Zorki Photo launches its first film: Zorki Photo Mono 100 ISO black-and-white

You're useless.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Snapper2013

@ Old Cameras That wasn't very nice. I was just kidding.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Would love to see side-by-side comparison between this film and other similar types like Tri-X, FP4+, and HP5+ using the same developer(s) and processing technique.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Ignat Solovey

I guess it's re-badged Fomapan, because it's only Foma, Ilford and Fujifilm that still make decent film. At worst it can be Chinese LUCKY. At best it can be Maco.

Jul 7, 2017permalink

happypoppeye

The 70's called ...they want their box back.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

beckmarc

? More 1960s I thought.

Jul 7, 2017permalink

OhWeh

'biting contrast and a traditional grain structure'

Great!! This is the Film, I have waited for! I'm so exited. I will sell my digital equipment and dust my old OM-2. The analog area rises again.

If you find irony, you can keep it ;-)

Jul 6, 2017*permalink

This film gives you at least 36 fullframe sensors for single-use. Try the new possibilities. Enjoy the Bokeh and Dynamic Range.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Jens Evensen

I think in 2017 35mm film = m43 or APS-C. Except DOF.. I guess..?? Today you do not need film for the IQ but the slowing down process cold be rewarding. Good Luck!

Jul 6, 2017permalink

@Jens Evensen.
It was only an ironic answer... :) But if you want facts then use the Adox CMS II 20 Film and you'll have a "sensor" which outperforms any lens on the market (800 Linepairs/mm). Giving you (theoretically) > 2 GigaPixel on 36x24. Any questions...?

Jul 6, 2017*permalink

PatsyK

holy cow!

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Eric Hensel

" (800 Linepairs/mm)" That's more than twice the resolution I see from a cursory look around the interwebs for this film.

Jul 7, 2017permalink

Ernest M Aquilio

Excellent! Love love love the packaging. I'll be trying this out for sure.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

beckmarc

Totally agree!!

Jul 7, 2017permalink

Michael Firstlight

Come back? Never left -45 years of D76, Dektol, and fixer in my blood. Love my D800; been mostly in digital since the late 90's, but happy to see new films coming out again. I love digital, but still have my 6x7 and 35mm film systems and an active Color/B&W darkroom. I enjoy both film and digital photography. Analog (film) is making a niche comeback (much like records ) - but never coming back in large numbers again ; its just too complex for the vast majority of those raised on digital (but It is comical seeing Polaroids making a pop comeback in stores like B&N). Now if only someone wold revive Ciba! Prices of used film cameras (the really good ones like Pentax 67II) are going up fast and darkroom equipment getting astronomical. Even B&H doesn't stock much analog anymore. My dry to dry automatic 11x14 color print processor is now worth a mint, as is my LPL 670MXL enlarger, Peak Model1 and more. MF scanners are out of sight. It used to be you couldn't give the stuff away.

Jul 5, 2017*permalink

Samuel Dilworth

The scanner problem is becoming serious. Never mind film in artful boxes; we need a new scanner, people!

Jul 6, 2017permalink

There are good scanners out there for little money. For example the Canon 9000F is very good. The only thing it's missing is a better filmholder, especially for 120 rolls.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Michael Firstlight

Yes, 120 film holders are awful all around - even the LS800/LS9000 holder war out @ $400 apiece now. And, there are no new MF scanners that use glass lenses - they are all plastic junk lenses.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Scanning is indeed one of the biggest issues when digitizing film. I am using successfully a Plustek scanner but this is only good for 35 mm negatives. For larger negatives, either Epson scanners like V800 or photographing and stitching the photos in PP is the name of the game.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

One solution would be a (backlighted) copy stand with macro rail, and maybe using a camera that can do multiple shots per image for extracting full colour information at every pixel: Olympus (with their High-Resolution mode, in E-M1mkII for example) or Pentax (PixelShift Resolution). Sadly, the Sigma cameras have too little resolution (even with their full-colour at every pixel sensor).
Of course, this doesn't preclude the need for a dedicated scanner; it's just a possible high-quality option for the truly determined film users.

Jul 7, 2017permalink

My workflow is to scan them with a mediocre, but still good, Canon 9000F scanner. And if the picture is worth the Pullitzer you can send it in to a professional shop (mostly Nikon 9000) for $2-$4 per scan. That's fair.

