There’s a digital camera that Fujifilm should absolutely be making right now, and it’s not the X-Pro4, or X-E5, or a full-frame model (although those would be great, too). There’s a specific camera that would fly off the shelves—the X100VI’s historic demand would pale in comparison. What is this camera?
The digital QuickSnap.
The Fujifilm QuickSnap is a disposable 35mm film camera that is beloved for its nostalgic lo-fidelity aesthetic, simplicity, and price. Fujifilm introduced the QuickSnap camera in 1986, with the slogan, “Everybody should enjoy photography with ease.” The QuickSnap was an immediate success, and was immensely popular for a very long time—it was even successful enough to survive the film crash of the 2000’s. People still buy and use QuickSnap cameras; they’re particularly popular for weddings, kids, and lomographers. Many people love the nostalgic experience of one-time-use cameras.
Interestingly, the most sold digital camera right now in Japan is a cheap Kodak digicam. Third and fifth places are also cheap Kodak digicams. Digicams are a dime a dozen (perhaps literally, if you win a collection on an auction site, or rummage through your parents or grandparents house). What’s missing in the photo world is a digital version of the QuickSnap, a film camera that partially inspired the digicam. I have zero doubts that it would be a massive success for Fujifilm, and would probably leave all digicams in the dust.
This is how I envision the digital QuickSnap:
First, it would need a digital sensor that obviously won’t be anywhere close to full-frame, since that would be both ridiculous and expensive. The Fujifilm Mini Evo has a tiny 5mp sensor; it would likely be a mistake to use that one, but they certainly could. I think that a 12mp or 16mp 1/2.3″ would be the most obvious choice, since those can be obtained by Fujifilm rather easily and cheaply. The sensor itself doesn’t matter all that much; however, cost and quality must be balanced extremely carefully. Too poor of image quality will hurt sales, while a too expensive price-tag will also hurt sales.
More important, though, is the picture aesthetic. Fujifilm should program it with their Classic Negative film simulation, including faux grain—something similar to my Fujicolor Superia 800 Recipe. The pictures created by the digital QuickSnap camera should look similar to the pictures that come out of an analog QuickSnap. As much as practical, the pictures need to look alike from the film and digital versions.
Next, it needs to function nearly the same as the analog QuickSnap. It should be super simple: a switch to activate the built-in flash, a wheel to cock the shutter and “advance” to the next frame, a shutter release button, a battery-level indicator, and maybe a one-press picture-transfer to an app. There should not be any LCD or electronic viewfinder to review the pictures.
The very basic optical viewfinder from the film camera should be carried over—the user experience should be as similar to the analog version as possible. Due to the crop factor of the sensor, a new lens will be necessary. The exact sensor size will determine what the lens should be, perhaps something like a 5mm or 6mm f/5.6 plastic lens that’s close to 30mm full-frame equivalent. What is important is that it is focus-free (fixed focus) and produces a similar aesthetic to the film camera.
A critical factor of one-time-use cameras is the film itself; namely, the tolerance for under and over exposure. Since the sensor won’t have this same tolerance, it’s necessary for the digital QuickSnap to have some amount of exposure control. It must have a light meter, as well as some (auto) control over the ISO and shutter speed. For the sake of image quality, the ISO should be capped as low as practical. If Fujifilm could utilize the D-Range Priority technology, I think that would help, too.
The digital QuickSnap should have internal storage that saves only 27 JPEG images. It could count the exposures mechanically exactly like the film camera does, providing an identical experience. Once the 27th picture has been captured, it won’t let you capture anymore until the memory has been cleared, either by wirelessly transferring the images to a mobile app, or via USB. The QuickSnap App should be super simple (and actually work), with an option within the app to auto-connect and transfer once 27 pictures have been recorded, or manually connect and transfer if preferable. The camera should also be able to connect to the Instax app, and transfer (and print) directly from there. The camera should charge via USB, and could also transfer the images using a USB cable. Once the pictures have been removed from the camera, it would then allow the user to capture the next 27 frames.
The QuickSnap App, aside from photo transfers, should have a few simple options, for those who wish to do a little more with their pictures. A retro-styled date stamp. Maybe a few filter overlays that don’t radically change the picture aesthetic (examples: high contrast, low contrast, warm, cool, color boost, reduce color, etc.), and maybe a handful of light-leak affects. The more simple the better. Maybe Fujifilm can even offer a service where 4″ x 6″ prints can be made and mailed out to customers who wish for an even more authentic experience.
While the size and design should still closely resemble the film version, I think the digital QuickSnap must feel a little more sturdy, and not so cheap that it would easily break if dropped. If Fujifilm could offer it for less than $100, that would be most ideal. A camera like that would be a huge hit, thanks to its nostalgic charm, ease of use, straight-out-of-camera aesthetic, and affordability.
You’re welcome, Fujifilm.
Don’t want to wait for a digital QuickSnap, but still want the look? Check out these articles:
Getting a Disposable Camera Look with DispoLens
Getting that ’90’s Film Look with Fujifilm Cameras
For those wondering, the four pictures in this article were captured with a Fujifilm X100VI using the Superia Negative Recipe.
I wish Fujifilm would start making their own color negative film stocks again and start producing film Quicksnaps again. Then they wouldn’t need to worry about the sensor and the price/IQ trade off. They need to focus their digital efforts on producing sufficient supply to meet demand for the current products. Just my two cents.
