# Canon exodus from film photography



## Zeabned (May 30, 2006)

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.  

Well, as long as they continue to manufacture parts for my EOS Elan 7n, I'll do my best to protract the death throes indefinitely.  That is, as long as there is print and slide film around somewhere.  

I've been expecting such news; still it's sad that it's finally announced.


----------



## Don Simon (May 30, 2006)

I'm actually surprised it's only just happened now; I thought they'd pulled out of film already. Nikon and Pentax have already done so, while Minolta have gone even further and dropped out of photography completely. While I agree that it's unfortunate that the main companies involved in 35mm won't be advancing that technology any further, it's also true that there are plenty of old cameras and accessories around that will continue to work for decades. On the other hand, that won't stop their prices from leaping as everyone becomes convinced the Nikon they're looking at on Ebay is the only one left on the planet... oh well...


----------



## 2framesbelowzero (May 30, 2006)

ZaphodB said:
			
		

> I'm actually surprised it's only just happened now; I thought they'd pulled out of film already. Nikon and Pentax have already done...



Don't believe the hype! They still manufacture the F6.

"Nikons new top-of-the-line professional camera, the F6, indicates the depth and breadth of our dedication to truly high-quality photography."

http://www.europe-nikon.com/details.aspx?countryid=20&languageid=22&prodId=944&catId=94


----------



## Torus34 (May 30, 2006)

I suspect that the obituary of film photography is premature.


----------



## mysteryscribe (May 30, 2006)

And if worse comes to worse we call all buy the russian knockoffs for years to come.


----------



## Don Simon (May 30, 2006)

2framesbelowzero said:
			
		

> Don't believe the hype! They still manufacture the F6.


 
Ah yeah, sorry forgot about that. Still, they no longer manufacture cameras that mere mortals can afford or use .



			
				mysteryscribe said:
			
		

> And if worse comes to worse we call all buy the russian knockoffs for years to come.


 
Very true. Just don't forget to wind the film, cock the shutter, load the breech, turn the monkey-gasket-handle and count to three before pressing the shutter, or it'll stop working forever. Will make a lovely doorstop though. :mrgreen:


----------



## craig (May 31, 2006)

Sad indeed. Dare I mention E-6 labs that have all but faded? 

We speak of protecting film to the death and how film is what photography was. Consider that photography will forever be part science and technology and part Art. We are in a transitional period. The old techniques will never die and digi is only limited to our imaginations. Personally I believe that both worlds can coexist.


----------



## LWW (May 31, 2006)

> Ah yeah, sorry forgot about that. Still, they no longer manufacture cameras that mere mortals can afford or use


I know it's really a Cosina, but the FM10 is still around...and at the price of the FM3 I suspect there will be NOS for awhile.

LWW


----------



## 2framesbelowzero (May 31, 2006)

2framesbelowzero said:
			
		

> "Nikons new top-of-the-line professional camera, the F6, indicates the depth and breadth of our dedication to truly high-quality photography."





I like that.. "truly".. high-quality photography   :shaking:


----------



## bigfatbadger (Jun 1, 2006)

Canon and Nikon are both big quantity market pleasing manufacturers, so it's inevitable that they will both move away from film, but that doesn't mean the death of film photography, there are still plenty of other manufacturers out there, they're just not the traditional big boys.


----------



## Zeabned (Jun 1, 2006)

bigfatbadger said:
			
		

> Canon and Nikon are both big quantity market pleasing manufacturers, so it's inevitable that they will both move away from film, but that doesn't mean the death of film photography, there are still plenty of other manufacturers out there, they're just not the traditional big boys.


 
I'm sure you're right, but I've only owned and shot Canon cameras.  I'm not familiar with other brands and therefore have no reason to trust them or expect to be as comfortable with them as I've been with Canon.  Perhaps a question of preference, but it can be a determining factor.  I think film, unfortunately, is going to go the way of VHS VCRs, who will be replaced altogether, very soon, by DVD technology.


----------



## Cuervo79 (Jun 1, 2006)

Zeabned said:
			
		

> I'm sure you're right, but I've only owned and shot Canon cameras.  I'm not familiar with other brands and therefore have no reason to trust them or expect to be as comfortable with them as I've been with Canon.  Perhaps a question of preference, but it can be a determining factor.  I think film, unfortunately, is going to go the way of VHS VCRs, who will be replaced altogether, very soon, by DVD technology.


I agree but that transition is not as hard because there is no real interaction with those as to cameras. I was inducted into photography with film and I have allot of love for it. I find it that for most "work" related photographs digi does its job to the max, but I still like the "mystery" of waiting to develop your film in order to see if your photos came out as you wanted, and the pround little moments when it actually comes out better than you expected...


