What do you think of this article, /p/? http://www.japancame

>>3070995
*market
shit

>>3070995
>Is there a marfet for that?
Not when they're competing with $10 ebay specials.

>>3070995
I didn't read this, but I seen it on instagram I think. I honestly believe a sub $500 film compact would really spark the film markets.

>>3071004
everything is overpriced now on ebay. even mju's that arent THE mju's. people are buying literally anything film that has a minimum of tangencial hype.

>>3071011
point and shit prime lens compacts are pretty much indistinguishable from one another though.

>>3071015
hype cant discern such minutiae. nowadays people are paying over $200 for a decent condition XA. what are these guys expecting to launch the new XA/mju/T6 for $180?

File: Capture.jpg (54KB, 516x671px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 516x671px

>>3071020
>over $200 for a decent condition XA
what the fuck are you talking about

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	Jaehoon
Image-Specific Properties:

>>3071021
>auctions
>uglier undesirable cousin XA2
wow bro.

>>3070995
>>3071007

It's not just compact film cameras, it's PREMIUM compact film cameras that people want. Otherwise, there's plenty if compact film cameras out there, but you'd have to settle for less-than-premium build quality and looks.

If someone manufactured one today with intent on capturing this market, it would have to be really high build quality and be very pretty.

Would that be profitable?

RANT INCOMING:

Sorry if off topic but i am mad at the camera industry.

I think digital cameras need to be simplified. Human beings really fucked this one up big time.

It's been decades and digital cameras are still not as aesthetically pleasing as film.

Personally, I just want to click a snap, man. Not a fucking 20 x 20 sqm print of my cat's nose and I DON'T WANT A 24K CARAT VIDEO and 64 MILLION ISO and 0.00000001f lens. NO THANKS. I want something which gives me the satisfaction of having controlled my shot with some skill and seeing the result.

And I don't want to waste 6 hours color correcting shit. It's not a healthy practice. It's enslavement.

It's not a hobby anymore i can enjoy. Feels more like a fucking obsession, especially to my friends who see me as an idiot.

TLDR - simplify cameras NOW

>>3071052
so...you want a fujifilm
inb4 "Im not a hipster"
sure thing you're not

>>3071055
Fuji is just a cheap imitation of a Leica. No, thanks.

I want the Nokia 1100 of cameras.

>>3071020
>>3071021
XA pricing is all over the place, but yeah some have sold for over $200 recently. You can find an XA for $50, and on the same page see someone selling one for $150.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=olympus+XA++-%28XA1%2C+XA2%2C+XA3%2C+XA4%29&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc

>>3071052
So you want a basic consumer point and shoot from literally any company.

There'll be a crowdfunded all-new point and shoot basic function camera, the functionality or quality still won't justify the price, though.

I just personally think it's better to trawl through stores like goodwill and find cameras for a few dollars as I have done so myself.

File: IMG_20170502_205059.jpg (289KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 1000x750px

I can see a company or two making a compact point and shoot again. It seems plausible. If they do I'd echo what JPH said. The simpler the better (and cheaper for them to build). Even if the camera was $500 with the following specs it'd sell out I bet.

>fixed lens 35mm
>built in flash that needs to be turned on to use, not automatically turned on when camera is powered on. This is a main gripe with many current point and shoots.
>No flash, autoflash, night flash, infinity focus settings. Basically what the T4 offered.
>Quick, center focus point AF
>manual film.afvance / rewind for Christ's sake. This is where so many 35mm fail these days. The motors get weak, the camera rewinds mid roll, etc.
>Manual iso setting.

No need for fancy film advance motors, advanced af systems, DX readers, or basically any overly complicated parts that people tend to complain about anyway.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	F-04G
Equipment Make	FUJITSU
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2017:05:02 20:51:00
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
F-Number	f/2.0
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Focal Length	4.80 mm
Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Exposure Mode	Auto
Image Height	1536
Rendering	Custom
Scene Capture Type	Standard
White Balance	Auto
Image Width	2048
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Brightness	-1.6 EV
ISO Speed Rating	778
Exposure Time	1/20 sec

>>3071101
agreed, but i think it should be full manual if it's possible to do it real cheap otherwise i'd want some control over shutter speed.