Jul 7, 2017permalink

The 9000F is a perfectly fine scanner. Still, as you can see in a few comments above, more and more people feel the need to have a better solution.

Jul 7, 2017permalink

DPhotoWriter

There is something magical and nostalgic when you go to a trip in your mind and remembering the film photography days. Something about it just triggers pure joy - at least for me.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Woodyz

No need for nostalgia. You can start shooting film again for as little as $50... just grab a cheap Pentax or Nikon SLR kit off eBay and order a couple rolls of film.

Shooting film is still as magical and fun as you remember.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

....and gives you sensorsizes, unavailable in digital. I need more 220 rolls. This would be a unique selling point on the market by now, but no company dares to bring it back. Why? ;(

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Ignat Solovey

It's not nostalgia, it's novelty for the generation that doesn't know what is analog. Hipsters under 20 and their younger siblings who are awestruck with film, tape, vinyl records, disk-dial landline phones and typewriters because they can't imagine that — that's the audience of that stuff. For us bald photographers it's way too expensive and lo-fi.

Jul 7, 2017permalink

Aleksei Korobov

Nowadays I see that China tries to build its own engineering school. Its a good way. ...But also I must tell a word on soviet photography works. It is worth part of the world art. Soon after the end of the USSR my mum bought this learning book: http://rangefinder.ru/manual/books/Agafonov_S_G_Pozharskaya_-_Fotobukvar.pdf Make a quick look on, isn't it good?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Aleksei Korobov

Sad to say, but this project looks like agressive business-promo that uses western interest to soviet camera history. You see that there're no real contacts at Zorki Foto web page, and its domain is in the U.K. Moreover, the author publishes his shots from western Europe and Turkey, not from ex-USSR. As native russian I'm afraid to see those english-world sights on soviet photography and cameras. Actualy, soviet film was really bad film, but this was enough for newspapers, memory shots and photographic art. As the least doesn't have need in technical quality. The paper was of moderate quality and you still can buy "Slavich" factory simple BnW paper at B&H. Many cameras and lenses were remakes of german prototypes. Though glass and metal weren't so good, we had some successful examples. While chinese manufacturers make direct copies using cheap materials, soviet remakes were made by good engineers with government manufacturing control. Of course, we had some pure soviet goods.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

kodachromeguy

The 20mm f/5.6 Russar lens for M39 screw-mount was an amazing little optic. It was developed or mathematically computed by Mikhail Mikhailovich Rusinov. As usual, now that the years have gone by, I wish I had never sold mine. Lomography is selling a new version for $650.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

mahonj

I had a Zorki 4K which I bought in London in 1975 for £20 if my memory serves me correctly. I couldn't afford a Zenit or a Praktica or anything from Japan. I got some reasonable sports photos with it as it had a 1/1000 shutter speed.
It looked a bit like a Leica 3 (not a 2) and had 39mm screw thread (Leica thread) lenses.
I just had a 50 mm F2. It did not look at all like the camera on the box, which looks more like a Canonet Ql17.
For the record, I used to use Ilford FP4 film (and Kodak TriX) in it (and develop them in D76)

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Well, they certainly were ahead of their time; a tabloid title could read like this:
„SHOCKING DISCOVERY! Ancient technology of the aliens or just time travelling?
50 years ago Zorki already had 4K !!!”

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Minolta SR-1b

Good morning;

Two things:

(1.) As Mahonj has pointed out, the illustration on the Zorki Photo box does look more like a Canon QL-17 or something else very similar.

(2.) Fortunately, I do have both a Zorki 4 and a Zorki 4K camera bodies here, but it is not clear from the press release, so I will ask also: Does this new film work in any other brand of 35mm film camera?

There are a number of Minolta cameras of many different configurations and styles here also, along with several other brands of cameras, and I would be really disappointed to learn that this film does not work in my largest collection of cameras. But I do have the Zorki 4 and 4K anyway.

Enjoy;

Ralph
Latte Land, Washington

Jul 6, 2017permalink

zlatko

That packaging design works beautifully. Something perfect about it.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

ovatab

the box design refers to old good times of Brillo/Campbell's

Jul 5, 2017permalink

I don't care about the film inside; I want the box!

