View Full Version : The new Fuji Folder - a few thoughts
Let's start with the basics.
The camera in question is only a prototype at this point in time. Fuji is currently showing it off at all of the major photography shows with it's introduction at the PMA. The GF670 as it is currently named, has caused a humongous stir in all of the major online forums, including APUG and RFF as well as dpreview where several of the digital folks there say this will be their "film"camera of choice. This is terrific news.
So, with that out of the way, let me add a few thoughts and wishes for the camera.
First, I really hope that Fuji makes this camera. No matter what format, just make the camera.
Format:
6x7 is a nice format but 6x8 or even 6x9 is better and here are a few reasons why:
Some people feel 6x7 is too close to 6x6, which is too close to square. Okay not a big deal. The big deal for me is that you cannot fit ten 6x7 negatives on a sheet of 8x10 paper to make contact prints. You can only fit 9, meaning there is always an orphan. This makes me crazy. 6x7 makes 10 negatives. 6x8 would produce 9 negatives and 6x9 would produce 8 negatives. Both of these fit onto a sheet of 8x10 paper and most importantly into a 8x10 negative sleeve like the PrintFile 120-4HB. To me, the 6x8 format is ideal. But I would be happy to get any new camera.
Price:
There is a ton of speculation about the price. Price of course limits who can and who will buy the camera. I am thinking the camera will be around $1500 US. This would be the buy/don't buy point for me. Some folks are thinking $1000 and some think even cheaper. Somehow, I do not think it will be cheaper than $1000. The latest and last film camera from Nikon is the F6. It sells at B&H in NYC for $1800 and they currently have a used one for $1299. The F6 is a techno marvel with lots of bells and whistles and sophisticated metering. The GF670 is and would be relatively simple with center weighted metering and not much more. Of course the built in lens would be top notch as all Fuji glass is but the rest of the camera is of rather simple construction. So if the price is $1000, I think this camera will do extremely well. As the price decreases, sales will get better. At $1000, I would buy two, one in chrome and one in black. At $1500, I think most folks might wait out the used market to see what happens. At $1500, I would only buy one.
Lens(es):
Wouldn't it be nice if there was a regular lens and Wide angle lens? If the normal is going to be an 80mm, as seen in the photos, wouldn't a 55mm lens be wonderful? I sure think so, and again, if the price is around the $1000 mark, I think more than a few folks would buy one of each, just like the Leica guys who carry two bodies with different lenses.
Accessories:
What I would like to see is a complete kit. A really nice bag to carry the camera, a small light meter, a filter or two, and 10 rolls of Fuji Acros 100. Add to that, the availability of a simple, light weight flash and this would be the ultimate travel kit. Imagine going through the airport with that set-up. As for pricing, maybe $100 for the bag and $149 for the flash. So if the camera was, let's say $1249, the entire kit minus film would be $1500. That would totally rock. And we all know that the profit margin in accessories is giant.
I think Fuji definitely hit a nerve and got people really excited with the possibility of this camera. I truly hope they make it. And if they don't, maybe Zeiss or Bessa / Voigtlander will come up with one.
(as posted on my blog (http://davidbram.blogspot.com/))
dazedgonebye
02-15-2008, 13:50
I'm fine with 6x7. 6x9 would add quite a bit of size and expense I think.
I think you're about right on price. If they keep things as simple as the prototype, there's no reason they can't keep it under $1k (I think).
I'm ok with the 80mm since that's about 40mm equivalent. Going much wider would make it a wide angle camera instead of a general walk around camera. Much wider than 65mm and I think it would actually be less interesting to me.
I was excited to see your post because, like many of us here, I am lusting after this camera. My biggest concern is probably price, because I'm one where up to about a $1k I can go, but much more than that and the wife will rebel. It seems to me that if they price it at, say, $900, then a lot of guys like me will definitely buy one, and people who would pay much more will buy two. But with prices of used Fuji MF cameras going for that much on Ebay, it surely won't cost much less than a grand.
Let's start with the basics.