>>3071104
I agree personally, but for the masses that wouldn't sell as well. Itd also become much more bulky and expensive. People want a true compact that can slip into your pocket. Any bigger than a T4 and it'd miss the mark.

>>3071101
>Quick, center focus point AF

how do you propose to do that on a mirrorless film camera? actually, it would be pretty awesome if they brough back sonar autofocus for this particular purpose, yeah, it's doesnt work in certain situations, but it does well enough. I'm so impressed how well it works on my sx70

I'm a film user, but I think this is not happening. Fuji has axed all their film cameras. Even Cosina couldn't keep their Voigtlander film cameras in production. Prestige cameras like the T series were likely financed by oodles of mass-market point and shits, and even the mju II was a mass-market camera that happened to have some enthusiast appeal. That whole design and manufacturing structure is gone.

The GR/GRII and X100 series are the descendants of these cameras, and they're fantastic. Their files need very little post-processing to look decent.

>>3071132
Maybe not center point, but the Stylus Epic's focusing system is fantastic and super quick. That's kinda what I had in mind.

>>3071137
All those died prior to this recent surge. As JCH mentioned, people are paying up to 4 figures for a camera that could break any second and this only recently started to be the case. Fuji could rerelease a small film cam utilizing some parts of the x100 potentially.

Saying there are digital equivalents doesn't matter. It's not the same thing, even if they are better in every way on paper.

File: 26e1e3f07b5eb8c05beb2f718726558e.jpg (65KB, 1000x818px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1000x818px

>>3071132
external AF sensors, duh

There are good ways to do it, and bad ways to do it. The Ricoh GR1v is an example of well-implemented AF. Something like the MJU-I or anything that racks the lens AFTER pressing the shutter release are awful.

>>3071123
>for the masses
The "masses" generally don't give a shit about 'muh film'
Targeting enthusiasts would be the better choice.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	NIKON CORPORATION
Camera Model	NIKON D700
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS5 Windows
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/3.1
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Color Filter Array Pattern	974
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	105 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4256
Image Height	2832
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:29 19:33:24
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/22.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/22.0
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Subject Distance	0.89 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory, Return Not Detected
Focal Length	105.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	818
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3071147
By masses, I meant the film enthusiast masses. A compact point and shoot and manual settings are pretty mutually exclusive. Manual iso and exposure comp would make most film enthusiasts happy. Guess you could do aperture priority with a mechanism similar to the XA or TC-1. Having full manual control would result in a bigger and more expensive (perhaps out of the acceptable range) camera.

20 year olds getting all fussy about the 3 or 4 films that haven't been killed yet and pretending to be hard-hittin' film-shootin' real niggaz is one of my greatest sources of shameful joy.

Y'all are like a bunch of hungry dogs fighting over the last gnawed-over steak bone. There will never be another film resurgence, there is no renaissance. There is just a constant wellspring of new college kids who discover film, shoot it for two years and then move onto digital.

>>3071226
Nah, this latest resurgence is much bigger than what you're talking about. The fact Kodak is bringing back an e6 film and Ilford has been experiencing a 5% growth in film sales each year says something.

It'll never get back to the peak 2003 levels, but i wouldn't be surprised if it gets steadily more popular and then levels off at around 10-20% of 2003 levels.

>>3071052
Fresh pasta?

File: Olympus_Stylus_Epic-9762.jpg (136KB, 1000x642px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1000x642px

Give me a digital compact camera with a 35mm lens. The X100 is too big to be really compact and the 28mm of the GR is too wide for me. Why doesn't it exist? It should be possible. They could use a mft sensor.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-7
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3.6 (Windows)
Photographer	WALLACE KOOPMANS
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	150 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2013:05:26 14:00:59
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Hard
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Close View

File: 3a61c360d9313842e30ff07939c53d03.jpg (37KB, 1014x396px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1014x396px

>>3071308

RX1 would be perfect if the lens was half as long.

>>3071238
> Nah, this latest resurgence is much bigger than what you're talking about.
It won't nearly go back to 2003, probably not even 10%.

