Pentax drops production of 35mm film cameras.

Discussion in 'Pentax' started by Alexander Zuev, Apr 29, 2004.

  1. According to the iXBT news site (Russian computer related news server)
    04.27.2004 president of Pentax corporation Fumio Urano said that Pentax
    is going to discontinue all the 35mm film cameras, both SLR and compact.
    Pentax will concentrate on producing digital cameras and professional
    medium format equipment.
    Alexander Zuev, Apr 29, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Subject: Pentax drops production of 35mm film cameras.
    If it sounds like a troll, looks like atroll, smells like a troll, then


    Does Pentax know about this? ;-)

    Mark Twain says that the rumors about Pentax's death in 35mm film cameras is
    greatly exagerated. Why? "Because Peppridge Farms remembers".

    Lewis Lang

    Photography without a mind is like Kodachrome without sunshine - LL
    Come visit LEWISVISION at...

    To have pleasure in responding to my e-mails first you must remove the pain
    King of Paine, Apr 29, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. I gave up. Then what?

    Sorry, it's in Russian.
    Have no idea.

    Alexander Zuev, Apr 29, 2004
  4. Alexander Zuev

    PCportinc Guest

    PCportinc, Apr 29, 2004
  5. Alexander Zuev

    Peter Chant Guest

    It seems a bit odd. They have only one 35mm digital SLR that has
    only been on the market a few months. A friend of mine has read
    an article stating that they have re-launched the MZ-5n but cannot
    find a web reference or buy one, except for the single old stock
    example at a high price.

    Are they getting out of the SLR market altogether?
    Peter Chant, Apr 29, 2004
  6. To be honest - he is not Russian.
    Alexander Zuev, Apr 29, 2004
  7. Alexander Zuev

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Pentax drops production of 35mm film cameras.
    Then it probably is a troll. But it seems in this case you were not trolling
    (making trouble by posting false reports to stir up interest/arguments), though
    I would question the validity of your Russian site that makes these claims
    about Pentax cameras, unless Pentax is discontinuing its film cameras in Russia
    alone, which also seems quite unlikely but who knows...
    My browser window is not loading up properly when I try to access Babelfish
    (AltaVista) for translation. Either way, I guess we'll know for sure if by the
    next big PHOTO EXPO PLUS SHOW in New York City whether this rumor has any truth
    to it.
    Lewis Lang, Apr 29, 2004
  8. Alexander Zuev

    PCportinc Guest

    I am a native speaker. trust me when I tell you thats what it said. Whether
    true or not who knows.
    PCportinc, Apr 30, 2004
    Re: Pentax drops production of 35mm film cameras.

    I ran that through a Russian to English translator:

    "PENTAX Fumio Urano has officially declared that, despite of a world
    recognition and uniqueness of film cameras PENTAX, the corporation stops
    manufacture both compact, and mirror analog chambers. From all ruler of film
    cameras PENTAX will continue manufacture extremely professional
    sredneformatnoj phototechnics. Thus, corporation PENTAX became the first
    company from so-called " the big five " photobrands, which completely will
    concentrate on the most actual for today to a ruler of digital cameras of a
    various class (including, professional and amateur digital "zerkalkah"), and
    also manufacture of "hybrid" photo-videos of chambers. (http: // hard104309id) "

    This was not unexpected, and the other second and third tier film camera
    makers will do the same soon. Expect Olympus and Konica-Minolta to exit the
    film camera business soon.. Sigma will likely exit the camera business for
    both digital and film, while continuing to do manufacturing for other

    There may still be a small market for low end point and shoot film cameras,
    but companies like Vivitar can fill that niche.
    The two top-tier companies will probably phase out most of their film SLRs,
    leaving one amateur, one prosumer, and one or two pro models each.

    Digital Camera Short List
    Steven M. Scharf, Apr 30, 2004
  10. Alexander Zuev

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Pentax drops production of 35mm film cameras.
    This is the typical digital fantasy/"wishlist" of "film is dead, long live
    digital" and it simply isn't true. Companies will continue to make film cameras
    along with digital. There's a market for both. Minolta just brought out two or
    three new film SLRs. I wouldn't be surprised to see Pentax come out with more
    *ist film bodies either above the current entry level "baby" *ist. Whether the
    Russian website is just rumor or is refering to Pentax distributution (sales)
    of film cameras in Russia is neither here nor there, soon we will know the
    truth and not mere idle speculation from you, me or this Russian "news"
    Lewis Lang, Apr 30, 2004
  11. </snip>

    I'm not personally a digital fantasiser, as I think it's quite sad in
    some ways that film is appearing to be replaced by digital, and we are
    coming to the end of an era. But to be frank, film technology is at
    its limits, and progress has been slowing down with regards to
    negative film and printing in the last several years. Digital media
    is expanding in leaps and bounds as we discuss this - surely the
    writing is on the wall that real question is 'when' will film SLR stop
    being made?, and not whether.

