Report Blog Entry
APS is an acronym that's still being used in photography to this day as many cameras still use APS-C and APS-H sensors, slightly smaller sensors that allow for more compact cameras and lenses at the cost of noise and resolution. But not many people know that the acronym actually comes from the 1990s from a failed compact film format of the same name. In fact, such sensors have a similar size to APS film frames. So let's look at this format's history, try shooting it and find out why it failed.
History
By mid 90s, most people still shot on 35mm film. Digicams were still in their infancy, quite low res and not very accessible.
Flm labs got a bit of a digital upgrade around this time. Film scanners made digitizing photos a breeze, digital printers allowed for faster and more consistent prints and labs could suddenly fulfill orders faster than ever before. Consumers could also get their own home scanners that allowed them to easily digitize their slides and negatives on their own.
But there was still desire to push film further technologically and a consortium of major film and camera manufacturers like Nikon, Kodak, Fujifilm, Minolta, Canon and many more started exploring ways to make shooting film more user friendly and streamline the process. This cooperation resulted in new grain technology being invented that made smaller film formats look much nicer and in a new film format that would be able to store digital metadata straight in the cartridge.
And so in 1996, the APS format launched alongside a series of point and shoot cameras. Nikon and Canon also took a risk and made APS SLR cameras oriented at professionals, the Canon IX and Nikon Pronea.
Flm labs got a bit of a digital upgrade around this time. Film scanners made digitizing photos a breeze, digital printers allowed for faster and more consistent prints and labs could suddenly fulfill orders faster than ever before. Consumers could also get their own home scanners that allowed them to easily digitize their slides and negatives on their own.
But there was still desire to push film further technologically and a consortium of major film and camera manufacturers like Nikon, Kodak, Fujifilm, Minolta, Canon and many more started exploring ways to make shooting film more user friendly and streamline the process. This cooperation resulted in new grain technology being invented that made smaller film formats look much nicer and in a new film format that would be able to store digital metadata straight in the cartridge.
And so in 1996, the APS format launched alongside a series of point and shoot cameras. Nikon and Canon also took a risk and made APS SLR cameras oriented at professionals, the Canon IX and Nikon Pronea.
However by late 90s, APS started slowly dying out in popularity and the format got finally discontinued in 2012.
Downfall
So what made APS fail? It's actually fairly simple.
- APS was a smaller format than 35mm, about 30x16mm (compared to 35mm full frame's 35x24mm) so the quality wasn't as good.
- The new grain tech was supposed to improve this format but it ended up being used for the larger formats aswell... so they just got even better and people had a reason more to ignore APS.
- A lot of the cameras for the format were high end point and shoot cameras with fully automatic exposure and focusing. There were two professional SLRs made for the format aswell, the Nikon Pronea and Canon EOS IX, neither of which were too good.
- Because amateurs switched mostly to digital by the end of 90s, APS really needed to win the hearts of professionals to stay alive. But the lack of proper professional cameras, the quality and 35mm film just being much cheaper and better in every way, they loathed it.
The science stuff
APS film came in metal cartridges. The indicator on the bottom of the cartridge states the current status in the form of 4 positions: unexposed, partially exposed (you still have shots left) ,fully exposed (you shot the whole roll but it's not developed yet) and developed.
The film strip itself actually has a magnetic coating on it which can store digital data. Some of the cameras also used a different method where it would imprint barcodes on the film with the data. The scanners would read both and imprint the metadata into the file. Simple. Chemically it's otherwise literally the same as any other film.
APS... today
Believe it or not, you can still get APS film today. The catch? Since it's been discontinued, you can only shoot expired film, which is getting rarer and pricier by the minute. And as for the cameras, they're everywhere and extremely cheap. There's not many labs which can process it anymore sadly but you can still find a few.
My experiences
Getting the film and finding a lab
So my first step was to check out what was available in my area and figuring out the logistics of this whole thing. After a bit of googling to my surprise, I found a lab that still processes APS film. And one of the photography stores had the last 3 refrigerated rolls of Fujifilm Nexia, expired in 2010. I nabbed it and hoped for the best.
