Fuji UK Situation
Ok I have finally got somewhere. This pertains to the UK situation and as you read you will see how this seems to work:
Each country decides what to import from Fuji Japan depending on demand, so what is not available in one country to another doesn't necessarily constitute discontuation outright.
So in the UK these are the changes
- Reala 35mm is no longer imported and is effectively no longer going to be available in the UK
- Reala 120 is a big seller and will continue to be imported into the UK
- Pro 160S - 35mm no longer imported into the UK, 120 and other sheet sizes will continue but Quickloads are discontinued. This will be rebranded as Pro 160NS later in 2010 (sorry I originally said 160NPS, that was a mistake, I had written the old-old name!)
- Pro 160C - the word is this: "120 is in short supply in the UK at the moment , but we have coming back in stock mid April." -- this doesn't confirm 160C is discontinued worldwide as we have heard but for now the UK will continued to get this film.
- Pro 400H - No changes, all will continue except Quickloads as noted.
- Pro 800Z - again I quote "35mm is not a very popular line, but I've not heard it will be dropped. 120 has already been dropped." (dropped meaning no longer imported by Fuji UK)
- Neopan 400 120 - As we all know by now, this is gone worldwide and is discontinued outright.
- Neopan 1600 - Still popular in the UK so we will continue to see it, not sure about Germany. No mentions of 120 format.
There is no mention of a Neopan 400 replacement in 120, as far as I can suggest, a new version is little more than a rumour at the moment. We will just have to see. I personally have never used Neopan 400, I'm more a TMax 400/HP5+ or Tri-X person at that speed.
So the message is, want to keep 800Z, buy more if you can, if you don't, it will probably not be imported much in the way 120 format 800Z isn't.
I still thought Reala 35mm was more popular than it evidently is in the UK.
So it looks like we can still buy Reala 35mm but it'll have to be from abroad or as a grey import I guess. I guess the same could be said for 160S in 35mm too.
So it's not a case of mass discontination, just a case of more selective importing.
I still think 160C is at risk give Fuji Japan's discontinuation notices but for now it'll still be around.
Last edited by lilserenity; 03-18-2010 at 10:31 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Vicky, those national differences have been hinted at before. But in this latest Fuji statement there is a reference to the Tokyo headqarter, although they have Reala still listed.
I guess we won't get any wiser. We'll have to wait and see what will be offered.
This has come directly from Fuji UK, and the reason I iterate this all here is because the "hinting at" is the problem ,there's been nothing firm.
Originally Posted by AgX
This sounds pretty firm from the UK situation and I cannot possibly comment about each other country's situation.
Therefore I am inclined to stand behind what I have been told as it's been pretty clear. As I see it the only question mark hangs over 160C in the UK at least.
Id hate to lose Reala and 160S. And 800Z even.
If it is true, that Neopan 400/120 was cancelled simply because the used surfactant has been banned for environmental reasons, than this does not imply much faith in Fuji's will to cope with the increased dynamic in film production business.
Also, a possible gap of a few months when 160S/C will be sold out in Q2 until the successor will arrive in Q3 is also quite strange and does not look very professional - apart from the horrendous information politics by Fujifilm. BTW, if you thought Toyota was unbeatable stupid, you might have to reconsider.
Wa all know that the colour film market is shrinking and colour film will die once the movie industry completely switches to digital. But at the moment it seems to be killed by lack in professionalism first.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I must have missed this somewhere in the thread, but surfactants can be easily replaced / exchanged with other surfactants in my experience. There are probably thousands of them on the market.
Originally Posted by GeorgK
The substance concerned, according to internet sources, is perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). Why would this particular chemical be so important for the production of Neopan 400 in 120 format?
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
Well, I have not seen the sources. That is an anionic surfactant and those are rather common. Triton-X 200 is one like that IIRC. Many of them are interchangable. But, use of an ionic surfactant indicates some kind of support/chemical interaction that must be overcome by having a charged (Ionic) surfactant. Very unusual if true. Perhaps it serves several purposes. This is not a surfactant that one would normally choose.
Can you give a reference?
I believe that it is harmful, I just cannot figure out why they chose this particular surfactant (or antistat) when others are readily available and much less toxic and expensive.