Format:
6x7 is a nice format but 6x8 or even 6x9 is better and here are a few reasons why:
Some people feel 6x7 is too close to 6x6, which is too close to square. Okay not a big deal. The big deal for me is that you cannot fit ten 6x7 negatives on a sheet of 8x10 paper to make contact prints. You can only fit 9, meaning there is always an orphan. This makes me crazy. 6x7 makes 10 negatives. 6x8 would produce 9 negatives and 6x9 would produce 8 negatives. Both of these fit onto a sheet of 8x10 paper and most importantly into a 8x10 negative sleeve like the PrintFile 120-4HB. To me, the 6x8 format is ideal. But I would be happy to get any new camera.
(as posted on my blog (http://davidbram.blogspot.com/))
its all swings and roundabouts hey! (there is always something with a format that has its quirks). for my self i am less concerned with the awkwardness of contact printing and would appreciate getting the maximum from the neg in the final print. 6x7 is considered the ideal format because it enlarges directly up in size to 8x10 and so on (larger) without wasting any negative (as does 4x5).
6x9 is difficult to find enlargers for (at least in my neck of the woods!) and some of the neg is wasted when enlarged to standard sizes ( a whopping 2cm). 6x6 is fine if you want the square format (though you waste some paper) but if you have to crop for standard size enlargements then you arnt making or getting full use from the negative size. 6x8 i have no experiance with!!!dont think i have actually ever seen one lol, but the wasted neg size would apply.
love the idea about supplying an alternet camera with wide angle. i keep thinking how i can convert some older folders, although i was considering tele for portrait use
Fortunately in the US, the Besseler 23 is commonly available used. It handles up to 6x9. I use a Durst 609, which is quite old - but yes newer 6x7 enlargers are more common.
In addition to the contact sheet issue, the reason to prefer 6x8 or 6x9 is that you wind up using the full 56mm width of the neg on photos other than 8x10.
If this camera comes to fruition as a 6x7 and is $1500 or less in USD - I'll still go for it - because I have other cameras that I can sell to offset the cost.
The market for used enlargers up to 4x5 capability is very, very good for buyers right now. If one needs to buy an enlarger as a result of purchasing this camera, it's nearly a trivial matter to do so.
Andrew Sowerby
02-16-2008, 06:25
This camera is indeed very interesting. I'm not as optimistic about the price though. I think that it will be at least $1,500. I would have preferred 6x6, but what are ya gonna do? It's great to see Fuji continue to make intriguing film cameras.
I think 6x7 is the most bang for the buck format in 120. If you prefer to print to a higher aspect ratio rectangle, you can always crop a bit along the long side. 10 shots per roll (6x7) is better than 8 (6x9). Just my opinion. 6x6 means you dn't have to rotate the camera for verticals, but if you're printing to a rectangle, you crop to 645, which is 1/2 frame 120 in essence. I don't print many square photos, so my bias is evident.
sleepyhead
02-16-2008, 14:02
This is all sounding rather PLAUBEL MAKINA-ish to me...
hope it would be lighter than a Plaubel Makina!
At least as far as my experience shows me. I would never print square, so 6X6 involves cropping. I have not been able to find a local processor who will do more than process the film in a strip using 6X9, so I have to scan and print myself (doable, but not my choice). I use 645 quite a bit, but would like to use a larger format.
I am happy with the choice of 6X7.
I am already on record as estimating the cost in excess of 1000 and more like $1500.
Otherwise, it's just wait and see. It is, after all a Fuji decision and I will likely get in line for it.
How difficult would it be to design this camera so that 6x9 was the native format, but with masks for 6x6, a la some of the older folders on the market? With dotted lines in the VF to show 6x6. Perhaps a switch on the film advance to allow it 8 or 12 frames per roll.
Gene
dazedgonebye
02-16-2008, 17:38
How difficult would it be to design this camera so that 6x9 was the native format, but with masks for 6x6, a la some of the older folders on the market? With dotted lines in the VF to show 6x6. Perhaps a switch on the film advance to allow it 8 or 12 frames per roll.
Gene
I think the variable film advance would be the toughest part.
David Goldfarb
02-16-2008, 17:51
The old cameras could combine formats with masks and multiple red windows, as some of the modern rollfilm backs made in China do today. A common combination was 6x9/645 with two red windows. With the 645 mask in place, you could use the 6x9 series of frame numbers exposing with each number first in one red window, then in the second red window. I have three frame number windows on my DaYi 6x17 back for 6x17, 6x12, and 6x9 with masks to go along with them.