As for the lab... I luckily found one last lab still doing it in my country. They're a bit of an oldschool bunch, still sending scans on CDs, but I don't mind. At least I got the authentic 90s photolab experience.
Getting the camera
The next step was to find a suitable camera. Looking over at the local online marketplaces, I found a Canon IXUS in a *seemingly* good condition. Paid roughly 20 euros for it and received it the next week. Aand... the lens was broken, couldn't extend properly.
So I gave it another try and ordered a Minolta Vectis 20, which set me back just 5 euros. And that one worked perfectly!
Conclusion
So I gave it another try and ordered a Minolta Vectis 20, which set me back just 5 euros. And that one worked perfectly!
The shooting
First off, loading the film is very easy. You just open the hatch, put the film in and close. The camera will do the rest of the work.
Pretty much all the APS cameras were autofocus so you don't have to do much. On this Vectis 20, you slide off the front cover to turn on the camera, use the two buttons on the back to zoom in and out, half press the shutter button to set exposure and focus and full press to take the picture. It's very easy to use, just a standard high end point and shoot camera.
I took mine for a few trips and shot about 2 rolls worth of photos over the course of Spring 2024 and had some fun with it.
Once you're done, the camera automatically rewinds the film and then you can send it off for processing.
Pretty much all the APS cameras were autofocus so you don't have to do much. On this Vectis 20, you slide off the front cover to turn on the camera, use the two buttons on the back to zoom in and out, half press the shutter button to set exposure and focus and full press to take the picture. It's very easy to use, just a standard high end point and shoot camera.
I took mine for a few trips and shot about 2 rolls worth of photos over the course of Spring 2024 and had some fun with it.
Once you're done, the camera automatically rewinds the film and then you can send it off for processing.
Image quality
Obviously since APS is a smaller format than 135, the image quality isn't as great. You're pretty much getting about half the resolution. And with the film being all expired for over a decade now, the resolution is a tiny bit lower than with fresh film, too. You're really getting around 10 Megapixels equivalent of resolution.
I was surprised that the film I got still worked fine. It was definitely perfectly preserved. I shot Fujifilm Nexia A200, exposed at 200 ASA. The camera's lens seems quite sharp and the grain is definitely strong but not too unpleasant. This is definitely a good representation of what APS film results originally looked like back in the day.
When I sent it for development, I even got it back the proper APS way... with negatives rolled back into the cartridge.
I was surprised that the film I got still worked fine. It was definitely perfectly preserved. I shot Fujifilm Nexia A200, exposed at 200 ASA. The camera's lens seems quite sharp and the grain is definitely strong but not too unpleasant. This is definitely a good representation of what APS film results originally looked like back in the day.
When I sent it for development, I even got it back the proper APS way... with negatives rolled back into the cartridge.
Conclusion
I actually had a blast shooting APS. It was a decent experience on the user side for sure. But would I call it an underrated film format? Nope.
In many ways, it's just 35mm but worse. It's a logistical nightmare, a single frame is half the size of a 35mm negative so you get a bit worse quality and you don't have many professional camera options. But I can see why it was popular back when it came out. It was very convenient and the digital features and simplicity were definitely nice for your average joe who didn't shoot film much. Too bad it came out when digital was just around the corner.
It was still fun trying it out though and seeing the results just for the curiosity sake alone and for the role it had in the photographic history. And we got higher res 35mm film and better digital scanning thanks to the APS, too. So I definitely wouldn't call it a pointless format. I'd say it was actually quite a technologically important format even if it had very little fighting chance against the digital revolution.
In many ways, it's just 35mm but worse. It's a logistical nightmare, a single frame is half the size of a 35mm negative so you get a bit worse quality and you don't have many professional camera options. But I can see why it was popular back when it came out. It was very convenient and the digital features and simplicity were definitely nice for your average joe who didn't shoot film much. Too bad it came out when digital was just around the corner.
It was still fun trying it out though and seeing the results just for the curiosity sake alone and for the role it had in the photographic history. And we got higher res 35mm film and better digital scanning thanks to the APS, too. So I definitely wouldn't call it a pointless format. I'd say it was actually quite a technologically important format even if it had very little fighting chance against the digital revolution.
Comments
Displaying 0 of 0 comments ( View all | Add Comment )