    Admittedly, we're always going to have film around, but when it stops
    becoming a mass-market business - who's going to pay for the
    specialised costs of producing the film, and then printing it? I can
    hardly afford it even at the moment (student). How long this is in
    the future, one cannot know - but I'm sure that for the same initial
    cost, within my lifetime, I will be able to buy a superior digital
    camera in many ways to it's film alternative.

    I look forward to this - with technology advances being rapid in
    colour calibration and reproduction, I will be able to have full
    control over my prints, which is something only a few people are
    priveliged enough to have, in terms of time and the resources, in the
    film side of things (excluding slide to an extent).

    It's time to let go .... and embrace something new and better.

    Duncan James Murray, Apr 30, 2004
  12. Alexander Zuev

    Alan Browne Guest

    Steven M. Scharf wrote:

    Wonder why Konica-Minolta released a few SLR's recently? Maybe they
    didn't read the cited article and don't know to stop?
    Alan Browne, Apr 30, 2004
  13. Alexander Zuev

    ~ Darrell ~ Guest

    Rumours are always interesting, I note they always seem to come from some
    obscure site. The recent rumours I heard was Kodak not making film, Nikon
    will stop making film based cameras, and Pentax making a full-frame digital
    back for the 645.
    ~ Darrell ~, Apr 30, 2004
  14. Alexander Zuev

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Pentax drops production of 35mm film cameras.
    Nobody at Minolta reads Russian... except for those who write the instruction
    manuals in Russian, of course ;-), I'm kidding of course, they write the
    instruction manuals in Greek, algebra and calculus with Martian as a second
    language ;-)

    PS - Of course I'm kidding again, Minolta's instruction manuals are quite clear
    and well laid out (especially for the Maxxum 7), which I guess might make them
    an exception to the rule.
    Lewis Lang, Apr 30, 2004
  15. Alexander Zuev

    Lewis Lang Guest

    Subject: Re: Pentax drops production of 35mm film cameras.
    ....and the ever present Hasselblad will change its name to Holga and come out
    with a series of interchangable lenses based on Fuji... wait a minute, they did
    that already with the H1! ;-) (Actually the H1 is quite well constructed but
    Hasselblad/Zeiss missed the boat on not including Zeiss lenses on it).
    Lewis Lang, Apr 30, 2004
  16. Alexander Zuev

    Peter Chant Guest

    Why on earth would Pentax stop making film SLR's when they have only
    one digital body? It would make more sense if Canon stopped making
    film SLR's as they seem to have a fairly respectable range.

    At the moment the company that abandons film SLRs abandons the
    highstreet 250 pound SLR market. I would have thought that that or
    the second hand route is how people start using SLRs. How many people
    buy a digital SLR as a first camera?
    Peter Chant, Apr 30, 2004
  17. Alexander Zuev

    Lewis Lang Guest

    I'm not personally a digital fantasiser, as I think it's quite sad in
    And you know this for a fact? The death of film, just like the death of
    painting has been foretold for years. Yet both go on in their own niches.

    But to be frank, film technology is at
    JUst the oppositte. There is an Agfa patent that allows film to be 10x? less
    grainy for the speed. We have just seen the release of Velvia 100 (probably a
    dream for most slide photographers since Velvia was released in '89/'90). SOme
    of the best slide films and negative films ever are being produced and will
    continue to be produced form the classic Tri-X to E100VS to 100GX to the Portra
    series of color negative and B&W chromogenic films, to all the Fuji Sensias,
    Astias, and Provias in various speeds and flavors, to Agfa's excellent Vista
    films, to Konica's Impresa 50, to all the aformentioned and Ilford's line of
    black and white films to name a few. Never has there been such a diversity of
    films. Plus I read that third world demand is high for color neg and one time
    use cameras with that film inside it, which wil insure some kind(s) of color
    neg film being made into the future.

    Digital media
    I have yet to see that wall lest it be adigital advertisement marketing hype.
    See above.

    I can
    Over 10 years ago when I was a photo student, it was the same deal, film is
    always expensive, but you get what you pay for, quality and archivability that
    will last last anywhere for 25-200+ years without the need for recopying. Many
    of the CDs/DVDs may be useless coasters well beyond the first part of that
    figure. Plus film images can be restored even with fading but once digital is
    gone its gone (unless you've made/retained some kind of photographic print or
    other long lasting hard copy of the image).

