mercer Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 I do think the D16 Monochrome wasn't priced properly... If that camera came in under $2000, there would have definitely had been a large niche market for it. But then again, I'm sure it was priced appropriately for what it cost to manufacture and unfortunately this is why it is very difficult for smaller camera companies to get market share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted June 28, 2016 Super Members Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 6:31 PM, mercer said: I do think the D16 Monochrome wasn't priced properly... If that camera came in under $2000, there would have definitely had been a large niche market for it. But then again, I'm sure it was priced appropriately for what it cost to manufacture and unfortunately this is why it is very difficult for smaller camera companies to get market share. Expand Its like the Leica Monochrom I had. It cost more than my M9, still worth it. mercer 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 8:00 PM, Mattias Burling said: Its like the Leica Monochrom I had. It cost more than my M9, still worth it. Expand I love b&w but I don't think I would ever pay more for the D16-M than I would for the D16. Leica is another story I suppose. I can't believe you are considering selling off your second D16? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veraguth Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 I cannot understand why any of the big companies did not buy the digital bolex enterprise after their success with the Kickstarter campaign and the actual product delivery, proving that there was a potential market and desire for that kind of camera and that they had the know-how to make a great camera. Could you imagine if for example Fuji had bought it? It would make much sense for them if they wanted to enter the cinema camera market. They just had to get that d16 body/expertise and update the c mount to a x-mount with full electronic compatibility and then add a super 35mm 8 megapixel sensor (kind of c100/300) for 4K compressed into mjpeg codec with Fuji film emulation. Digital Bolex by Fuji Film straight out of the camera. Man, I would just give my money to them with pure joy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 10:19 PM, veraguth said: I cannot understand why any of the big companies did not buy the digital bolex enterprise after their success with the Kickstarter campaign and the actual product delivery, proving that there was a potential market and desire for that kind of camera and that they had the know-how to make a great camera. Could you imagine if for example Fuji had bought it? It would make much sense for them if they wanted to enter the cinema camera market. They just had to get that d16 body/expertise and update the c mount to a x-mount with full electronic compatibility and then add a super 35mm 8 megapixel sensor (kind of c100/300) for 4K compressed into mjpeg codec with Fuji film emulation. Digital Bolex by Fuji Film straight out of the camera. Man, I would just give my money to them with pure joy. Expand It sounds like a totally different camera that Fuji could make at any time without buying Digital Bolex. Fuji should definitely make that camera, but where are the ingredients from the D16 that made it such a special camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Punk Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 10:19 PM, veraguth said: I cannot understand why any of the big companies did not buy the digital bolex enterprise after their success with the Kickstarter campaign and the actual product delivery, proving that there was a potential market and desire for that kind of camera and that they had the know-how to make a great camera. Could you imagine if for example Fuji had bought it? It would make much sense for them if they wanted to enter the cinema camera market. They just had to get that d16 body/expertise and update the c mount to a x-mount with full electronic compatibility and then add a super 35mm 8 megapixel sensor (kind of c100/300) for 4K compressed into mjpeg codec with Fuji film emulation. Digital Bolex by Fuji Film straight out of the camera. Man, I would just give my money to them with pure joy. Expand Fuji would be the last company to buy Digital Bolex because the sensor inside is a Kodak CCD - likewise as with the Ikonoskop. From back when Kodak were frantically selling off patents and IP to keep them afloat before they mismanaged themselves into oblivion. When I worked for them, I actually witnessed a Kodak manager tell me that digital would never replace consumer and professional film cameras...this was while the demolition crew were surveying the factory floor of the film processing facility. Mattias Burling, kaylee, Inazuma and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted June 28, 2016 Super Members Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 8:53 PM, mercer said: I can't believe you are considering selling off your second D16? Expand Believe me, I'm going over the numbers again and again. The problem is that I shoot film every day. Its a running expense. My YouTube is just a hobby. So is my freelance. For work I never use my own gear, never have. So a Bolex is just a hobby for me. Which is OK. But to tell my GF that I need to spend all that cash on both film and digital video doesn't feel right. Its how it is unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
veraguth Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 10:46 PM, Hans Punk said: Fuji would be the last company to buy Digital Bolex because the sensor inside is a Kodak CCD - likewise as with the Ikonoskop. From back when Kodak were frantically selling off patents and IP to keep them afloat before they mismanaged themselves into oblivion. When I worked for them, I actually witnessed a Kodak manager tell me that digital would never replace consumer and professional film cameras...this was while the demolition crew were surveying the factory floor of the film processing facility. Expand Companies buy rival companies all the time. And after all, why should Fuji care about Kodak? Kodak is no longer the owner of the sensor. Even the company who bought the Kodak sensor division was already sold again. And more, Fuji left the cinema film market. They are not even competing there. Finally, and the most important aspect, the digital bolex and the x-series speak for the same kind of people: those who want that film, old-school feeling without too much of a hassle. People buy the x-series because they get great JPEG colors, film emulation and old school ergonomics. People who bought the digital bolex wanted the closest color to film and the experience of using a super 8/super 16 camera. Bingo. And, then, as I said, they just needed to change the sensor if the sensor was a problem. It was a missed opportunity for FUJI in my opinion, and even for Kodak, which could become meaningful again for filmmakers instead of creating that ugly, new super 8 camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 10:52 PM, Mattias Burling said: Believe me, I'm going over the numbers again and again. The problem is that I shoot film every day. Its a running expense. My YouTube is just a hobby. So is my freelance. For work I never use my own gear, never have. So a Bolex is just a hobby for me. Which is OK. But to tell my GF that I need to spend all that cash on both film and digital video doesn't feel right. Its how it is