----------



## brassring (Jun 1, 2006)

I think the problem is not companies no longer making film cameras.  With all of the name brands still productive and knockoffs available, film cameras will be around for my lifetime.  You may not be able to get your "favorite" brand but somewhere cameras will be manufactured.

The place to keep watch on non-digital products is film, not the cameras.  When companies begin to drop film, as some have already begun to do, then we are in trouble.  But I do not think this will happen for some time.  Watch film producers, not the camera people.


----------



## spiky_simon (Jun 1, 2006)

brassring said:
			
		

> The place to keep watch on non-digital products is film, not the cameras.  When companies begin to drop film, as some have already begun to do, then we are in trouble.  But I do not think this will happen for some time.  Watch film producers, not the camera people.



Unfortunately, I think this might happen faster than you think...


----------



## Zeabned (Jun 1, 2006)

spiky_simon said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, I think this might happen faster than you think...


 
Yes, watch the film producers:  I have to agree with your qualms in this respect.  Agfa is the first down; and I understand that Ilford's survival has been a near-run thing.


----------



## 2framesbelowzero (Jun 1, 2006)

Zeabned said:
			
		

> 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&#8217;s UK arm, told Ian Andrews of ePHOTOzine today that Ilford would be &#8216;The last man standing&#8217; 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&#8217;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. _&#8220;The one notable casualty is SFX200, which had a very low turnover anyway&#8221;_ said Howard.
Howard was keen to emphasise that the new company was free from debt and therefore free of pressure. _&#8220;This gives us a good platform to focus on the right things&#8221;_ 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&#8217;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 (Jun 1, 2006)

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


----------



## Cuervo79 (Jun 1, 2006)

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


----------



## 2framesbelowzero (Jun 1, 2006)

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 (Jun 1, 2006)

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 (Jun 2, 2006)

ZaphodB said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 2, 2006)

ZaphodB said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 3, 2006)

2framesbelowzero said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 4, 2006)

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 (Jun 4, 2006)

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 (Jun 12, 2006)

ZaphodB said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 12, 2006)

2framesbelowzero said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 15, 2006)

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 (Jun 15, 2006)

Zeabned said:
			
		

> 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 (Jun 18, 2006)

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


----------



## Zeabned (Jun 18, 2006)

LWW said:
			
		

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


 
Precisely, but only die-hards will pay $31 per roll, and how good a quality can be expected from these niche-suppliers?  How good are those cameras being produced in China and Russia?


----------



## JamesD (Jun 18, 2006)

Not everybody can afford digital cameras, or will be willing to spend the money on one when a $2.99 disposable can do the same job, so film will continue to be available.  As long as there's film, there will be a demand for film cameras.  As long as there's a demand for film cameras, there will be demand for film (in addition to the disposables).  The technology isn't going anywhere any time soon.

However, the number of digitals will continue to increase.  And, sooner or later, someone's going to figure out how to fit a digital system into a package the size and shape of a film canister, and make inserts to retrofit 35mm cameras.  Then film sales might take a serious dip, though I think that anyone willing to spend the money on the retrofit would probably just buy a digital camera.  And there will still be people who simply don't want to shell out the cash for a digital system, when a roll of film at a minute fraction of the price will do the job just as well.

I'll tell you what, though... if all manufacturers quit making film cameras altogether, and all manufacturers quit making film altogether, then I'll go into business making new cameras if someone will go into business making film.  It'd be an interesting project.


----------



## bigfatbadger (Jun 19, 2006)

A lot of landscape professional landscape photographers continue to shoot on large format cameras because of the control given and the quality that arises. And of course, large format is dead, replaced by more convenient forms such as medium format and 35mm, oh, and digital.

Some people just won't be told


----------



## ahelg (Jun 19, 2006)

I don't think the fact that Agfa dropping film means that it's about to happen to others as well. Agfa was the samller of three big film producers. Kodak, Fujifilm and Agfa. I go to my local photography store regularly and they still sell loads of film, mostly fuji, so I expect to see Fujifilm around for at least another decade. After all, as long as there is a demand, someone will fill the void, and I expect fuji will live the longest. But I do admit that I miss the old Ektachrom from Kodak.


----------



## DocFrankenstein (Jun 19, 2006)

bigfatbadger said:
			
		

> A lot of landscape professional landscape photographers continue to shoot on large format cameras because of the control given and the quality that arises. And of course, large format is dead, replaced by more convenient forms such as medium format and 35mm, oh, and digital.
> 
> Some people just won't be told


Amen

Film won't "die" because it's relatively easy to make. At least the silver halide - and that's the only I mostly care about.


----------