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Father Bouvier

Looks like somebody was in a coma for the last 20 years.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

esorensen

Go away.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

wilsonlaidlaw

Do we need yet another 100 ISO B&W film? I really doubt it. Ilford, Kodak, Foma, Adox, Rollei, Kentmere, Agfa and Fuji plus I suspect other niche players. Surely these must cover every requirement from ortho to low contrast, extended red sensitivity, UV sensitivity, panchro and so on.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Black and white films have always been known for their individual characteristics. Maybe this brings something unique to the table.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Jozef M

How is this site called? Oh yes, 'Digital' Photography review ...

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Photog74

Well, you can always digitise film, can't you?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

The Davinator

As the admins have pointed out countless times, the news feed is not digital photography only. I presume you place comments in news feed items about tripods, filters, lenses, camera bags, etc?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Michael Firstlight

LOL, nad if you print your 'digital' images, it's .. (tada) analog again!

Jul 5, 2017permalink

kodachromeguy

Oh, boy, another brilliant insight about how this site is called DPR. And your point is??

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Jozef M

To 'The Davinator': tripods, filters, lenses, camera bags, all have to do with digital photography of course, and have to be treated on this site, prints are analog, you don't have to be so clever seeing this, and to this brilliant pretentious kodachromeguy; a photo created on film is a total different medium than images created with a digital sensor, it is chemistry rather then computise.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Oh, that dreaded swearword: analoque. How can we rid our pure, pristine digital world of that cancer?!

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Becksvart

I recently got some XP2 developed by a professional developer (because C41) and I really liked the contrast and general look of it. If this has more contrast than TRI-X 400 I'd be happy to give a roll a spin and bath in the old D76.

Jul 5, 2017*permalink

CallumG

ISO 100? Much prefer ISO 125!

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Usable up to 400!

Jul 5, 2017permalink

CallumG

Damn right!

Jul 5, 2017permalink

photoac

Since we seem to be on a nostalgia trip, shouldn't we be referring to ASA and DIN rather than ISO ratings?

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Real man use film. Real man know how to convert one to another. ;)

Jul 6, 2017permalink

AbrasiveReducer

I love how the box looks like its been on the shelf since Sputnik. Russian film has always had the coolest packaging.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

rurikw

Yes, loveliest retro design I've seen.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

N/T (delete)

Jul 6, 2017*permalink

kpaddler

Any relations to Zorki cameras in 70s?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Father Bouvier

Yes, they finally got around to manufacturing film for those cameras.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Ilia Snopchenko

Doesn't look like this is the case. Looks like someone (seemingly in UK, of all places) just picked up a long defunct brand that has not been properly copyrighted, and ran away with it.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

@Ilia: and even so, what's bad about it? Somebody just recognized a market niche which is getting more profitable. So, and now back to the digital Canon camp, right ;)?

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Ilia Snopchenko

@Copal Fit: nothing is terribly wrong with that, it's just that the branding may be causing confusion in the user base. But then again, quite a few old defunct brands have been "resurrected" by savvy entrepreneurs to exploit that (misplaced) nostalgia or yearning for everything old and good. :)))

Jul 7, 2017permalink

Graham Austin

£4 a film, seems a good price and always good to see new film come out. Will put an order in I think

Jul 5, 2017permalink

DarnGoodPhotos

We've seen this with other legacy technologies as well. First digital solutions take over and perfect it from a convenience point of view. Afterwards some people return to the previous, analog version of the technology or pleasure rather than need. The analog and digital versions of the technology end up coexisting because they satisfy different needs. I'm glad film is coming back; well not coming back because it never completely disappeared,

Jul 5, 2017permalink

onlooker

Hipster special — on so many levels.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

The Davinator

Only "hipsters" use film? My you are out of touch with reality.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

onlooker

Please pay attention to the whole post -- "on so many levels". Film, "Zorki", box for the film, press release wording. Next time you want to feel offended by a single word, please waste someone else's time. Every time I see one of the professionally offended, I feel I need to take a shower.

Jul 5, 2017*permalink

Michel Aristegui

@ onlooker
Next time, after your shower, please waste someone else's time.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

esorensen

Go away, filth.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

onlooker

"Go away, filth" -- Ah, Hipster love.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en5z-Q4po4M

Jul 5, 2017*permalink

Saying "Hipster" is no longer hip. You're out of fashion, get with it.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Doesn't matter if this film is used by "hipsters" or others - the manufacturer recognizes an opening market niche like others (e. g. Ferrania) do, too. I work as photo instructor and see more and more young people interested in film these days. Not all of them are "hipsters" - the growing interest in film comes from multiple directions. Film is not better than digital or vice-versa - it is just different.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

stevo23

So there's room in the market for yet another film?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

(unknown member)

Yes

Jul 5, 2017permalink

stevo23

You know this how?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Because of photography.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

stevo23

@mxx - because of apple pie.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

Aaron801

I agree with others here: the packaging design is great...