If you want something like this, you can get it now from companies like Fotoman or Gaoersi, but they don't have a coupled rangefinder, or you could just get one of the multiformat Chinese backs for almost any 4x5" camera, some of which have rangefinders, but they are heavier and bulkier than a folder.
There are systems for multiple formats on one roll with auto frame counters. One is the Sinar Zoom II rollfilm back for 4x5" cameras, and one is the very sophisticated electronic back for the Gilde medium format system. Both of these cost much more than I think anyone would be willing to pay for a folding camera.
Thanks. It sounds as if even if it could be done, it would add significantly to the cost of production, hence the price.
Gene
If the 80mm lens folder is successful, Fuji might well consider a 55mm lens version. This is equivalent to what they've previously done with 6x4.5cm cameras, both in the manual non-folding GS models and the later autofocus GA645's (prior to the zoom GA645Zi) in which there were 60mm and 45mm versions. We'd have to buy one of each, naturally. :D
You're correct Doug, Fuji has offered a normal and a wide lens version of their different 120 camera series. Let's hope they continue this trend!
You're correct Doug, Fuji has offered a normal and a wide lens version of their different 120 camera series. Let's hope they continue this trend!Indeed! It would be very attractive... And I should add that Fuji history also includes the GW690 with 90mm and the GSW690 with 65mm lens as precedents.
Leighgion
02-17-2008, 11:42
I don't think it's apt to compare the F6 to this prospective Fuji folder in the price arena.
Not only is the F6 a much more complex, high tech and flexible machine, its continued existence is, in my opinion, an act of prestige for Nikon. The role that professional 35mm F-series once filled is now pretty much completely taken over by digital. Nikon made an F6 and continues to sell it though, I think in order to retain a pretty solid claim that they're still making the best 35mm SLR in the world, even if the 35mm SLR's time as dominator of the photographic scene is past. Nikon no doubt doesn't expect to sell a lot of F6's, and so they can charge high since it's going to mostly be attractive to a few people who have the money and are willing to spend it.
This Fuji folder is an entirely different case. Not only it technologically a much simpler device with correspondingly lower manufacture costs, its niche has not been displaced by digital. A compact medium format camera is still unmatched for how much potential quality you can pack into such a small package. I think it'd be a terrible mistake for Fuji to boutique price it in order to jack up the profit margins as, with a competitive price tag, a new medium format folder from a major maker could rake in a lot more sales than an F6 could hope to, and the potential market extends much farther than rich hobbyists. Price it right, and they could make sales to all of us who haunt eBay looking at used medium format rangefinders that still go for hundreds and over a thousand dollars US.
I'm quite interested in the camera, but if Fuji asks for $1500+, then I'm tuning out. At that price, I'm you're moving into Mamiya 7 territory, which has interchangeable lenses.
oftheherd
02-17-2008, 14:06
...
This Fuji folder is an entirely different case. Not only it technologically a much simpler device with correspondingly lower manufacture costs, its niche has not been displaced by digital. A compact medium format camera is still unmatched for how much potential quality you can pack into such a small package. I think it'd be a terrible mistake for Fuji to boutique price it in order to jack up the profit margins as, with a competitive price tag, a new medium format folder from a major maker could rake in a lot more sales than an F6 could hope to, and the potential market extends much farther than rich hobbyists. Price it right, and they could make sales to all of us who haunt eBay looking at used medium format rangefinders that still go for hundreds and over a thousand dollars US.
I'm quite interested in the camera, but if Fuji asks for $1500+, then I'm tuning out. At that price, I'm you're moving into Mamiya 7 territory, which has interchangeable lenses.
Good points I think. Its not like they are manufacturing a new technology. Folders have been made by a lot of manufacturers, and in good quality. They have even done it before themselves. As seen below, with a top view, back open view, and back with film windows view.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=80023&ppuser=50
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=80020&ppuser=50
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=80021&ppuser=50
and here also (a camera that later sold for that price (?):
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=80021&ppuser=50
They can move the manuafcturing off shore and still monitor the quality. I expect they are using a lens they have already used on another of their rf cameras, so that could reduce cost. For those reasons, I don't see why they would have to charge over a thousand dollars per camera. Someone who knows more about the camera manufacturing business may be able to correct my thinking.
EDIT: Sorry about the links to my gallery, they wouldn't post from the post an image icon.
