What is the current state and future of film availability especially 35mm?

[DREW WILEY]

Ask a dentist. It seems like they use lead plumbing solder, but charge for gold.

 

[pbromaghin]

Now you tell me! If i knew that it could have gone in the anti xray airport bags and then into the freezer!

Probably not. TSA would certainly catch it in a carryon and delay your departure while they remove it and run the film through without the bag. Same with checked baggage and who knows they would do. I wouldn’t want to find out.

On my last trip I had about 30 rolls of film and a half dozen were flagged during hand inspection to be run through the scanner. Not sure what I’m going to do with them. Mix of Fp4+ and Hp5+.

 

[Pieter12]

The Xray envelopes precede the TSA and modern Xray equipment. If you had one of those in your bag today, they might just turn up the machine to try to see inside, pretty much guaranteeing your film is toast.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Camera sales in general have been decreasing precipitously. In particular, digital cameras (other than cel phones).
So what was once a mainstream industry is now a niche. And that niche has its own realities.

Cell phones are cutting into both film and digital photography.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Same. The arc of Andy Sipowicz's story (played by Dennis Franz) is one of the most interesting and well-written in TV history.

Years ago when it was popular and I had a mustache, people always asked me if I was related to him because I looked like him.

 

[GaryFlorida]

Probably not. TSA would certainly catch it in a carryon and delay your departure while they remove it and run the film through without the bag. Same with checked baggage and who knows they would do. I wouldn’t want to find out.

On my last trip I had about 30 rolls of film and a half dozen were flagged during hand inspection to be run through the scanner. Not sure what I’m going to do with them. Mix of Fp4+ and Hp5+.

well my goal is not to get through the airport its to protect the film in storage. but in any case its too late now. and its efficacy is unknown anyway.

 

[pbromaghin]

well my goal is not to get through the airport its to protect the film in storage. but in any case its too late now. and its efficacy is unknown anyway.

Fair enough.

 

[Angarian]

I am having an hard time accepting that Canon and Nikon phased out their line of film cameras when it was plainly clear that film was experiencing a definite comeback.

That is not quite correct:
Canon stopped the production of their film camera (EOS 1V) already in 2009 (at that time demand for film was still strongly decreasing).
The EOS 1V was available a bit longer, but it was all "new old stock", selling from existing warehouse stock.

With Nikon it has been different: Production of the F6 continued until 2020. The main reason for production stop was probably that Nikon closed at that time their camera factory in Japan (Sendai), in which all professional models were produced.
Production was completely concentrated then at their factory in Thailand, for all models. Transfer of the Japanese F6 experts was probably not possible or too expensive (being a niche product in relation to digital camera production).

 

[Angarian]

I used to work on the Agfa Motion Picture Film advertising account. Cinematographers absolutely loved their negative film, it had a fabulous look and dynamic range. If anyone remembers the TV series "NYPD Blue" that was all shot on Agfa film. However, Agfa developed (no pun) a print film that had a polyester base and used less water to process. Unfortunately, it also had a tendency to separate from the emulsion. That pretty much spelled the end for Agfa Motion Picture Film and I would speculate, the end of Agfa film altogether.

No, that hadn't influence on Agfa's film production. Because their cinema print films were produced in their factory in Antwerpen/Mortsel, Belgium (former Gevaert factory before the merger of Agfa and Gevaert). And that factory is producing film still today (e.g. aerial film). Production of print film was stopped there some years ago, but because of decreasing demand (digitalisation of cinema projection).
The Agfa photo films were produced in Germany, and that production stopped at the end of 2005. And that had absolutely nothing to do with Agfa print film quality, as these films were never produced at that factory.

 

[GaryFlorida]

No, that hadn't influence on Agfa's film production. Because their cinema print films were produced in their factory in Antwerpen/Mortsel, Belgium (former Gevaert factory before the merger of Agfa and Gevaert). And that factory is producing film still today (e.g. aerial film). Production of print film was stopped there some years ago, but because of decreasing demand (digitalisation of cinema projection).
The Agfa photo films were produced in Germany, and that production stopped at the end of 2005. And that had absolutely nothing to do with Agfa print film quality, as these films were never produced at that factory.

The amount of photographic knowledge on this board is astounding.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The amount of photographic knowledge on this board is astounding.