unfortunately. Expand Gotcha. It is an expensive holiday... I guess I just figured with the traffic you get on your YouTube channel, that it paid for your toys. I would love to see a feature film of yours made with that D16 though... Am a big fan of your work. Mattias Burling 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Punk Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 11:03 PM, veraguth said: Companies buy rival companies all the time. And after all, why Fuji should care about Kodak? Kodak is no longer the owner of the sensor. Even the company who bought the Kodak sensor division was already sold again. And more, Fuji left the cinema film market. They are not even competing there. Finally, and the most important aspect, the digital bolex and the x-series speak for the same kind of people: those who want that film, old-school feeling without too much of a hassle. People buy the x-series because they get great JPEG colors, film emulation and old school ergonomics. People who bought the digital bolex wanted the closest color to film and the experience of using a super 8/super 16 camera. Bingo. And, then, as I said, they just needed to change the sensor if the sensor was a problem. It was a missed opportunity for FUJI in my opinion, and even for Kodak, which could become meaningful again for filmmakers instead of creating that ugly, new super 8 camera. Expand I take your point, but what makes the Digital Bolex and the Ikonoskop create such lovely images were those Kodak originated sensors. Once Kodak turned out their pockets and sold their mothers to whoever would take them, it was never going to be in a large company's conception to cut and paste legitimately purchased IP from a competitor (current or past) - to then resell into a new product. Shareholders would raise an eyebrow or two when they read in the acquisition reports that a current Fuji product contained at its core, purchased and repurposed Kodak IP from 10 years ago. This is my wild guess why Ikonoskop and Digital Bolex were allowed/ could have the run it had - it could be feasible that the access to licence could have been on an agreed limited term from whoever owns the rights now. In a nutshell it appears to not be a sustainable economic viability to continue these cameras - at that price point...to effectively a very niche market....even when specifically made for that niche market in the case of the Digital Bolex. I agree that what Kodak should do is use that sweet Nolan/ Tarantino magnet money to kick that ridiculous super 8 hybrid camera to the curb, and put a sweet CCD they hid in one of their dusty draws into a S16 digital cine camera of their own. Make it accessible to the Indie/film school crowd and keep Kodak as a brand that younglings will grow up associating with film making...albeit digital. I'm not belittling Digital Bolex in so much sensor talk, what they did took balls and big credit to them for sticking to their plan for the D16 and keeping it niche. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 I was looking at their site last week because I had read that they had a simplistic raw conversion software and while I was there I had read and watched all there was to read and watch and I can honestly say that the raw they were using in those D16s was nothing short of gorgeous. It was like a perfect mix between 5d ML and BM raw and in a lot of ways better looking. I also loved the small videos featuring their Kish lenses... Specifically the 18mm. If anyone has one they want to sell, keep me in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 On 6/28/2016 at 10:52 PM, Mattias Burling said: Believe me, I'm going over the numbers again and again. The problem is that I shoot film every day. Its a running expense. My YouTube is just a hobby. So is my freelance. For work I never use my own gear, never have. So a Bolex is just a hobby for me. Which is OK. But to tell my GF that I need to spend all that cash on both film and digital video doesn't feel right. Its how it is unfortunately. Expand Why don't you rent your gear ? You get money and can still use it very often Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandido Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Even thought I’ve never been a fan of the 70’s image produced by the Digital Bolex, I recognize that it has a very “organic” look and no rolling shutter effect due to the CCD global shutter. So it is sad to see another CCD camera going to the graveyard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted June 30, 2016 Super Members Share Posted June 30, 2016 On 6/29/2016 at 7:31 AM, Justin Bacle said: Why don't you rent your gear ? You get money and can still use it very often Expand Because its to expensive. Its much cheaper to buy and I usually turn profit. For work is a different matter. On 6/29/2016 at 10:10 PM, Bandido said: Even thought I’ve never been a fan of the 70’s image produced by the Digital Bolex, I recognize that it has a very “organic” look and no rolling shutter effect due to the CCD global shutter. So it is sad to see another CCD camera going to the graveyard. Expand Hopefully something new comes along. The DB team has hinted many times that they are looking at possible new models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 On 6/30/2016 at 4:28 AM, Mattias Burling said: Because its to expensive. Its much cheaper to buy and I usually turn profit. For work is a different matter. Expand I was talking about renting the gear you bought in order to make a little profit out of your gear when you don't use it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted June 30, 2016 Administrators Share Posted June 30, 2016 On 6/30/2016 at 4:28 AM, Mattias Burling said: Because its to expensive. Its much cheaper to buy and I usually turn profit. For work is a different matter. Hopefully something new comes along. The DB team has hinted many times that they are looking at possible new models. Expand I have thought about renting my Cookes and C500, the only equipment I owe that can take the rough and tumble. People really do wang rental stuff about. I'd have to have insurance, or give it to a company and allow them to take a share of the profit, but it's still a worry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 On 6/30/2016 at 7:45 AM, Justin Bacle said: I was talking about renting the gear you bought in order to make a little profit out of your gear when you don't use it Expand The word you're looking for is "lend" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 On 6/30/2016 at 8:21 AM, Inazuma said: The word you're looking for is "lend" Expand Oooo you're right. Thank you for the english correction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted June 30, 2016 Super Members Share Posted June 30, 2016 On 6/30/2016 at 7:45 AM, Justin Bacle said: I was talking about renting the gear you bought in order to make a little profit out of your gear when you don't use it Expand Ahh, yeah I've thought about it. But it seems like a lot of work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 On 6/30/2016 at 9:12 AM, Mattias Burling said: Ahh, yeah I've thought about it. But it seems like a lot of work Expand You can contact a rental place and offer your gear as available for lend. They'll be happy to add them to their catalog and contact you if someone asks to rent your gear. It's pretty easy plus you don't have to deal with insurances as the rental company will use theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now