case scenario is that the major film companies see more demand for lower ISO films (either 50, 64, 100, 125, 160 and 200), and light demand for high ISO films (320 to 400, and above). I doubt that. In terms of performance, the fast emulsions are still far ahead the digital detectors that get noisy above ISO400. And all disposable cameras are loaded with ISO400 or faster. -- Lassi |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
... [...] In theory, moving production to China, or other locations, might save some cost. However, competition will really drive costs, so as long as neither Kodak nor Fuji have a monopoly, prices should be even with inflation. [...] That can be true with a publicly held company, but in aggressive markets private companies, for example some Japanese efforts, they will accept considerable loss far long than a public American company can sustain and thereby win the market. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Gordon Moat" wrote in message
... [...] In theory, moving production to China, or other locations, might save some cost. However, competition will really drive costs, so as long as neither Kodak nor Fuji have a monopoly, prices should be even with inflation. [...] That can be true with a publicly held company, but in aggressive markets private companies, for example some Japanese efforts, they will accept considerable loss far long than a public American company can sustain and thereby win the market. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
MATT WILLIAMS wrote:
The main point of the post is how long will 120 film be made ? I don't want to spend a 1000 dollars on equipment that I will not be able to get film for in two years or so. Think of it this way, in 5 years your digital rebel will be worth maybe $100 so what's the difference? And no 120 film isn't going to disappear in 2 years. -- Stacey |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Stacey" wrote in message
... MATT WILLIAMS wrote: The main point of the post is how long will 120 film be made ? I don't want to spend a 1000 dollars on equipment that I will not be able to get film for in two years or so. Think of it this way, in 5 years your digital rebel will be worth maybe $100 so what's the difference? And no 120 film isn't going to disappear in 2 years. CORRECT! And I'll bet that digital Rebel will more likely be $25. There will be bins of digital cameras at Goodwill just like there are bins of old point-n-shoots now... if they will even take them! |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Stacey" wrote in message
... MATT WILLIAMS wrote: The main point of the post is how long will 120 film be made ? I don't want to spend a 1000 dollars on equipment that I will not be able to get film for in two years or so. Think of it this way, in 5 years your digital rebel will be worth maybe $100 so what's the difference? And no 120 film isn't going to disappear in 2 years. CORRECT! And I'll bet that digital Rebel will more likely be $25. There will be bins of digital cameras at Goodwill just like there are bins of old point-n-shoots now... if they will even take them! |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
jjs wrote:
"Stacey" wrote in message ... MATT WILLIAMS wrote: The main point of the post is how long will 120 film be made ? I don't want to spend a 1000 dollars on equipment that I will not be able to get film for in two years or so. Think of it this way, in 5 years your digital rebel will be worth maybe $100 so what's the difference? And no 120 film isn't going to disappear in 2 years. CORRECT! And I'll bet that digital Rebel will more likely be $25. There will be bins of digital cameras at Goodwill just like there are bins of old point-n-shoots now... if they will even take them! Example, I just picked up a new old stock JVC mini DV video camera, 2 years old originally MSRP was $1128, street price was $875, I just paid $165. Now it's considered "Old school" and about 10% it's original price. -- Stacey |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Happy Thanksgiving! | Basic Wedge | 35mm Photo Equipment | 5 | October 13th 04 10:11 PM |
New Mamiya 645 may influence DSLR prices | Alan Browne | Digital Photography | 57 | October 7th 04 11:10 PM |
Not happy with prints from Kodak T400CN | Phil | Film & Labs | 5 | May 27th 04 03:25 PM |
Shutter CLA prices and qualities | AArDvarK | Large Format Photography Equipment | 5 | April 15th 04 07:55 PM |
Happy Easter ! | Benedikt Schenker | Film & Labs | 0 | April 8th 04 01:20 PM |