I expect they are using a lens they have already used on another of their rf cameras, so that could reduce cost.Which previous Fuji RF has used an 80mm lens able to cover 6x7?
oftheherd
02-17-2008, 16:22
Which previous Fuji RF has used an 80mm lens able to cover 6x7?
You have me there. I knew I should have looked before I said that. However, I am curious why they are using an 80mm rather than a 100mm.
dazedgonebye
02-17-2008, 16:34
You have me there. I knew I should have looked before I said that. However, I am curious why they are using an 80mm rather than a 100mm.
Because they want to sell one to me. :D
I just think slightly wide is more versitile.
oftheherd
02-17-2008, 16:39
Well, I understand that a little, maybe. Maybe not. If they want to go wide, then why not? Otherwise, why not the 100mm? What was the advantage of the 38mm lenses on the 35 rangefinders other than for people who couldn't be trusted to keep their subject in the frame lines?
Mind you, I like wides for a lot of things. But if wide you want, then I say go wide. At least 65mm (a 28mm equivalent on 6x7).
dazedgonebye
02-17-2008, 17:00
Well, I understand that a little, maybe. Maybe not. If they want to go wide, then why not? Otherwise, why not the 100mm? What was the advantage of the 38mm lenses on the 35 rangefinders other than for people who couldn't be trusted to keep their subject in the frame lines?
Mind you, I like wides for a lot of things. But if wide you want, then I say go wide. At least 65mm (a 28mm equivalent on 6x7).
This isn't a thing that can ever be settled...purely a matter of preference.
I think your characterization of 38mm lenses being for "people sho couldn't be truseted to keep their subjects in the frame lines," is a bit odd.
I'm not in the habit of choping heads off, no matter the lens.
..I think it'd be a terrible mistake for Fuji to boutique price it in order to jack up the profit margins..
Indeed, the more expensive it becomes, the less film they'll sell for it..
oftheherd
02-18-2008, 04:25
This isn't a thing that can ever be settled...purely a matter of preference.
I think your characterization of 38mm lenses being for "people sho couldn't be truseted to keep their subjects in the frame lines," is a bit odd.
I'm not in the habit of choping heads off, no matter the lens.
No doubt you are correct that lens choice is a matter of personal preference. However, when you are selling a camera with only one lens, shouldn't you try to be where most people want to be? There have been a couple of threads where favorite lenses have been discussed. There have been a lot of choices, but is seems I recall 50mm was one of the strong choices. The normal lens for the 6x7 format as you no doubt know is 100mm.
As to frame lines, I guess I was being a little contentious there. I am often disconcerted by having to pay attention to insure what I want in the photo is inside the frame lines. That no doubt comes from having started with cameras that had viewfinders without that. From box cameras to ground glass to SLRs. My shortcoming, not anyone elses. It probably has a lot to do with what you get used to. I accomodated to it with the Super Press 23, but did have to pay attention to it.
..There have been a couple of threads where favorite lenses have been discussed. There have been a lot of choices, but is seems I recall 50mm was one of the strong choices. The normal lens for the 6x7 format as you no doubt know is 100mm..
Personally, I find it very hard to compare focal lengths for different formats. Even though 80mm is sort of normal for 6x6, it's always given me a roomier impression than 43mm on small format. Probably because even though 43 is the diagonal of a 35mm frame, it's 1.8 times the short side.. making it even somewhat longish in one direction..
When it comes to 80mm on 6x6 or up, it's about 1.4 times the short side. For me, that gives a much more 35-ish feel than the diagonals suggest..
Long story short: I could totally live with 80mm on MF..
oftheherd
02-18-2008, 07:05
I hadn't really given that much thought pvdhaar. But it might explain why I never felt as comfortable using my Rolleiflex as opposed to when I had my Yashica MAT 124 G. Something so subtle I didn't figure out why. Now I am thinking even stronger about getting another Yashica. I alwasy thought it was just because I liked the 6x7 negative so much, and I do. I also like the Super Press 23.
But silly as it may sound, you have me thinking. A dangerous thing. :D :D
dazedgonebye
02-18-2008, 07:19
Thinking of the competition for this camera... Mamiya 7.
75mm standard lens on 6x7.
That might also give us a hint as to the max price we could expect. Surely they would have to come in under the price of a Mamiya 7 with standard lens. Yes, a folder has portability advantages, but it gives up versitility in return.
