Canon has sold its last film camera • Hacker News Board

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#141

Post by girvo » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 3:13 AM UTC

cptskippy wrote: post #116

stan_rogers wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yessir. They were first to break compatibility, immediately (ish) after Minolta did it.

True and his transgression was an easy one to make because most people will say "Mi..who?" They merged with Konica sometime in the early 2000s and exited the camera market. Minolta was never considered more than a prosumer camera maker, it's cameras lacked many essential features that professional photographers demanded in their SLRs.

Bah. Tell that to the amazing 40mm on my Minolta 7S! :)

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#142

Post by rangibaby » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 3:46 AM UTC

mathewsanders wrote: post #140

When I was 16 (1997) a photographer friend of my parents gave me his old Canon AE-1 (I think released in 1980 or 81) it’s shutter wasn’t working and I took it into the local Canon center where they fixed the shutter, replaced light seal on film door, and even gave me a lens cap for something like NZD$50. Amazing that companies used to build such sturdy products that they could be cheaply fixed 15+ years after they we…

> Amazing that companies used to build such sturdy products that they could be cheaply fixed 15+ years after they were sold...

The award for most durable SLR has to go to the Pentax Spotmatic. The first ones were released in 1964, and they are seemingly indestructible.

Even the exposure meter is a future-proof design; it was designed for mercury (1.35V) batteries but the circuit was designed in a way that modern LR44 (1.5V) cells "just work"!

Nikon lenses from the same era generally need a CLA because the grease used on their focusing helicoids gums up over the years and makes focusing feel dry, bumpy, and just plain nasty. I have come across some Super Takumar (Pentax) examples that are moldy enough that they would probably grow mushrooms if you left them outside soon the shady side of a tree, but the focusing feel is always smooth and perfect.

The only lens I have that feels better is a Voigtlander and it cost $500 vs $10 for an ugly but usable Super Takumar lens.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#143

Post by devb » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 4:35 AM UTC

lb1lf wrote: post #73

carbolite103 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as 35mm systems it's pretty much just Leica and Nikon at the moment, though I would imagine that Nikon is close to discontinuing their F6 flagship soon. Thankfully many 35mm cameras from the 70s and 80s are engineering masterpieces that will likely keep functioning well into the second half of this century. I just hope that companies will continue making film stocks for them.

Nikon even has - or at least had, until recently - two film cameras in their line-up. The ‘because we can’ high-end F6 and the entry-level, manual just about everything FM10. (Though I think the current FM10 may be made by others under licence.) I think Voigtländer may still make a 35mm rangefinder, too.

Cosina was the company licensed to make the Nikon FM10 and produced rangefinders under the Voigtländer name. All of those products were discontinued last year, sadly.

As far as I know, the F6 is the last one still in production.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#144

Post by devb » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 4:41 AM UTC

wl wrote: post #125

chuckkir wrote: post #96

I was talking to a friend who recently got into 35mm film cameras. He develops the color film himself, but then immediately scans it in and uses digital tools to work on the images. I left a bit confused; what is he gaining by using film as the medium?

I can't imagine many people developing their own color film unless they like the process. It's much more involved than B&W and there's not as much room for playing around.

It's actually a little less involved than B&W. You don't have to look up developer/film times and there are no agitation timing techniques to worry about, because the process is exactly the same for every roll. The only annoying part is getting the chemicals up to 100 degrees rather than getting room temperature water straight from the tap.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#145

Post by mhomde » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 8:01 AM UTC

ccnafr wrote: post #137

GuiA wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the first paragraph of the article: The news was spotted by PetaPixel on the camera giant’s Japanese support forum.

Breaking a story should be rewarded. Ok, I'll admit it. I hate sites like TechCrunch or The Verge that simply take reports from other news sites, reword them, and then pass them as their own. It disturbs me to learn that HN favors TechCrunch like this.

But, but, that's just how Blogs work man :)

They clearly attribute it to them (though I find it a tad lame they don't have a specific attribution area), and you could argue that being featured on a popular blog helps people discover them, and with google ranks as well. Curation does add some value and it's not like The Verge for instance doesn't create its own content.

I find sites that just repackage reddit stuff to be much much worse.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#146

Post by SmellyGeekBoy » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 8:17 AM UTC

mhomde wrote: post #145

ccnafr wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breaking a story should be rewarded. Ok, I'll admit it. I hate sites like TechCrunch or The Verge that simply take reports from other news sites, reword them, and then pass them as their own. It disturbs me to learn that HN favors TechCrunch like this.