There is no reason for it to, even with old people getting caught in a wave of nostalgia and younger people thinking it's their way around paying for a more "expensive" camera (but then probably mostly figuring out film will cost more over time).

idk man I've tried a7rii, d810, and 5DSR they just don't match my Rolleiflex / 4x5 color negs

Phase One was okay but not worth the price

>>3071319
4x5 negatives look actually quite fine and I could see why they'd be a huge step up from basically any smartphone camera.

But OP explicitly considers shitty compacts.

> they just don't match my Rolleiflex / 4x5 color negs
The do basically match 4x5 as long as you use good lenses if you ask me.

Much better colour accuracy and workflow, resulting resolution is about equal (maybe a sliver worse? its so hard to judge). At least as good as 4x5 where all the colours are wrong.

>>3071052
>And I don't want to waste 6 hours color correcting shit.

This might be slightly off topic:

I know that /p/ will tell you how you should not use film as a crutch and learn how to edit your images but I think they are all missing one point. The point of the person who looks at photographs. How many people have the skills and patience to edit their photographs in pleasing ways? Especially amateurs? The popularity of digital photography made the photographs I see every day look worse. I looked through some nature photographs taken by dedicated amateurs and none of them looked as pleasing as something that would have been taken on Velvia. Maybe that's just me though since everyone else was enjoying those photographs...

>>3071327
I don't mean sharpness/resolution

>>3071309
RX1 would be perfect if it never existed or was designed by Contax desu.

>>3071333
That's the main thing I'd give the 4x5, though.

Film reproduces colors worse, is slower to work with, heavier to carry, harder to use with flashes, and so on.

File: t7hr5tO.jpg (36KB, 374x347px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 374x347px

>>3071344
>heavier to carry
In what way?
>harder to use with flashes
In what way? Hook that shit up to your PC sync port, trigger. Take photo.

>and so on
Go on.

These sure sound like limitations you've placed on the system. The only ones I'd really give it is slow fps and thinner DOF with a specified FOV.

>>3071350
>In what way?
Kilograms. If you want, also cubic centimeters.

> In what way? Hook that shit up to your PC sync port, trigger. Take photo.
In the way where you need to wire up x portable and studio flashes that you can't even remotely adjust with the camera.

Place 2+ portable flashes with wireless triggering and control them them fully from the trigger on top of the camera, or in the camera itself.

Also, possible sync speeds are higher.

> Go on.
Well, okay.

Digital can do stabilization for movement like panning/tilting or full handheld shots.

Digital can handle very long very fast bursts.

You are able to easily hand interested parties a sample shot still on site through a smartphone (promotes yourself and/or just makes people a little happy, plus definitely helps with them cooperating with your shots because now they also got "something" from it - I very often used this already).

Obviously generally doesn't require a ridiculously expensive scanner and setup to even get _to_ digital processing, which is vastly more capable.

Archival and replication of photos is much, much easier.

Lens availability is much bigger.

Well, it's not like you don't already know much of this.

>>3071357
Sounds like you're a pleb who needs crutches. I'd recommend a visit to your family doctor.

>>3071360
> crutches
I like tools. They allow me to do more difficult things faster.

Yea, I'm not really with the following crowd:
> I can do less and less efficiently, but without / with ancient tools! Man, I'm cool!

I'm actually just fine with my camera being so damn sophisticated that a 4 year old who is told where to press the shutter button can get the same job done handheld in 10 seconds as you with a tripod and 30+ minutes of more skilled work.

It sometimes allows me to do something you couldn't do well at all, and otherwise I guess I just can work faster.

I think Fuji should start making the Klasse cameras again

File: 0261_Ricoh_GR1s_(5413479583).jpg (1MB, 2000x1071px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2000x1071px

I miss having manual controls on compact cameras.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2011:01:13 13:41:35
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/7.1
Exposure Bias	1/3 EV
Subject Distance	0.51 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	105.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3071308
Yeah my dream camera is a mju ii sized full frame point and shoot

>>3071415
That's part of the reason why I was considering the X10/X20 for a while.