NickTrop
02-18-2008, 07:31
When I first saw this camera - love at first sight. MUST HAVE IT. However, I just picked up some color prints from my Iskra (which is 6x6). I've concluded that the new Fuji probably doesn't offer much that I don't already have with the Iskra. The only issue with my Iskra is that it has an intermittent light leak that effects 1 to 3 frames per roll. The camera has been serviced in the FSU and Certo6 made a simple repair (in exchange for another rare-ish folder with a Solinar lens I had). Usually the pics are salvageable as the leak appears as a straight solid band running from top to bottom on the left side of the print and can be scanned out. Weird. I've added foam, black tape, tightened up some screws... But this last roll is the first I shot that had no defects on any of the frames. And, as always, the Iskra "wows" imo on image quality.
Long answer - if I've fixed the light leak on the Iskra, no sale. I don't see the Fuji "offering me anything" over the Iskra and that includes what I'm sure will be a terrific lens.
If I haven't or can't fix this weird light leak, I'll start saving up for this thing. MF "in your pocket" - folders, is where it is for me.
Truly portable MF quality is the thing.
Is that a hint of sarcasm from you, sitemistic? You're normally so positive. ;)
NickTrop
02-18-2008, 07:41
Say this thing - if made, goes for $1000 to $1500. I'm sure it will be a very fine camera with a stellar lens. But what will it really offer over any number of serviced folders wth coupled RFs you can get from Certo6? A meter? (Who cares?)
dazedgonebye
02-18-2008, 07:48
Say this thing - if made, goes for $1000 to $1500. I'm sure it will be a very fine camera with a stellar lens. But what will it really offer over any number of serviced folders wth coupled RFs you can get from Certo6? A meter? (Who cares?)
My Iskra has a sneaky leak I can't locate either. I'm assuming the new Fuji would not have that leak.
I've just ordered a VC Meter II to go along with the Super Baldax I have coming in. Assuming it doesn't have a leak, the combination will be a passable substitute for the Fuji. Still, the Fuji lens will surely be better and a coupled meter with an option for aperture priority would be very nice.
I think I mentioned in an earlier thread that if I could have back the money I've put in to older folders that had problems, I could likely pay for the fuji twice over. That's pretty much what the fuji will have to offer above any old folder I might have...it'll work.
BernardHS
02-18-2008, 08:11
I have a Mamiya 7 and a Balda Super Baldax - and the latter has seen much more use over the past couple of years. Why? Because it is so small when folded it fits into a coat pocket or a small bag. I took it to Wyoming last week taking pictures of Yellowstone in the freezing winter, and the size was just right. Unfortunetly, the shutter cocking lever is unwilling to cooperate, and the viewfinder leaves a lot to be desired (especially since I wear glasses). So I love the idea of a new folder that has a great viewfinder (with frame lines) and folds to a compact size. For this reason I'd prefer a 6x6, but I can see where a 6x7 might appeal to more photographers. Personally, I don't care about a built-in meter, just give me a modern lens, a compact size, and a great viewfinder, and I'd be very, very happy.
Bernard.
Besides, this chatter might actually have an impact on whether Fuji decides to make this camera or not. If there absolutely no buzz, then they probably wouldn't. But with sufficient interest? We'll see....
NickTrop
02-18-2008, 08:43
My Iskra has a sneaky leak I can't locate either. I'm assuming the new Fuji would not have that leak.
I've just ordered a VC Meter II to go along with the Super Baldax I have coming in. Assuming it doesn't have a leak, the combination will be a passable substitute for the Fuji. Still, the Fuji lens will surely be better and a coupled meter with an option for aperture priority would be very nice.
I think I mentioned in an earlier thread that if I could have back the money I've put in to older folders that had problems, I could likely pay for the fuji twice over. That's pretty much what the fuji will have to offer above any old folder I might have...it'll work.
A fair point. And I actually agree, though I haven't spent that much on old folders. However, I don't see how the Fuji EBC lens - which will be outstanding no doubt, will be so much better than the lens on the Iskra that it would make a difference in the end product. I might argue that the old Tessar designs paint an image that is more pleasing and balanced than the hyper-sharp and somewhat cold modern designs.
