Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canon has sold its last film camera

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 163 posts

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#101

Post by vanderZwan »

_ph_ wrote: post #93
vanderZwan wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heck, The Impossible Project managed to bring back polaroids. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaroid_Originals

With all the respect for their achievements, their film is far from classic Polaroid.

Sure, but that's understandable no? Even if they had managed to hire all of the former engineers working at the original manufacturing plant, there was probably a ton of knowledge that was simply lost when it was closed. If they now have to rediscover all of that on their own you can't expect them to recreate a century of fine-tuned knowledge from scratch.

Actually, that touches on something that really saddens me: a ton of this knowledge is just lost when a company goes bankrupt. Part of The Impossible Project was to minimise that loss:

> Kaps revealed through a series of blog posts and interviews in 2016 that he had personally approached Fuji about acquiring their machinery in an attempt to to rescue their soon-to-be discontinued FP3000b and FP100b packfilm products. Kaps was unsuccessful in this pursuit, but motivated by his disappointment in Fuji's decision, he established the Analogue Product Institute (API) with the goal of "developing a NEW generation of analog instant packfilm [and] Establishing a rich network of new suppliers, manufacturers and financiers from all over the world".

It's not entirely unlike relying on closed source software, I guess.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polaroid_Originals#Future_and_...

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#102

Post by wiredfool »

jccalhoun wrote: post #3

"The model in question is the EOS-1V, which, incidentally, the company actually stopped making a full eight years ago. Since it has simply been selling out the rest of its stock, which, it seems, has finally depleted." That says a lot about how few they have been selling.

I think that's pretty standard for a lot of camera equipment. They'll do a run of one lens, and then a run of another, rather than 10 of this and 10 of that.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#103

Post by Broken_Hippo »

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?

One of the popular trends right now is scanning a film picture or a piece of physical artwork and then adding things with digital means. I'm not sure that the film adds anything whatsoever - nor the physical artwork since digital is pretty good at mimicking all of it. I think it is all about the process and the skillset a person is showing off. In his case, he winds up with an image that has a lot of steps, has a lot of room for error (film processing), and not many people can repeat his exact process.

People pay for this sort of thing as much as they pay for a clever gimmick.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#104

Post by msbarnett »

shawnz wrote: post #98
ISL wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of Canon and Nikon rumors regarding a mirrorless option; the proof will be in the pudding. The A7 III is Sony's shot at Canon's full-frame jugular. I, too, surprised myself by recently purchasing a 6D (I, not II -- why increase weight and dark noise?) on both lens-selection/lock-in and quickness concerns. I was surprised to find that I loved being able to leave the camera switched on all day in the m…

> For a week at temperatures between -20 and -30 C, the 6D (and iPhones kept warm) operated normally while friends with mirrorless cameras suffered shutdowns. This is clearly not due to the nature of mirrorless technology though, so I don't think it's fair to criticize the technology based on that.

I think it's more about the nature of battery chemistry and the relative loads SLR vs mirrorless setups place on batteries

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#105

Post by soundwave106 »

macintux wrote: post #37
ekianjo wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like saying Ferrari doesn't matter market-wise because they sell only a few thousands cars a year. The same goes for large format film photography.

Ferrari doesn't matter market-wise.

But Ferrari matters greatly in the luxury sports car segment. There's no sin in tailoring a business to a small niche.

Heck, I'd say "in the grand scheme of things", if you look at some of the data available (https://petapixel.com/2017/03/03/latest-camera-sales-chart-r...), stand-alone digital cameras "don't matter market-wise" compared to what has replaced them for a lot of people -- smartphones. Not that all stand alone digital cameras will disappear anytime soon (especially in segments like the DSLR market where the lenses can offer advantages for certain pictures), but the general purpose "compact digital camera" is probably doomed.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#106

Post by msbarnett »

wiredfool wrote: post #102
jccalhoun wrote: post #3

"The model in question is the EOS-1V, which, incidentally, the company actually stopped making a full eight years ago. Since it has simply been selling out the rest of its stock, which, it seems, has finally depleted." That says a lot about how few they have been selling.

I think that's pretty standard for a lot of camera equipment. They'll do a run of one lens, and then a run of another, rather than 10 of this and 10 of that.

I dunno about other companies, but Canon does "cellular" manufacturing rather than having huge lines all dedicated to just one thing.

Each cell is 5-or-6 small reconfigurable stations manned by a couple of people, who build a body or lens from start to finish, rapidly re-taskable to different lenses or bodies on the fly. Hundreds of cells on a manufacturing floor.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#107

Post by msbarnett »

carbolite103 wrote: post #36
_ph_ wrote: post #26

This is not very surprising news - very recently I was wondering who still sells film cameras. Digital has surpassed film in almost every way. It is however quite scary to see technology completely go away which was so common not long ago, sometimes even completely lost as technology. You can’t buy proper Polaroid film any more, many other important film materials are completely gone as well.

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 stopped building the F6 a number of years ago. They're just selling through old stock at this point.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#108

Post by ghaff »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #103
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?

One of the popular trends right now is scanning a film picture or a piece of physical artwork and then adding things with digital means. I'm not sure that the film adds anything whatsoever - nor the physical artwork since digital is pretty good at mimicking all of it. I think it is all about the process and the skillset a person is showing off. In his case, he winds up with an image that has a lot of steps, has a lot…

I tried to muck around with color film processing once upon a time but I found it to be a PITA exacting process that was pretty much straight follow the recipe.

I totally get trying out B&W processing and printing for the sake of the experience even if I have no personal interest in trying it again. But color doesn't have any appeal whatsoever.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#109

Post by exelius »

vvanders wrote: post #10
jonknee wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'd argue there is for Medium/Large format, but that's a whole different ballgame compared to consumer SLRs. Last time I looked the digital back for a Hasselblad was ~$30k.

That’s a small market, and most photogs I know who shoot MF/LF film are using cameras that are 50+ years old (Hasselblads mostly).

A digital back can improve workflow, but quality is still better with film at those sizes. These are studio cameras through and through; and I was able to connect a Hasselblad to some el cheapo Chinese lighting setup I bought on Amazon a year ago. That’s backwards compatibility.

Re: Canon has sold its last film camera

#110

Post by snowwrestler »

anthonybsd wrote: post #95
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…

>But their film cameras lagged Nikon in the sophistication of their AF, their automated exposure control, and especially their flash exposure control. I'm sorry, but you are completely off base here. Nikon always had the lead in flash exposure, yes. But in AF and lenses especially? Canon was the first to completely break compatibility with their older (FD mount) lenses which allowed them to have lightning fast autofo…

Canon had high-performance lenses thanks to putting the AF motor in the lense (as I said). But their AF sensors lagged Nikon in their low-light sensitivity and their intelligence with moving objects. This is why most nature photographers did not move from Nikon to Canon until the digital era. Art Wolfe was just about the only big-name nature photographer on Canon for years.

EDIT to add about auto exposure: the EOS-1N, released in 1995, had a monochrome 16-segment evaluative meter. The Nikon F5, released in 1996, had a 1,005 segment color-sensitive evaluative meter, which also incorporated focus distance from the lens. Essentially it took a 1 kilopixel digital photo in order to set the film exposure.

Post reply on HN