Yashica is Launching Its Own 35mm Film

After the awful debut of the Y35, I'm not inclined to believe the new owners of the brand name are producing what they slap their name on. Like one of the commenters to the article you linked to suggested, I'm also assuming this is some relabeled stock from a discontinued maker or someone's shelved film line - and Lucky in China seems like the most likely candidate to me too. I  hesitate to think they're capable of manufacturing anything on their own... or even following a recipe to create a batch of soup for the chemical layers on their own.

Slick marketing for a fire-sale purchased brand name, loads of fancy graphics, and the ability to create social buzz means absolutely nothing. Taking a low-end cellphone camera circuit and sensor and plopping it into a palm sized box and fronted with a mediocre glob of optical glass doesn't make a serious camera either.

If they'd simply stated the facts of what's behind the junk they'd brought to market, they might have had a chance to create a product line that people would buy and support. I still shoot film, and I'm all for more choices coming to market, but I'll be damned if I'll buy one roll of repackaged anything if they're trying to pass it off as 'new' film when it isn't. We'll see how it unfolds I suppose, because there are certainly a lot of suspicious people watching.

I was oh so glad that I balked at putting money up for the Y35, even though it was close to what I had dreamed of for a digital camera with an analog throughput. But there is no way I'd fall for the latest marketing ploy. They have already trashed the Yashica name, why should we perpetuate their business model?

PF

More news: Yashica Unveils Three 35mm Cameras and Two New Films



petapixel.com/2019/04/27/yashica-unveils-three-film-cameras-and-two-new-films/


/description

My first impression is that you've peeked behind the curtain and just found the real Wizard of Oz! :)

Fuji may have outsourced making their disposable body with a Chinese maker - then supplied the bulk film to fill it. Then 'you-know-who' tracks down the same firm to license the same basic body, but as a reusable with a slightly modified look to make it seem like their own. Sturdy metal parts? Other than the springs/screws/washers that hold it together, and some circuitry tape for the electronics, I doubt it's very robust at all... so just like the Y35, I'd be suspect of what you're actually getting inside if you'd be willing to buy one. From the description they provided it doesn't sound like it's reusable though, and with a fixed f/11 aperture, why would I want it? The other 2 cameras may be more ambitious, but equally embarrassing in the long run if the 'Y35 Effect' comes into play.

As far as the film details now mention... my gut is still telling me that it's some kind of re-branded 'XYZ' film stock. It may or may not be from someone like Lucky in China, as it could be a custom formulated stock that was born in Russia. I'd read that someone had used a Russian maker to produce a boutique line of 35mm film recently, but can't remember the specifics (Silberra, I think?). I'd doubt if it's reformulated like JCH's Street Pan, with older Agfa Aerial chemistry that was pulled from the archives and laid on a new base, but JCH is all B&W stock anyway and wouldn't include a direct candidate for this 'new' color film.

[ For anyone interested in companies still making film stock worldwide, here a link to 6 articles that cover everyone currently producing it... emulsive.org/reviews/film-reviews/film-list ]

After reading up and doing some research on re-purposed film (as opposed to re-branded film), I participated in CineStill's campaign to get their Tungsten line into production for both 35 and 120 formats. I've yet to use the film in-camera, but I still thought that it merited enough support to help get it started. I might do the same for others who've had some history in making new film stock available, but not when there's no track record or significant details. I really don't think they'd be their suppliers either. I don't get the impression they'd be a good partner match from what I've learned of the 2 Wright brothers that founded CineStill.

Once upon a time (late 1970's) I was a big buyer of Seattle Film Works 35mm color stock when I needed something cheap. Back then you bought a roll (or 5/10/20) and the cost of processing was included in the price - plus - they'd send you 1 new roll of whatever you'd just sent them for each roll sent in, and you'd only need to pay for the processing fee after that. I initially bought 10 rolls, and would send them back 5 at a time, and get 5 new cans returned with my processed film (and optionally, prints) before I'd finished the other 5. A fairly good deal while it lasted. CineStill is kind of reminiscent of Seattle's emulsion setup, but no freebies or processing is included with their film, of course. They've been out of business since 2000-ish, and their old warehouse stock is looooong gone, so they're not a source for anyone these days.