    How long this is in
    Not in the ways that count to me - archivability, choice of color pallettes and
    grain signatures that can only be simulated but never attained, more
    information (hue/resolution/tonal gradations) on a single image than can ever
    be attained by any sub-35mm-sized sensor, true wide angle and ultra wide angle
    without the need for extra and/or expensive digi lenses on an affordable (under
    $1,000 USD) DSLR, and the plain old natural look of film (most digital looks
    like high res video, very plasticky, cold, clear and "antiseptic" with easily
    burned out highlights), etc.…
    Anybody can rent a color darkroom or even a computer with Photshop on it and
    color calibration devices/software have been available for matching the monitor
    to output for years.
    Its time to get real, digital is not "new" (only new to the masses) nor is it
    better (just better marketed to the mindless masses). For those who want
    quality no portable DSLR digital can approach currently - especially in large
    sized blow ups, film is the answer and will continue to be the answer. It wil
    be interesting to see if there are any complaints or lawsuits that will affect
    the digi industry as those early 21st century digital photo memories drop out
    of existence in just a few years hence while the Kodachromes and Ektachromes
    and possibly even Fujichromes on emakes will still be in existence years after
    their makers have long passed away. Digital has its uses, but mostly for image
    processing and temporary storage and quick and convenient PJ and possibly some
    catalog use. Digital is even more temporary than film "whose dies may change in
    time" but the film boxs' warning is kind of ironic since in time even if the
    film dies do change there will most likely be something there from the films we
    shoot today to restore where as digital media will be all but "erased" by time
    and technological obsolescence and archival short-sightedness due to marketing
    greed. Digital's dirty little secret is never mentioned in the DSLR ads and
    those who claim hundreds of years for inkjet permanence with special ink sets
    are only fooling themselves and their public since none of their materials'
    claimed longevity has been tested in _real time_ (not the "accelerated aging"
    conditions of light intensity and heat which are supposed to test longevity but
    are actually mere tests of "accelerated aging conditions" not real aging which
    has quite a different set of time/temp/RH/lighting insity parameters). Digital
    is a marketing bargain with the devil when it comes to the _real_ (not just
    claimed) longevity of its formats and media as people are wiling to trade today
    (quick easy pictures of lesser quality and longevity than film) for tommorrow
    (the necessity to constantly recopy onto new media and formats until the copier
    and/or their descendants die and/or the hardware/file format and/or media
    become obsolete and/or unreadable and the info/data/pictures becomes lost
    forever - at least 100 years from now there will still be the possibility of
    some films surviving enough to be restored, much like the 19th century b&w
    plates/roll film, 100 years from now how much of this era's digital memories,
    especially those of the masses who buy the stuff, not to mention the PJ stuff,
    will still be visible?, very little if any would be my guess but time will
    tell) for instant results and no film/developing.

    Ironically it is film that is the future as digital is no more than at best a
    temporary storage medium and disaster control for backup copies. But people
    will always go for the cheapest and not the best nor the longest lasting. Those
    who want quality and longevity will continue to use film at whatever price it
    is or becomes. For some, the price of digital (lack of longevity and lack of
    high quality enlargemnet potential and lack of a non-plasticky/antiseptic look)
    is and will continue to be too high a price to pay.
    Lewis Lang, Apr 30, 2004
  18. It has WHAT??? The progress made with colour negative film over the
    last 5 to 10 years has been simply amazing, especially considering that
    the standards had already been very high.

    You can't possibly have tried films like Kodak Royal Supra 200 or you
    wouldn't be proclaiming such nonsense.
    ....and still has a long way to go before it will get anywhere near the
    quality, resolution *and* the dynamic range of negative film.

    I've been doing cityscape night photography with a friend, last weekend.
    Him with a Canon 10D, me with a 40+ years old Contarex loaded with RS
    200 and a Noblex 150 with Agfa Optima 100. I've done my usual
    rule-of-thumb 45 secs at f8 thing. He's been bracketing up and down the
    scale. I'd hate to have his burnt-out highlights and still no detail in
    the shadows.

    I admit I'm more than a little tired of hauling a boot full of analog
    equipment around and I had staged the above exercise as a test for my
    own mid-term decision-making. My hopes to go digital anytime soon have
    been shattered beyond my wildest expectations.

    Ralf R. Radermacher, Apr 30, 2004
  19. Alexander Zuev

    Nick C Guest

    Digital is neither new nor is it better.

    I don't often use my digicams, but two nights ago I to decided to use them
    for some night shots. The D100 with a Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 lens did a fairly
    decent reproduction of a scene, with the exception that deep red neon lights
    photoraphed as redish-orange. The Olympus 5050 photographed the same scene,
    with exception that the deep red neon lights photographed as yellow.

    Haven't encountered that severity of color shifting using film. Personally,
    it's my opinion that those that think digicams are the greatest need some

    Nick C, May 1, 2004
  20. Alexander Zuev

    Frank Pittel Guest

    : In article <8ytkc.320375$>,
    : > Rumours are always interesting, I note they always seem to come from some
    : > obscure site. The recent rumours I heard was Kodak not making film, Nikon
    : > will stop making film based cameras, and Pentax making a full-frame digital
    : > back for the 645.

    : Why on earth would Pentax stop making film SLR's when they have only
    : one digital body? It would make more sense if Canon stopped making
    : film SLR's as they seem to have a fairly respectable range.

    Pentax is primarily a maker of medium format cameras. They haven't been a major
    player in 35mm cameras in years.


    Keep working millions on welfare depend on you
    Frank Pittel, May 2, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.