Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,571   Posts: 1,545,640   Online: 963
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54

Thread: Fujifilm

  1. #11
    arealitystudios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by brian steinberger View Post
    I lost all faith in Fuji when they discontinued Neopan 400 in 120 without warning, and released no information to the public regarding it. That was in my opinion one of the most versatile films ever. It's a shame. More power to Ilford in this day in age. I will support Ilford til the end.
    I 100% agree with this statement. I thought Fuji handled that situation so poorly and I have not supported them since. These days it is Ilford who gets my dollars.

  2. #12
    Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,493
    Images
    30
    Why did you have to bring up Neopan 400 in 120.... it's early, but I will have to start drinking away the sorrow again.
    K.S. Klain

  3. #13
    hdeyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central Canada and Southern France
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    295
    Add my vote. I like to support the companies that look after and care about their customers, and I think Ilford does both. It's lucky for us that a company that is in it for the long run also happens to make great products.

  4. #14
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by brian steinberger View Post
    I lost all faith in Fuji when they discontinued Neopan 400 in 120 without warning, and released no information to the public regarding it. That was in my opinion one of the most versatile films ever. It's a shame. More power to Ilford in this day in age. I will support Ilford til the end.
    Fuji wakes up one morning and finds out that a key ingredient in a film has been banned. Now what? Well, they look at the sales. Not so hot. How much does it cost to reformulate that film? That much??? For how much in sales? Eh, it was good while it lasted.

    I'll use Acros 100 until it runs out. It's good stuff, and I don't blame a film manufacturer because a bureaucrat wants to feel good. What would you do if Ilford had to discontinue an emulsion because an agency changes a rule? We are at the mercy of a lot of factors.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,604
    Does anyone else find it ironic that a company formally titled FujiFILM is advertising digital cameras?
    But the mere fact they've kept the name should tell you something, esp about their at least keeping up appearances with corporate continuity. Maybe you folks who only shoot black and white
    can do without them, but they're still very important in the color game. And ACROS is a homerun product in is own right. We all hate to lose a favorite item from time to time, but this is nothing new,
    and as long as I can remember companies have been retailoring their lines. Blaming any single source
    doesn't help a thing.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,965
    Images
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian C. Miller View Post
    Fuji wakes up one morning and finds out that a key ingredient in a film has been banned. Now what? Well, they look at the sales. Not so hot. How much does it cost to reformulate that film? That much??? For how much in sales? Eh, it was good while it lasted.

    I'll use Acros 100 until it runs out. It's good stuff, and I don't blame a film manufacturer because a bureaucrat wants to feel good. What would you do if Ilford had to discontinue an emulsion because an agency changes a rule? We are at the mercy of a lot of factors.

    Do you know what additive was banned?

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Shooter
    35mm Pan
    Posts
    1
    well you all have points to make but iford gets my bucks too a fine film must stay in the mix

  8. #18
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    Do you know what additive was banned?
    Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS).

  9. #19

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,972
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian C. Miller View Post
    Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS).
    Which isn't present in the 35mm version of Neopan? Isn't present in any of the Ilford 120 films? Isn't a banned substance in the U.K. where Ilford films are made?

    Do you know which of these apply?

    I know there was a thread on the demise of 120 Neopan 400 but it was never very clear to me exactly what the nub of the problem was

    Thanks

    pentaxuser

  10. #20
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Klainmeister View Post
    That site still lists Astia, which has also been discontinued.

    Every time I say that here someone challenges it, then someone else posts the proof. I don't recall the proof so if someone wants to look it up, go right ahead. I was content to drink in mourning.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin