fjablo wrote:
I also dislike not being able to set ISO manually. Usually I shoot Gold 200 at ISO 125 and HP5 at 800-1600… but I guess there are different cameras for that
..to be fair there have been very very few compact point and shoot cameras where you could manually set the ISO.
But fortunately, changing the DX code on the film catridge is really easy - so you can really set the ISO to whatever you want 💁♂️
Tina Kino wrote:
..to be fair there have been very very few compact point and shoot cameras where you could manually set the ISO.
But fortunately, changing the DX code on the film catridge is really easy - so you can really set the ISO to whatever you want 💁♂️
I've been shooting film for years and had no idea one could alter the DX code on the film cartridge. This is really useful info for my GR1s (even though it has full time exp comp).
shujert wrote:
I've been shooting film for years and had no idea one could alter the DX code on the film cartridge. This is really useful info for my GR1s (even though it has full time exp comp).
Ha, you're welcome 🙂
I remember how this realisation was a nice lightbulb-moment for me as well a couple years ago.
It's just a couple of rectangles in the right places that are either conductive or not, so you scratch away the black paint to expose the bare metal beneath, or tape little pieces of tape on areas of bare metal.
I always used the (German) Wiki page for "DX Coding" as there's a cheat sheet (as below) - just double check which way around you need to hold the film catridge (you will want to change the upper row to what's displayed in the cheat sheet) -
A few places make stickers that do this. Freestyle has some but they don't go up to 800 which is annoying. So I made my own with tin foil and it worked fine.
I had mentioned in a post above that they had not even created tooling let alone made a prototype.
This is their reply to the video you linked:
“Most important to mention is that we’re not charging anyone €339 or €399. The refundable €5 reservation is only to better understand the market demand. This approach provides us with valuable insights and helps us to plan future/follow-up production batches, ensuring a smooth(er) roll-out since with that we get a clear picture of the interest. That’s all. The financial risk to bring this passion of a big part of the community to life is fully on us.
That being said, thank you for taking the time to review our project.
We understand your concerns, and we want to address them directly while clarifying any misconceptions. This project is not something dreamed up overnight, it has been years in the making, driven by our passion for creating a camera that many in the community have been asking for.
Key points:
Refundable Deposit: The €5 deposit is fully refundable, ensuring there is no financial risk to the people that made a reservation. The full risk lies with us.
Reputable Business: We have always operated with integrity and transparency. This project is a genuine effort to bring a thoughtfully designed product to market.
No Sponsorships or Influence: None of the content created about our project on YouTube has been sponsored or influenced by us
Opportunity for Dialogue: While we respect your right to critique, it’s unfortunate that you didn’t reach out for clarification before labelling this project as a scam. We would have gladly answered your questions directly. Also about the reservation system, since you seem to have not understood that correctly.
Addressing Specific Concerns:
“Throwing €400 at something that might never exist”
The deposit is €5, not €400, and fully refundable. We’ve ensured that people that made a reservation face no financial risk.
Comparison to other projects (e.g., Reflex, FilmNeverDie):
We are aware of past projects that didn’t materialize, but we're not them. We’ve shared detailed specifications and realistic timelines, and we’re collaborating with trusted manufacturing partners.
Photos not taken with the camera:
We’ve been open about this from the start. The images shared are placeholders, as we’re still finalizing the development sample. This has been outlined clearly in our roadmap. As this is something we’ve heard a few times we will add a remark to every photo saying “images for reference”.
Camera is still in development:
That’s correct. We are in the final stages of development and have shared transparent updates about the process.
3D renders not being final:
The back part was changed based on some great input from the community so we are addressing those as we speak. The current 3D renders are not manufacturing-ready CAD files. We will have an updated model on the landing probably next week or the week after.
Lens specifications:
The lens uses a Double Gauss construction, it’s not the most logical choice for a compact camera like the aF-1but it was the best construction for our concept and wishes construction. Finalised images of the actual lens will be shared soon.
Viewfinder concerns:
The viewfinder is just a cost-effective, tried-and-tested design commonly used in (analog) cameras. It's not that deep.
“Nothing new” claim:
Reviving analog cameras in today’s landscape requires integrating modern components (e.g., LiDAR) due to the discontinuation of many parts. This approach allows us to meet timelines and budgets while staying true to the analog experience. If we would've needed to manufacture all parts from scratch the price point would be much higher and the timeline would be much longer.
Partnerships:
We’re collaborating with a manufacturing partner that has extensive experience producing analog cameras. This partnership is critical for this project. On the user side we’re collaborating with a bunch of different types of users from beginners to professional photographers.
We hope this response provides clarity and addresses your concerns. Our goal remains to create a camera that is build around quality and ease-of-use, but we’re definitely not saying that we’re creating the next Contax T3. As the two cameras come a totally different price points.
Thank you again for your feedback. We remain open to constructive dialogue and encourage you to reach out with any further questions.”
Full disclosure - I got scammed by the reflex 35mm SLR camera kickstarter campaign, and I heard that kickstarter now no longer allows projects that only have renderings. They have to have a real prototype product.
But I also blame the online media for hyping up the reflex project as if it was a real thing. Guess everyone wants clicks! ……
Desmolicious wrote:
I had mentioned in a post above that they had not even created tooling let alone made a prototype.
This is their reply to the video you linked:
“Most important to mention is that we’re not charging anyone €339 or €399. The refundable €5 reservation is only to better understand the market demand. This approach provides us with valuable insights and helps us to plan future/follow-up production batches, ensuring a smooth(er) roll-out since with that we get a clear picture of the interest. That’s all. The financial risk to bring this passion of a big part of the community to life is fully on us.
That being said, thank you for taking the time to review our project.
We understand your concerns, and we want to address them directly while clarifying any misconceptions. This project is not something dreamed up overnight, it has been years in the making, driven by our passion for creating a camera that many in the community have been asking for.
Key points:
Refundable Deposit: The €5 deposit is fully refundable, ensuring there is no financial risk to the people that made a reservation. The full risk lies with us.
Reputable Business: We have always operated with integrity and transparency. This project is a genuine effort to bring a thoughtfully designed product to market.
No Sponsorships or Influence: None of the content created about our project on YouTube has been sponsored or influenced by us
Opportunity for Dialogue: While we respect your right to critique, it’s unfortunate that you didn’t reach out for clarification before labelling this project as a scam. We would have gladly answered your questions directly. Also about the reservation system, since you seem to have not understood that correctly.
Addressing Specific Concerns:
“Throwing €400 at something that might never exist”
The deposit is €5, not €400, and fully refundable. We’ve ensured that people that made a reservation face no financial risk.
Comparison to other projects (e.g., Reflex, FilmNeverDie):
We are aware of past projects that didn’t materialize, but we're not them. We’ve shared detailed specifications and realistic timelines, and we’re collaborating with trusted manufacturing partners.
Photos not taken with the camera:
We’ve been open about this from the start. The images shared are placeholders, as we’re still finalizing the development sample. This has been outlined clearly in our roadmap. As this is something we’ve heard a few times we will add a remark to every photo saying “images for reference”.
Camera is still in development:
That’s correct. We are in the final stages of development and have shared transparent updates about the process.
3D renders not being final:
The back part was changed based on some great input from the community so we are addressing those as we speak. The current 3D renders are not manufacturing-ready CAD files. We will have an updated model on the landing probably next week or the week after.
Lens specifications:
The lens uses a Double Gauss construction, it’s not the most logical choice for a compact camera like the aF-1but it was the best construction for our concept and wishes construction. Finalised images of the actual lens will be shared soon.
Viewfinder concerns:
The viewfinder is just a cost-effective, tried-and-tested design commonly used in (analog) cameras. It's not that deep.
“Nothing new” claim:
Reviving analog cameras in today’s landscape requires integrating modern components (e.g., LiDAR) due to the discontinuation of many parts. This approach allows us to meet timelines and budgets while staying true to the analog experience. If we would've needed to manufacture all parts from scratch the price point would be much higher and the timeline would be much longer.
Partnerships:
We’re collaborating with a manufacturing partner that has extensive experience producing analog cameras. This partnership is critical for this project. On the user side we’re collaborating with a bunch of different types of users from beginners to professional photographers.
We hope this response provides clarity and addresses your concerns. Our goal remains to create a camera that is build around quality and ease-of-use, but we’re definitely not saying that we’re creating the next Contax T3. As the two cameras come a totally different price points.
Thank you again for your feedback. We remain open to constructive dialogue and encourage you to reach out with any further questions.”
RoamingScott wrote:
I really appreciate the directness of their answers. "It's not that deep" needs to be said to more people about more things
I agree. They address each concern point by point and also it really bugs me that there are idiots out there claiming they need to pay the full amount up front. They clearly say on their website it is a 5 Euro deposit.
I still don’t think this is going to happen because their timeline is frankly ridiculous.