They do still manufacture some films. They have been slowly and routinely discontinuing various stocks. They briefly stopped manufacturing some stocks (namely, Velvia 100) due to supply-chain issues; although it’s my understanding that that situation has been resolved. And they replaced Fujicolor 200 with repackaged Gold 200, although I heard that they are back to manufacturing Fujicolor 200 in limited quantities, with availability only in certain countries at this time. Currently, Fujicolor 200, Fujicolor 400, Fujicolor PRO 400H, Fujichrome Velvia 50, Fujichrome Velvia 100, Fujichrome Provia 100F, and Neopan Acros II (which is actually not manufactured by Fujifilm, but Harman) is currently available. You can still buy QuickSnap cameras, they’re still being made. My local CVS sells them, and they can be found on sites like Amazon and B&H.
Regarding the X100VI, Fujifilm is currently producing them at twice the rate as the X100V, and are in the process of doubling that—soon will be making four-times as many each month as they did the predecessor. Not sure what more can be done. Increasing production is risky business… if the market suddenly collapses, they’re going to be stuck holding a ton of copies.
Have you heard of the Camp Snap Camera? It’s basically a cheap digital camera that is a replica of the disposable film cameras. I got one for my child to take on field trips and it’s great for that. They also have some vintage film filters that can be loaded on to the cameras. I got one when they were $40 and it’s a good bargain.
I have definitely heard of them before (but never tried one myself). It’s my understanding that the IQ is lacking, with banding and artifacts and such. My hope would be that Fujifilm could do better. But, yeah, similar concept. And I think they sell a lot of them, have trouble keeping them in stock.
Today everybody has QuickSnap in his phone.
Try RitchieCam 😀
https://ritchiecam.com/
😀 😀 😀
Essentially, yes. But definitely a divergent experience, and I think the experience is more than half the draw. 🤷♂️
I am not sure about this. In my opinion it would just produce more plastic waste once the hype is over.
Would be recyclable, no? Probably not even close to half as environmentally unfriendly as the average cellphone, I would think.
Main thing is that Fujifilm should offer cameras that are available – first and foremost.
My interest in Fujifilm as a brand has waned considerably because i find the game of camera availability unacceptable. to say the least.
I think that interest in Fujifilm cameras have increased tremendously. For example, Fujifilm is producing the X100VI at twice the rate as the X100V, and soon it will be four-times as much, and that still won’t be enough for the current (unprecedented) demand. I don’t know what more they should be expected to do. 🤷♂️
As a broad concept, yeah. Something along these lines could be a lot of fun.
Personally, I wouldn’t have a 27 shot limit. I don’t really know that it would be fun. I also am mixed on the faux advance wheel. From what I’ve heard of the Camp Snap, it’s slow. There can be shutter lag. And that’s not really fun. A simple no-frills digital with a basic “cold” optical finder has a lot of appeal, but so many cheap cameras are slow, and slow really hurts. Missing a shot because the camera is slower than you are isn’t something I’m looking to get. And since transferring to a phone is so easy, that’s just an extra little lag.
Maybe make the viewfinder bigger than a Quicksnap.
I agree with no full LCD screen, and no EVF, but I think there should be a small basic screen, akin to what you’d have from a digital watch. It’d have a shutter counter, and most importantly: it’d show which Film Sim was active. I think Fuji would be making a massive mistake by not leaning into their film sims. Having at least Classic Negative, Classic Chrome, and Acros is a minimum, and maybe toss in a Velvia recipe akin to The Rockwell and Eterna maybe like the Visions 250D or Cinestill 800T. I think that’s a good spread: traditional negative, Kodachrome, a cinematic look, hypersaturated slides, and a good black and white. Fuji has these film sims. The really help sell cameras. Putting some of that in a basic point and shoot just seems right.
Maybe that could be handled through the phone app. Giving it the full range of options for the limited selection of film sims, but you can only download one onto the camera and you’re using it until you’ve shot your 27… I dunno. There’s an appeal to not thinking about what film sim goes with what individual shot, but on the other hand, it’s also a lot of faffing about added into the process. Not while shooting, but between shots. Maybe that feels more limiting, maybe that feels more freeing. It’d be hard to know without the camera in hand.
But I do like the heart of it: small and basic camera, simple OVF, and fast speeds.
//
For free, here’s the other camera Fuji should make:
Ultrawide Instax. Put a 42mm (21mm equivalent) in a basic analog Instax Square camera. SQ1-Ultrawide version. An Instax Mini would be fine too, doesn’t have to be Square, but Square would be an affordable Hasselblad SWC alternative.
There’s no right or wrong way for Fujifilm to approach it, I don’t think. The Dispo app, which raised millions of dollars, doesn’t make the photos taken with it appear on your phone until the next day. So it could be something like that. Whatever they decide to do, the more alike the digital version is to the film, the better (in my opinion).
I think your ultra wide Instax Square is a great idea! It definitely should be made.
Thanks for sharing!
Check out flashback with their One35 camera. I have one and love it for casual everyday photos
That’s more-or-less the concept. But… Why do the photos need to go to a server? What happens when the company goes under or pivots? Why can you only “develop” one “roll” per day? The 4mp sensor is not very good… I read some complaints that the quality is one of the worst from any digital camera in the last 20 years.
But, you know, what’s important is that the users (such as yourself) like it, so definitely thanks for sharing! Feel free to post a link to your pictures captured with it if you’d like. I’d be curious to see, personally.