>>3071415
this is a great camera

>>3071681
just sold my x10. Don't make me regret it

>>3074529
It always seemed really solidly built to me for being what it was, and I like how it handles.

Fuji should start reproduction of the Classica and Klasse camera series

>>3071309
the old retracting lens digital compacts are the closest digital ever got to film compacts

>>3071424
I've been saying the same thing for years. No need for a live view screen or video or giant resolution, no need for the sharpest lens ever. Simple ovf window would do and the simplest settings screen. Physical marked dials x100/lx100 style. Though I would like full manual or at least aperture priority, and a hot shoe...

Propably the reason I got fuji stuff and an lx100.

>>3074556
Exactly. Honestly, I want an RX1 with a smaller lens. I don't care about the quality of the lens or anything. As long as it is 2.8 or brighter, and 35mm or wider.

Just a single exp comp dial would do me fine.

>>3070995
>Do you think big manufacturers are going to produce film compacts again seeing the increasing interest in film related stuff?
No.

>Should they?
No.

>Is there a marfet for that?
Hell no.

Film is only for hipsters.
Once they start mass producing again then the hipster value drops to zero and you might as well shoot digital.

>>3071309
what if they put a small lens like those film compact and put a7s sensor?
the lens doesn't have to be tack sharp, just good enough for 12 megapickle at f2.
would anyone buy it?

>>3074720
Didn't know the angry photographer posted here

>>3074726
I'd fucking buy it. I'm interesting in what https://www.instagram.com/ohsocult/ is doing. Adapting compact camera lenses to A7 cameras. Love it.

>>3074720
>hipsters
wow is this still a thing? or just memers that didnt get the memo yet?

>>3070995
what is the bottom right ? looks sick

>>3074754

It's a meme dream machine volume threem.

You can't afford one, and shouldn't want to anyway.

>>3074756
>You can't afford one
how much is it though ?

> shouldn't want to anyway
why ? i'm getting into film life and that camera suits my aesthetic. it would complete my whole style

>>3074760
Its a contax t3.

>>3074785
Actually thats on the left my bad must be my dyslexia flairing up again. Contax t2.

>>3071147
How does the GR1v AF work? I had a GR1s but the focus was quite slow and I needed to look for vertical contrast all the time to be sure it worked.

File: $_58.jpg (27KB, 640x464px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 640x464px

>>3074756
You need the TVS for the true meme dream team.

>>3071060
>Fuji is just a cheap imitation of a Leica. No, thanks.
No, he's right. You want a fuji because you can just point and click and view your snapshits without the all that post processing effort.

File: DSCF2944.jpg (680KB, 1000x750px) Image search: [Google]

680KB, 1000x750px

>>3071681
The X20 is fucking great. Here's a SOOC jpeg, I love this camera. It's definitely an unsung hero as far as I'm concerned.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X20
Camera Software	Digital Camera X20 Ver1.02
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:08:17 11:37:27
Exposure Time	1/75 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	5.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	7.10 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	750
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Unknown
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Off
Macro Mode	On
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

>>3074526
imo not as good as people make it out to be

>>3075194
And whys that?

>>3075194
hahaha it's memed to fucking oblivion thanks to daido

>Fujifilm designed the XPro1 with heavy inspiration from the Contax G series
>Fujifilm designed the X-T1 with heavy inspiration from the Contax Aria

>>>>>>>Fujifilm might make a point and shoot inspired by the Contax T series.

>>3075027
It's only good at macro. Everything else is shit because of the tiny sensor. Too many unnecessary features bump up the price and it can't even do videomode properly.

>>3075027
>xt20 is great guys
>posts ridiculously soft yet also crunchy snapshit

>>3075898

x20, not xt20.

Though neither of them are worth the price.

>>3075898
>doesn't know how to read
>can't into exif

Strong performance there bud.