For me - if I've fixed the light leak on the Iskra, and this is the first roll I've gotten back where no frames were effected, then I'll pass. Yes, it offers some automated nice-ities; yes "new is new", but it simply doesn't offer me "enough" over a working older folder with a coupled RF and a working film counter (Iskra) that has a lens that's "very, very, very good - stellar, even, but probably would lose to the Fuji in a lens resolution test" to warrant purchase.
If the Iskra isn't fixed and I continue to have issues with a light leak, then I will break down and get the Fuji. IF they actually make it (and I believe they will, and I believe it will be surprisingly affordable. Can't sell much Across if there ain't enough 120 cameras out there that people can afford other than Holgas and broken down old folders. I think they'll go with the "Razor Blade" business model. I'm hoping anyway...)
Thinking of the competition for this camera... Mamiya 7.
75mm standard lens on 6x7.
That might also give us a hint as to the max price we could expect. Surely they would have to come in under the price of a Mamiya 7 with standard lens. Yes, a folder has portability advantages, but it gives up versitility in return.
Regarding your versatility sacrifice. Frankly, my own problem with photography in general is the availability of too much versatility. Until I started shooting fixed lens medium format and a bit of Large Format with one lens, one of my stumbling blocks was "too many choices".
I certainly don't want to diminish the use of a variety of camera's and lenses, since I have so many myself, but my images started improving when I limited my choices of equipment and films.
For that reason, this new Fuji grabs my attention because I have fondness for all the Fuji's I have owned. The lens will undoubtedly be EBC coated and world class for sharpness. It will be reliable construction and operation. But mostly, it will be limited in a way that will force me to improve my photography.
It's almost inconceivable for me to say this, but I can almost image buying this camera, getting rid of the bulk of my other inventory and having one camera to work with.
Photography is a hobby for me, but I would like to shoot some really wonderful images before I am found heels up somewhere in the woods. If Fuji makes this camera, I will buy it, and possibly??? shoot Fuji for the rest of my life.
NickTrop
02-18-2008, 08:55
It's almost inconceivable for me to say this, but I can almost image buying this camera, getting rid of the bulk of my other inventory and having one camera to work with.
-----
Agree 100%, also about what you said about "too many choices". I have an SLR which has all the focal lenghts (all fixed, no zooms) from 19mm to 85mm for portraits. I usually shoot it with a 50mm but I usually just grab one of my fixed lens rangefinders. Once camera, one lens, one focal length.
If it wasn't for the light leak on the Iskra, which pisses me off, I might do as you suggest, shoot nearly always with the Iskra, and just hang on to a couple 35s and sell the rest. If I can't fix it, I might sell a bunch of these RFs to finance to Fuji.
Harry Lime
02-18-2008, 08:59
I'll take one of the 6x7 models, but I would really love to see a miniature 6x4.5 version. Now that would be a camera you could stick in your jacket pocket. 16 shots per roll is great for traveling.
I'll take one of the 6x7 models, but I would really love to see a miniature 6x4.5 version. Now that would be a camera you could stick in your jacket pocket. 16 shots per roll is great for traveling.
Fuji has already made this camera: the GS645. Replace the original bellows, and there you go. Great lens, rangefinder, meter, and viewfinder.
I'm excited about the 6x7 format, as I rarely print square, and 645 is just 1/2 frame in 120. That's a great travel camera since you're bound to carry a bag with travel stuff anyway.
Leighgion
02-18-2008, 09:24
Indeed, the more expensive it becomes, the less film they'll sell for it..
Exactly. Eventually you have to ask the question, "Look, do you want more people to buy your camera or not?"
I get irritated these days when I think of Leica, the Epson RD1 and Nikon's limited run of their new S3. All have contributed to making it a norm that any camera other than an SLR will now command an exorbitant premium and in the case of the RD1 and S3, be of so limited a production run that even many willing people won't have time to think about saving up for one before they're all sold and start commanding even more exorbitant premiums on eBay.
The whole thing stinks of an appalling shortsightedness and lack of confidence, even in the face of strong sales. As I read, Nikon's reincarnated S3 flew off the shelves. Epson's unique RD1 got terrific reviews stateside even though it wasn't being officially sold here. I don't know any figures about Epson's sales, but has anybody heard about unsold RD1 stock being put on firesale because nobody wanted them? I didn't think so.