But, but, that's just how Blogs work man :) They clearly attribute it to them (though I find it a tad lame they don't have a specific attribution area), and you could argue that being featured on a popular blog helps people discover them, and with google ranks as well. Curation does add some value and it's not like The Verge for instance doesn't create its own content. I find sites that just repackage reddit stuff to…

> ...you could argue that being featured on a popular blog helps people discover them, and with google ranks as well.

I ran a semi-serious gaming blog for years and we often had our stories repackaged and linked from Kotaku, at the time the biggest gaming blog in the world. The extra traffic and SEO boost was negligible at best.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#147

Post by jacobush » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 8:22 AM UTC

jonknee wrote: post #4

snowwrestler wrote: post #2

I'm not surprised; in SLRs at least, Canon was never the dominant film camera company with the biggest customer base. Their SLR business did not catch up to and pass Nikon until the digital era. Canon's decision to put the AF motor in the lens helped them in verticals that use huge telephotos (sports, mostly). But their film cameras lagged Nikon in the sophistication of their AF, their automated exposure control, and…

Well that and there is almost no market for new film cameras.

Almost no - but what tiny market there is, is growing. My favorite pet project to watch right now is

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/reflexcamera/reflex-bri...

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#148

Post by jacobush » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 8:35 AM UTC

mauvehaus wrote: post #32

ghaff wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At one point I was probably spending 10s of hours a week doing B&W darkroom work so I have a certain nostalgia for it. I also spent lots of time playing with developer chemistry, etc. But, no, I don't really miss it. It was an enjoyable hobby but it was also a pain to the degree that it was a process you had to go through in order to arrive at the final photograph. And color slides were just always a finicky and fair…

I've never shot much transparency film, and I've definitely never developed it. I guess my favorite part of shooting slides is that you can't fix things in the darkroom. What you get off the camera is what you've got (absent digital manipulation, of course). As a pretty casual photographer (I don't have a darkroom or access to one, and have never really been more than a roll a month shooter), that means I've both bee…

In that respect, slide is a bit like shooting JPEG instead of raw.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#149

Post by jacobush » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 8:41 AM UTC

toomanybeersies wrote: post #68

hamitron wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only reason it made sense to transition to digital is the workflow. Its more efficient to shoot weddings on digital so you can turn out a product faster.

Cost and flexibility when shooting (adjustable ISO, no need to pause to change rolls) are actually the bigger advantages. You can turn out photos in film about as fast as digital. I can get a roll developed, scanned, and online in about 20 minutes.

You are fast. For me it's more like 2 hours at least. You have a Pakon?

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#150

Post by apocrypher » Fri, Jun 01, 2018, 8:43 AM UTC

stan_rogers wrote: post #135

foobar1962 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sony bought part of the Minolta/ Konica camera business. Minolta had an AF slr very early in the game iirc. They weren’t pro mainly because they didn’t have an extensive range of lenses ands accessories, and the lenses were mainly slow zooms.

They actually had a pretty extensive range of lenses and accessories (bulk film backs, drives and grips, etc.), and had those cool white f/2.8 zooms and teles before Canon did. Some of those lenses, like the 24mm VFC (variable field curvature), were unique to the line and allowed a photographer to pull off shots that wouldn't be practical again until digital composition (focus stacking, etc.) came along. They also ha…

I owned and used that VFC lens for many years.

Variable Field Curvature.

this can't be digitally recreated.

its a really interesting lens and the reason why I may yet fall back into my Kodak habit of yore.

Flash, on the Maxxum/Dynax AF cameras, from the get go, was incredible. Focus distance is critical for flash exposure. Minolta pioneered AF. Thry also played sloppy with a Honeywell patent, when we feared trade deficit to Japan, remember 4GL, 5GL... Originally Japanese manufacturers claimed solidarity. Then Minolta was left standing alone, stood up, and stupidly didn't settle. This was widely attributed to Minoru Tashima, he of Machinery and Industrial OpticAL Tashima. Reality, bad legal gamble lost to international politics. The punitive $100MM fine, hurt MINOLTA horribly, hence erratic pro equipment development.

On the contrary to the above comments assertion, Minolta had mire fast glass than anyone.

Edit, I used professionally almost every single MINOLTA camera and certainly every serious lens, from the SRT102b, to the last pre Sony, all home grown Dynax 7D...

if you're curious, just find a good store with a Sony A99II on display. This is the model that'sgoing to demonstrate the ability of a camera to be a genuinely delightful experience, above even the A9. If you can afford it, my experience of the A9, I challenge anyone to take a technically bad photo with it. The A99II is a serious machine too, but it caters to a old school crowd and the new models, the reason why they have a all new lens mount, again, is the lenses are designed for use with in camera software correction of distortion and vignetting etc. I personally dislike that change, not that i can criticize the results, but, strikingly demarked by the A9, we have entered the software supremacy era. Its incredible.