>>3075213
>>3075298
I'll base this off the one I sold last year
>AF is slow and isn't very sensitive - sometimes doesn't lock when you need it. >Viewfinder frameline leds go dim so framelines, focusing distance, other indicators in the viewfinder are hard to see
>Top LCD issues are common - and it's not that some segments aren't missing permanently, they're gone like 75% of the time so it's frustrating because you know it can work but just don't for some reason. So you don't know how much film is left (e.g 18 shows up as 13 sometimes) or whether its on snap focus (3m or infinite) or autofocus.
>start up is kind of slow
>feels like there is some shutter lag

Kind of annoying because the main improvements I wanted after using a mju2 were in this - exp. control and flash not being on by default.

It just doesn't seem agile enough for snapshits, it doesn't seem reliable enough, and I'm scared of dropping the metal body vs the plastic mju body.

File: 1492752712509.png (1MB, 1434x808px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1434x808px

> no champagne/gold colored compact in production today

Why live?

>>3075027
>twin lens butterfly

>>3075910
Sounds like these things are just getting too old to be useful. That will probably happen with most of the trendy film p&s.

>>3075002
that thing's a piece of shit

>>3076126
Yeah but MUH ZEISS.

File: Screen-Shot-2012-09-11-at-10.13.28-AM[1].png (264KB, 639x449px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 639x449px

Nah, in times of netflix, ig, and fast starbucks coffee no sizable market would be invested in such a timely endeavour. instant film never even took off other than a party favor

>>3076232
what a waste of instant film

File: TX1_1.jpg (96KB, 846x1117px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 846x1117px

>>3076103
I'd totally get a modern Fuji in champagne.

>>3076103
There was the Coolpix A for a half second. Don't know why Nikon didn't continue that line.

File: hasselblad-stellar.jpg (261KB, 2000x1484px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 2000x1484px

>>3076243
The Stellar comes in a sort of titanium/champagne color too, but you have to be a special kind of stupid to pay that much for an RX100 1.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>3076239
Might be buying one of these soon

>>3076245
fuck the 2000s "lets mix plastic with metal, glass and wood" aesthetic. what a forgettable era for design.

File: disgust.jpg (71KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 600x450px

>>3076245

File: images.jpg (14KB, 455x323px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 455x323px

>>3076247
What about this though?

File: Pentax_6×7_MU.jpg (70KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 800x600px

>>3076276
i dont think the materials match or compliment each other, but that camera is so stunning one just doesnt mind, but its not a good mix.

pic related is metal+wood done right.

>>3071366

Might as well have an Artificial Intelligence take the pictures for you, what's the point.

File: pentacks46.jpg (55KB, 564x564px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 564x564px

>>3076278
And done even better is pic related

>>3076311
'no'

>>3076311
this gives me a chubby

Why is the gw690 called a texas lecia when it looks way more like a contax?

>>3076319

marketing tactic
also how much should I pay for a mint one?

>>3076333
>marketing tactic
You're an idiot.

>>3076319
a joke

>>3071330
ease of use of digital has lowered the bar for entry. more people can shoot with less and less knowledge. thus we are flooded with mediocre photography. even with experts, digital never looks as good as film. digital has only been viable for less that 20 years. film has had autistic gooks and krauts perfecting it for well over 100 years.

>>3071344
>reproduces colors worse
quality lel

>>3076348
That's absolute bullshit because stupid simple point and shoot cameras date back to 1900 with the Kodak Brownie, autofocus compacts in the 80s, and APS film in the 90s. You should really be saying that the advent of digital brought about less of an emphasis on taking good photos that summarize an event or situation, and instead freedom to take a picture of every little thing without worry of wasting a frame.

>>3076319
cause it's a rangefinder like a leica but it's big like texas

>>3071357
the only real limitations are that you have to reload after 36 shots and you can't see the photos instantly.
a nikon f5 or a canon eos 1v will do just about anything you'll need in a studio environment

>>3071415
i have this one, can confirm great camera

>>3071309
>Compact that isn't even compact
>A whole lens ring wasted on 'macro on/off'
>lens dial for aperture with fucking 1/3 stop clicks
>no marked dial for shutter speed

Whoever designed this thing got as far as "let's put a FF sensor in something smallish" for a plan, but didn't think the rest of the camera out at all. A camera for autists, by autists.

>>3078498
It's just a proof of concept/boutique/prestige model. It's neck jewelry.