Jul 5, 2017permalink

I've had the dubious „luck” to live in a communist country when I was a kid.
It's fun to see so many people appreciate what we had as our only (poor) option: the cheapest cardboard packaging, with a minimum of typography.
Surely, the box pictured in the article tries to simulate that (using far better printing and materials), but I still remember the delight of buying the first rolls of Kodak Plus 200 and Kodak Gold... Sure, pretty ordinary films, but in a box having full color printing on glossy cardboard? Amazing, after many years of unbleached, rough surface boxes.

Jul 6, 2017permalink

MaxiMax

The box looks like something from the 1960´s.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Father Bouvier

Probably because it's produced by the same people on the same equipment :)

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Tungsten Nordstein

@Father Bouvier

I doubt it. I bet it uses modern printing. That's just a CGI mock-up.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Colin Stuart

who really makes this film? I'm assuming it's just another rebadge?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Tungsten Nordstein

Yes. Some doubt over provenance of this film has been expressed over at UPUG, already. Where is this 'Zorki' company anyway? Uk?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

From Zorki Photo's website: "The film is an existing emulsion made by a European film producer. It is new stock produced in 2017."

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Tungsten Nordstein

@mxx
thanks - that's cleared that up. :)
A 100ASA with biting contrast. What would that be Rollei RPX, Adox Silvermax or Scala used as negative? Foma 100 does not seem to fit the description.

Jul 5, 2017*permalink

I look forward to trying it out, hope it comes to market on schedule.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

kodachromeguy

Very nice. This is the third announcement of a new or repackaged film in about two weeks. Time to get the old Leica or Spotmatic out of the cabinet for some exercise and some contemplative photography.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Woodyz

I have more cameras than any responsible adult should.

I love my $20 Asahi-Pentax Spotmatic and ~$50 Takumar lenses out of pretty much everything. Just give me a couple dozen rolls of Portra 400 and I would gladly shoot all day.

Jul 5, 2017*permalink

none of us are responsible adults woody

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Woodyz - I have about 30 that work if it makes you feel any better.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

McArchive

Just picked up a minty nice Valoy II w/ Focotar at a yard sale for $7...

Jul 5, 2017permalink

beautiful enlarger

Jul 5, 2017permalink

CopCarSS

I want some just for the box. Fabulous design.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

Gesture

Besides B&H, Adorama, etc. Freestyle Sales and Photo Warehouse are good sources of analog materials:
http://www.ultrafineonline.com

Jul 5, 2017permalink

D135ima

"Зоркий" - это советская дальномерка, которая как и "ФЕД", происходит от Leica II.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

D135ima

"Zorki" - this is the Soviet rangefinder camera, which, like the "Fed" comes from "Leica II". But "fed" began to produce before the war, and "Zorki" - after. The first "zorki" - this is exact copy of "fed". By the way, the mechanics of the famous "zenith" bodies also goes back to "zorki", and so in a sense to the "leica II".

Jul 5, 2017*permalink

RusVolley

А если бы маэстро Погодин сконструировал свою дальномерку, представляю какая бы она была...

Jul 5, 2017permalink

RusVolley

Как же ненавижу когда русичи пишут тут на английском. Сам раньше на форумах писал, вроде и нормально, прошло десятилетие и понял какой китч отвратительный. Как всё это выглядит.

Jul 5, 2017permalink

rurikw

Интересно. Кто "маэстро Погодин"?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

why are you making me put posts into a Russian translation engine

Jul 5, 2017permalink

rurikw

The engine is hungry? Anyway Rusvolley wonders what maestro Pogodin's rangefinder would have looked like had he made one and I asked who he is. Further, (s)he hates when "rusichi" (not sure how to interpret that, refers to people of ancient Rus) write in English on these forums. (s)he did so her/himself decades ago but now realises what disgusting "kitsch" it was. Hope i got it right. Does the engine agree?

Jul 5, 2017permalink

D135ima

Сosinaphile
You have a unique chance to feel how other world live.
If someone does not have enough knowledge of English received from pirated video games or movies , then they use a wonderful Google translator.

Jul 6, 2017permalink