Monday, September 19, 2016

New Instax Square is 2.5 X 2.5 (inches)

Here's a cut down Instax Wide made in the size of the newly announced Instax Square. The announcement and its timing show that Fujifilm intends to capture remaining market share from its competitors and fulfill its stated goal to stand alone in photographic instant films.  The picture area is 2.5 X 2.5 inches, or a little bigger than a square 120 size film negative frame. The side by side comparison is done by cutting down an Instax Wide shot and simply overlapping it. On the left is a recent Impossible instant photo. Both were shot by me.
Impossible Project's film (left) and a mockup of Fujifilm's new
Instax Square.

7 comments:

  1. If the price for the fuji-square is 10€$ for 10 frames, Impossible can close down its factory...
    Anyway, asking 21€ for 8 exposures like Impossible does for the quality they are offering is kind of a rip off... :-(

    ReplyDelete
  2. I may be wrong but I have a sense that just like rubbish USB turntables are a 'gateway drug' to real hifi and vinyl for a crucial minority, Fuji's lameishly small square Instax may have a similar effect. Real Polaroid kit, or at least the small number of great higher end models, is on a different planet than Hello Kitty co-branded pieces of plastic. But the latter may bring a few new interested parties into the former camp. And it may force Impossible to keep raising its game. Maybe even find a way to put 10 exposures in a pack again (smaller battery perhaps?) and make or partner to make a fuller range of cameras. Competition and increased interest - will they help us, or condemn us to a world of novelty cameras and tiny, icily perfect instant images?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sorry one other thing - is Instax truly competition for and intended to take market share from the rump of other instant options? Surely Impossible's sales of just a million packs of expensive and temperamental material, usually used in cameras at least a decade old, cannot even appear as a blip on Fuji's commercial radar? These sound like very different but adjacent markets me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I would say adjacent as in a baloney and cheese sandwich, where the elements have a distinct strata, but the consumption is orthogonal to the structure.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think it is interesting that people will go out and pay a thousand dollar for a lens but don't think their own photograph is worth even $3.

    ReplyDelete
  6. At least instax doesn't fade in a matter of weeks/months like Impossible stuff does. The IP film looks good now but it's keeping ability and quality overall is not inline with it's pricing. It's too bad fuji lacked the vision and foresight to really promote fp100c, it's far superior to instax in every way, but they let it wither and die on the vine as far as promoting it goes.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thought I,d let you know. Just tried R5 for the first time. Understand I have not done any darkroom in 45 years and this was my first attempt at 4x5. Used a Speed graphic handheld with sunny 16 rule, no meter yet. The results were awesome 2 out of 3 negs came out great. Now to get out shooting.

    ReplyDelete