Desmolicious wrote:
I agree. They address each concern point by point and also it really bugs me that there are idiots out there claiming they need to pay the full amount up front. They clearly say on their website it is a 5 Euro deposit.
I still don’t think this is going to happen because their timeline is frankly ridiculous.
I gave them $6 (yes it's not $5 lol) after reading their responses. If this is how they want to judge market demand, then it's time to speak with my wallet.
RoamingScott wrote:
I gave them $6 (yes it's not $5 lol) after reading their responses. If this is how they want to judge market demand, then it's time to speak with my wallet.
Desmolicious wrote:
I had mentioned in a post above that they had not even created tooling let alone made a prototype.
This is their reply to the video you linked:
“Most important to mention is that we’re not charging anyone €339 or €399. The refundable €5 reservation is only to better understand the market demand. This approach provides us with valuable insights and helps us to plan future/follow-up production batches, ensuring a smooth(er) roll-out since with that we get a clear picture of the interest. That’s all. The financial risk to bring this passion of a big part of the community to life is fully on us.
That being said, thank you for taking the time to review our project.
We understand your concerns, and we want to address them directly while clarifying any misconceptions. This project is not something dreamed up overnight, it has been years in the making, driven by our passion for creating a camera that many in the community have been asking for.
Key points:
Refundable Deposit: The €5 deposit is fully refundable, ensuring there is no financial risk to the people that made a reservation. The full risk lies with us.
Reputable Business: We have always operated with integrity and transparency. This project is a genuine effort to bring a thoughtfully designed product to market.
No Sponsorships or Influence: None of the content created about our project on YouTube has been sponsored or influenced by us
Opportunity for Dialogue: While we respect your right to critique, it’s unfortunate that you didn’t reach out for clarification before labelling this project as a scam. We would have gladly answered your questions directly. Also about the reservation system, since you seem to have not understood that correctly.
Addressing Specific Concerns:
“Throwing €400 at something that might never exist”
The deposit is €5, not €400, and fully refundable. We’ve ensured that people that made a reservation face no financial risk.
Comparison to other projects (e.g., Reflex, FilmNeverDie):
We are aware of past projects that didn’t materialize, but we're not them. We’ve shared detailed specifications and realistic timelines, and we’re collaborating with trusted manufacturing partners.
Photos not taken with the camera:
We’ve been open about this from the start. The images shared are placeholders, as we’re still finalizing the development sample. This has been outlined clearly in our roadmap. As this is something we’ve heard a few times we will add a remark to every photo saying “images for reference”.
Camera is still in development:
That’s correct. We are in the final stages of development and have shared transparent updates about the process.
3D renders not being final:
The back part was changed based on some great input from the community so we are addressing those as we speak. The current 3D renders are not manufacturing-ready CAD files. We will have an updated model on the landing probably next week or the week after.
Lens specifications:
The lens uses a Double Gauss construction, it’s not the most logical choice for a compact camera like the aF-1but it was the best construction for our concept and wishes construction. Finalised images of the actual lens will be shared soon.
Viewfinder concerns:
The viewfinder is just a cost-effective, tried-and-tested design commonly used in (analog) cameras. It's not that deep.
“Nothing new” claim:
Reviving analog cameras in today’s landscape requires integrating modern components (e.g., LiDAR) due to the discontinuation of many parts. This approach allows us to meet timelines and budgets while staying true to the analog experience. If we would've needed to manufacture all parts from scratch the price point would be much higher and the timeline would be much longer.
Partnerships:
We’re collaborating with a manufacturing partner that has extensive experience producing analog cameras. This partnership is critical for this project. On the user side we’re collaborating with a bunch of different types of users from beginners to professional photographers.
We hope this response provides clarity and addresses your concerns. Our goal remains to create a camera that is build around quality and ease-of-use, but we’re definitely not saying that we’re creating the next Contax T3. As the two cameras come a totally different price points.
Thank you again for your feedback. We remain open to constructive dialogue and encourage you to reach out with any further questions.”
I had not seen their response, I watched the video two days ago.
They address everything, the order of things is odd so I guess it was legitimate for some to have a few questions.
The dude’s got a nice channel though.
I agree. They address each concern point by point and also it really bugs me that there are idiots out there claiming they need to pay the full amount up front. They clearly say on their website it is a 5 Euro deposit.
I still don’t think this is going to happen because their timeline is frankly ridiculous.
I'm not so sure. I'd call it ambitious. Plenty of spare manufacturing capacity in factories in China and I'm not sure the tooling would necessarily take very long.
I guess it will depend on who their manufacturing partner is.