That is way so many who visit it end up staying for ever. A Hotel California if you will.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

That is way so many who visit it end up staying for ever. A Hotel California if you will.

Roach motel?

 

[foc]

The amount of photographic knowledge on this board is astounding.

I have been here since 2010 and have read a lot of posts..... so by now I must be a genius..........

 

[pbromaghin]

The amount of photographic knowledge on this board is astounding.

Lots of old farts. Ask your questions while you can - they’re getting old. RIP Photo Engineer (Ron Mowrey). He knew more about Kodak film Emulsions and chemistry Than any man alive.

 

[Henning Serger]

True if it meant new product development, but we're talking about equipment sharing a lot of electromechanical components with the digital reflex cameras that is (was!) already in production so no active development investments would be required.

That is correct.
This "same parts strategy" has been used in many different industries, including the camera industry. Both during the film era and the following digital era camera manufacturers used it successfully to decrease both development costs and production costs.

Concerning our topic here - new film SLRs - we already have one successful and very prominent example: The Nikon F6.
It was developed together with the digital top prof. camera of Nikon at that time, the D2X.
Both cameras shared important parts, mainly the highly sophisticated completely new autofocus system. Which was a huge step forward at that time for Nikon, upgrading from 5 to 11 AF sensors and much more sophisticated and improved dynamic AF subject following functions.
If the D2X would have been a 35mm camera instead of the APS-C format, both cameras would have even shared more parts (like the prism for example).

But nevertheless with this development of two cameras sharing essential technology, Nikon could lower design and production costs significantly. We should not forget that at that time (2001 - 2004; design phase of these two cameras) the sales numbers for the high-end top DSLRs have been very, very low. Return on investment has been more difficult than in later years when the DSLR boom was in full swing.
Another positive effect:
Despite being a very significantly improved camera compared to the F5, the F6 could have offered to the market at a bit lower price than the F5. Because of these shared costs with the D2X.

What does that mean for today:
Let's have a look at Pentax. They have explained that if the first (compact 35mm P&S cameras) projects are successful, an AF SLR is possible / planned as well.
Currently Pentax in 35mm format is producing the K1-II. The successor K1-III is in development (official statement by Pentax), and due to the latest 'rumor mill' the K1-III could come next year.
From this K1-III Pentax could take
- the prism
- the AF system
- the exposure / metering system
- the mirror-box
- the shutter unit
for a 'film-sister' model.
All these above mentioned elements are the most important, most sophisticated and most expensive parts of an AF film SLR.
All what is left over and needed to be designed specifically for the film SLR is the body, the film chamber and the motorized film transport. But that are all relatively easy tasks compared to the list above.

So all the most expensive parts of a film AF SLR will be already there for a potential new AF film Pentax.
Sharing of those parts between the K1-III and the film SLR will reduce costs for both cameras significantly. And it will make the Pentax AF SLR more likely.
And a film AF Pentax with that K1-III technology will be an outstanding perfect film SLR, a dream camera, which has the clear potential to surpass even the amazing F6 (and I say that as a F6 lover who is using two F6 for many years now) and the Canon EOS 1V.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Sirius Glass]

Lots of old farts. Ask your questions while you can - they’re getting old. RIP Photo Engineer (Ron Mowrey). He knew more about Kodak film Emulsions and chemistry Than any man alive.

I regularly carried on conversations with Ron on the PMs about whatever post was before us.

 

[rippa_the_hutt]

And a film AF Pentax with that K1-III technology will be an outstanding perfect film SLR, a dream camera, which has the clear potential to surpass even the amazing F6 (and I say that as a F6 lover who is using two F6 for many years now) and the Canon EOS 1V.

Now I can start dreaming my next Pentax SLR

 

[DREW WILEY]

Dream the first Pentax SLR, certainly one of the best, and prior to all the nonsense features.

 

[Milpool]

These guys have some Nikons: https://shop.graysofwestminster.co.uk/product-category/limited-edition/

 

[mshchem]

That is correct.
This "same parts strategy" has been used in many different industries, including the camera industry. Both during the film era and the following digital era camera manufacturers used it successfully to decrease both development costs and production costs.

