>
> But for Fuji? she will be the big loser if people go digital, no
> selling of film, much less prints. Since people will only take the
> better one to print (for my family photo, may be less than 1/4) for
> the rest just left them on computer. Fuji is not a big DC supplier nor
> a CCD/CMOS manufacturer, what benefit?
>
> C.H.Ling
That's a hard question to answer. First let me explain that my comments were
more of an
attempt to inject a little bit of paranoid humor into the subject, not to point
out a
serious concern of mine. Do I believe that we are "conditioned" to believe
advertising
claims at face value? To believe that something is "NEW AND IMPROVED" just
because it
says so on the label? Yes, emphatically.
What benefit for Fuji?
Well I can only speculate. One, digital imaging technology is still in
its infancy
and changes are still rapidly occurring. There are only a few companies that
have the
resources or commitment to ride the "Bleeding Edge" to develop the technology,
work out
manufacturing flaws and survive. By your comments Fuji does not seem to be one
of these
companies. So, it makes sense that they would limit their exposure to the
market until
digital imaging development begins to flatten out, meaning when development and
research
approach the limits of current technology to manufacture new devices. Then I
can see
where Fuji and many others will quickly expand into the digital market,
reliable mass
manufacturing will make it affordable and profitable for them. This will also
drive the
price of digital cameras way down to where a high resolution digital camera is
affordable as say a Kodak Instamatic. Already many low-resolution cameras
640x480 are
well under $100 US, and 1024x768 cameras are following suit. Making them
attractive to
first time buyers. Also due to the quality and durability, the cameras will
require
replacement after a few years. Making first time buyers repeat buyers. This last
statement made on the belief that we live in a disposable society. Also the
price
"professional" digital SLR cameras will continue to drop, although I think
they'll
always be in the +$2500 range and out of reach for most consumers. And people
will
always want hard copies so printers, inks and paper will be more widely
manufactured as
well as new gizmos for displaying digital images. Is it possible that Fuji and
Kodak
have shot themselves in the foot with digital imaging? Its possible, but I
think they
will eventually profit from it more than film products.
None of what I've said now or in my previous post can or will happen
overnight.
It will take a few more years maybe another decade, but I firmly believe that
it will
happen. How long will film last? I think as long as most of us on the list will
live,
but I believe our choices of types and speeds of film will become increasingly
narrower
and more expensive.
My warning signs:
Lowering costs of digital cameras.
Stronger advertising touting digital over film.
Narrowing lines of film-based products. (film, paper, chemicals....)
C*n*n, N*k*n, Olympus? introducing digital backs for the serious amateur.
Charles Packard
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|