Cosina might not be getting rich off their Voigtländer bodies and lenses, but they're several generations of product in and still selling away. They've got the market for reasonably-priced 35mm rangefinders in current production zipped up since <i>nobody else is doing it.</i>
Fuji, if you're out there, please, look to Cosina's example and actually plan to make a camera you intended to sell to many people over many years instead of a handful over one or two years.
bmattock
02-18-2008, 14:49
Good grief sitemistic, howdid they do that? They are't making any new cameras (yet anyway). Most of their film line should long since have amortized and be returning pure profit. How much is 43 Billion yen in dollars? 10 billion at least I would suppose.
http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/investors/annual_report/index.html
literiter
02-18-2008, 14:58
I really do hope the camera happens.
It does suprise me, however, that a camera like this could hit the market after so many years. Especially when the availability of film seems to be so iffy. I hope there isn't some market speculation of some sort happening and we won't ever see the thing hit the market.
So, I wait.
If Fuji decides to build this camera, heck even if they are thinking about it, the future of film can't be too bleak. We're not talking incompetent Kodak here, this is Fuji. That's the way I see it.
literiter
02-18-2008, 15:12
If Fuji decides to build this camera, heck even if they are thinking about it, the future of film can't be too bleak. We're not talking incompetent Kodak here, this is Fuji. That's the way I see it.
I hope this is true.
Think "Fuji Folder" really really hard.
IWe're not talking incompetent Kodak here, this is Fuji. That's the way I see it.
What? AFAIK, Kodak makes money on film, not loses money. Yes the profit from film is dropping, but they have even invested in more R&D (note the recent new emulsions, and don't be surprised if you see more) and rejigged production to concentrate all film coating in a hyper-modern, efficient facility here in Rochester. Film is still a cash cow for Kodak that helps support the pathetic margins on digital products.
If Fuji is bleeding cash from film, then it's likely because Kodak "owns" the motion picture film market. And there's no denying that motion picture is keeping analog film alive.
I hope Fuji makes this camera. I'll load it with TMY-2. :D
Edit: If you look at the Imaging Division portion of Fuji's annual report here (http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/pdf/investors/annual_report/ff_ar_2007_part_011.pdf), my reading is that the Imaging Division lost the Y43B, not film. The imaging division includes digital imaging products, and there was bleeding there. Colour film declined in sales volume, but colour paper volume and market share was up. The way I read it, colour analog products still made money.
Is this the Y43B you were referring to, sitemistic?
Fuji's folder idea may be a sound one; there doesn't seem to be a huge enough surplus of MF rangefinders out there to cause prices to fall. And if there is a reason for that it must be that users of MF rangefinders aren't stopping using film. Is there another possible explanation? I think the company's explanation for considering it holds at least some water.
As for Fuji's losses, the only area the report shows as having grown within the imaging division is color paper and chemistry sales.
Looking at that report, it says nothing about B+W film. Why? Is that not part of the imaging division, or was something lost in a translation?
Ernst Dinkla
02-19-2008, 06:53
As for Fuji's losses, the only area the report shows as having grown within the imaging division is color paper and chemistry sales.
Looking at that report, it says nothing about B+W film. Why? Is that not part of the imaging division, or was something lost in a translation?
Color paper is used as digital output media for Frontiers and Noritsus. So it doesn't say that analogue is still alive when Crystaljet paper sales increase. Fuji sells Epson printers as well and Fuji-Hunt has a large catalog of digital media. Fuji is also in the sign printing business that is now 80% digital. I thought 5 years ago a 6x9 folder produced in China at a quality like an Iskra would be nice as a stop gap solution to wait for that ultimate digital rangefinder. The last isn't still there but the folder is too late.
Ernst Dinkla
vdonovan
02-19-2008, 08:16
That annual report notes that Fujifilm's loss in the imaging division is "mainly due to structural reform charges. Excluding these charges...operating income grew CONSIDERABLY to 17.5 billion yen, a LARGE increase of 15.8 billion yen year on year."
Translation: they are writing down equipment, consolidating operations and maybe laying some people off, but still have a very positive cash flow in the imaging division. The same is true in the '06 annual report: a large operating profit against which they've taken some large write-downs.
vdonovan
02-19-2008, 09:09
Games, yes, but very standard games. Everybody does it.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.