Concerning our topic here - new film SLRs - we already have one successful and very prominent example: The Nikon F6.
It was developed together with the digital top prof. camera of Nikon at that time, the D2X.
Both cameras shared important parts, mainly the highly sophisticated completely new autofocus system. Which was a huge step forward at that time for Nikon, upgrading from 5 to 11 AF sensors and much more sophisticated and improved dynamic AF subject following functions.
If the D2X would have been a 35mm camera instead of the APS-C format, both cameras would have even shared more parts (like the prism for example).

But nevertheless with this development of two cameras sharing essential technology, Nikon could lower design and production costs significantly. We should not forget that at that time (2001 - 2004; design phase of these two cameras) the sales numbers for the high-end top DSLRs have been very, very low. Return on investment has been more difficult than in later years when the DSLR boom was in full swing.
Another positive effect:
Despite being a very significantly improved camera compared to the F5, the F6 could have offered to the market at a bit lower price than the F5. Because of these shared costs with the D2X.

What does that mean for today:
Let's have a look at Pentax. They have explained that if the first (compact 35mm P&S cameras) projects are successful, an AF SLR is possible / planned as well.
Currently Pentax in 35mm format is producing the K1-II. The successor K1-III is in development (official statement by Pentax), and due to the latest 'rumor mill' the K1-III could come next year.
From this K1-III Pentax could take
- the prism
- the AF system
- the exposure / metering system
- the mirror-box
- the shutter unit
for a 'film-sister' model.
All these above mentioned elements are the most important, most sophisticated and most expensive parts of an AF film SLR.
All what is left over and needed to be designed specifically for the film SLR is the body, the film chamber and the motorized film transport. But that are all relatively easy tasks compared to the list above.

So all the most expensive parts of a film AF SLR will be already there for a potential new AF film Pentax.
Sharing of those parts between the K1-III and the film SLR will reduce costs for both cameras significantly. And it will make the Pentax AF SLR more likely.
And a film AF Pentax with that K1-III technology will be an outstanding perfect film SLR, a dream camera, which has the clear potential to surpass even the amazing F6 (and I say that as a F6 lover who is using two F6 for many years now) and the Canon EOS 1V.

Best regards,
Henning

Nikon D6 & Nikon F7

 

[pbromaghin]

Best regards,
Henning

My god, you make Me salivate like Pavlov’s dog.

 

[Henning Serger]

Now I can start dreaming my next Pentax SLR

But better than dreaming is simply contacting Pentax: They are indeed very interested in customer feedback and want to know what their potential new customers need / want.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[GregY]

We're crossing the borders.....film is indeed alive. I'm not dreaming about new 35mm cameras.....but if i were it would be a new new Mamiya 6 without electronics. Loved that camera. There are plenty of idle cameras sitting on shelves....still in working condition.

 

[Henning Serger]

Dream the first Pentax SLR, certainly one of the best,

No need at all to dream that: He can simply buy a used one.
But his comment here shows that he is probably not interested in one, or already has one. He certainly know what he wants and needs new, and it looks that is a high-performance AF film SLR.

and prior to all the nonsense features.

What you call "nonsense features", characterize hundreds of thousands of professional photographers and millions of enthusiast photographers as real progress, which has enabled them to make photographs which were impossible before, and which also increased their keeper rate enormously. Countless of outstanding photographs from press-, documentary-, sport-, action-, wildlife-, wedding-, fashion-, portrait-photographers have been made possible and much easier by technology-progress in cameras after the first Pentax SLR.
Including countless famous award-winning photographs.
That you personally don't need these features does not mean that all other photographers also don't need them.

Looking at my own photographic career, 98-99% of my best shots would not have been possible to make if I would have been forced to use the first Pentax SLR. Including my professional photo jobs.
I am extremely thankful for the technological progress in photography. It removed many limitations for my creativity, and gave me much more options.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Henning Serger]

We're crossing the borders.....film is indeed alive. I'm not dreaming about new 35mm cameras.....but if i were it would be a new new Mamiya 6 without electronics. Loved that camera. There are plenty of idle cameras sitting on shelves....still in working condition.

I can understand the general love for the Mamiya 6 and 7. Especially as the lenses for it are really excellent.
But as Mamiya does not exist anymore, and the buying company Phase One is a 100% digital company from its start on, with no roots in classic film photography, it is extremely unlikely that the Mamiya 6 and 7 will come back.
More likely is that new ways can be found to keep the current cameras running much longer than expected. There already first developments in that direction, but that would lead too far here, and being off-topic.

Best regards,
Henning