More on the Pentax film camera project

[Godfrey]

Okay, so it's finally shipped. My biggest question: Why did they have to make it so funky looking? The MiNT Rollei 35AF is a far nicer looking camera, as are my old Rollei 35S and Minox 35GT-E.

And who really needs all those exposure modes? Overly complicated (same issue I have with many compact digital cameras...).

Beyond that: It looks well made, Ricoh/Pentax make fine lenses, etc. The price seems right. Will it sell in any volume? I guess we'll all see.

G

 

[agentlossing]

Oprah likes photography?

The thing for me is the Mint said they were aiming for $600-800. Pentax is lucky they beat them to the market, because if they get in that $600 range, it is clearly the better camera. That said, I doubt that it'll be $600.

I'm with Retro Grouch, there will be plenty of these on the used market eventually.

I think Mint's camera will be closer to $800. Also, though I haven't held either camera in my hand, I have a suspicion that the Pentax, while cheaper, will be somewhat better made than the Mint Rollei 35AF. Mint has much less manufacturing know-how and most of what they have made is very plasticky.

 

[Coldkennels]

As to how it's better than an LCA, I don't have any personal experience with the Lomo cameras so I don't want to comment too much, but for one thing the Pentax 17 is a brand new in-house design manufactured in (I believe) the same factory in Vietnam as some of Pentax's best lenses. The current LCA+ is a Chinese-made copy of an old Russian camera that was a knock-off of an even older Cosina camera. Not that they can't make great images, but LCAs are not exactly known as the most trouble-free or long-lasting cameras in the world. Again, I don't mean to badmouth the LCA but there is a reason Lomo has always touted the "Don't worry just shoot" principle.

The original Soviet LC-A, while not flawless, was a damn sight better built than any of Lomography's LC-A derivatives.

Really take that on board for a second: a Soviet camera, made during the total collapse of the Soviet Union and a period known for low quality manufacturing (see: an entire batch of Kievs supposedly going straight from factory to landfill in this era) is still better and more reliable than something being produced by a marketing monolith today.

It's been a long time since I've followed their product releases, but at least in the early 2010s, everything Lomography made had serious defect rates and design issues, and I don't believe things have really changed that much over there.

So, again: £400 for a 120 LC-A from a company that cares more about flashy packaging than producing a reliable product, or £500 for the Pentax 17 from a company that has a long track record of making really great and well-received cameras (whether we're talking about the Pentax brand or the parent company Ricoh)?

Honestly, I hope it sells well, and I'm sure other companies are going to be watching it with some interest.

Also, I don't know if anyone clocked this, but Fuji have also released a new film camera this week - the new Instax Wide 400. It looks like a pretty big step back from earlier models as far as features go, but two new film cameras in one week? Unheard of.

 

[AntonioC]

Was having a look at James Tocchio's clever (as usual) review. He's had the camera for a month, so the effort feels quite a bit more solid (here) than the average ones on YT. To be honest, I was struck by the picture quality. Some are beyond my expectations, especially the ones by Ned Bunnell. Worth having a look.

PS: 1 CR2 reportedly lasts some 10 rolls. Ouch that's kind of F5 style 🙂

 

[Guth]

I find the relative amount of negativity here encouraging. This camera isn’t aimed at old farts like us, but rather young people who have little to no experience with film photography. For what it’s worth, Pentax has stated in previous videos that the vertical framing not only makes sense given the half-frame aspect of this camera, but because it will be familiar to young people whose only experience has been using smartphones (their actual target audience). Should this camera prove to be a success for Pentax, then I expect that I’ll be seeing a lot of them around Portland where interest in film photography among young people is already very high. Pentax is basically betting that this group of young people would like the chance to buy a new camera that comes with a warranty.

As for the price, hell just look at the price of almost anything these days. Young people are already spending hundreds of dollars on old point & shoot cameras that are essentially worthless when something goes wrong. Here is a camera that will actually be supported by its manufacturer. Previous Pentax videos also spoke quite a bit about this as well. Such processes must be put into place before they can sell these cameras. Obviously this is a much bigger deal than just releasing a camera. As for the layout and features of the camera, Ricoh/Pentax conducted a lot of research among their target market. Most of the people who will be using this camera will only have experience using smartphones or perhaps Instax type cameras.

Pentax has also said that this camera would represent only the first step in their return to film photography. Should it prove to be successful, they already have something of a roadmap for the development of more capable cameras. But first they want to see if there is a potential market for such cameras going forward (in other words, not those of us on this forum but a new generation of film photographers). If nothing else I’m finding this whole story incredibly fascinating. Much more interesting than anything else that has happened in the photography world over the past couple of decades and it doesn’t even have anything to do with me. Personally I have no idea if the little Pentax 17 will be a success, but I definitely applaud Ricoh for their efforts.

 

[d_c]

I appreciate the fact that Pentax have stuck their necks out and made an investment in film photography again, but I'm not taken by it's looks, and the ergonomics and useability don't look great. Hopefully there will be better things to come.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Looking cool. I mean, Bessa.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

My point with the Leica comparison was that the Pentax 17 is a brand new film camera from a reputable manufacturer and with all of the other major manufacturers having ceased production years ago, it's really the only other quality 35mm film camera in production. As I said, I don't think the 17 is comparable to a Leica, but it's not priced in the Veblen goods luxury territory of the Leicas either.

As to how it's better than an LCA, I don't have any personal experience with the Lomo cameras so I don't want to comment too much, but for one thing the Pentax 17 is a brand new in-house design manufactured in (I believe) the same factory in Vietnam as some of Pentax's best lenses. The current LCA+ is a Chinese-made copy of an old Russian camera that was a knock-off of an even older Cosina camera. Not that they can't make great images, but LCAs are not exactly known as the most trouble-free or long-lasting cameras in the world. Again, I don't mean to badmouth the LCA but there is a reason Lomo has always touted the "Don't worry just shoot" principle.

Sure, I'd be happier if the 17 cost less. But I don't think it's reasonable for people (not here, but elsewhere on the internet) to complain that "I could buy an F3 and a lens or two for that price!" Of course you could! That F3 and a 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor cost the equivalent of over $4,000 in today's money when it was introduced in 1981. That's what happens after 40 years of depreciation.

Why P17 is compared to LC-A here? P17 is FED-MICRON.

And as anyone who have tried halfies, it is buttpain to scan or print.

 

[Zuiko-logist]

I think that is the point of 17 - 2 frames are easier to scan (than 18mm frames).

 

[sojournerphoto]

A few random thoughts:

- it’s not aimed at ‘old farts like us’, but there’s a few of us quite taken by it, the young at heart perhaps😉

- on the B&H livestream they again mentioned that many young people don’t pick up their negs from the lab. I was surprised when my daughter’s lab made return of negs optional, but she got hers back and made a lampshade! However, if you just get the lab scans back then they do go straight to phone and whatever social media place you’re sharing in. Half frame works in every way at this scale, even though it seems a cumbersome way to pictures for a digital native…

I popped into my local shop today to see if they’d arrived yet and they’re expecting them this week. While I was there they pulled out a 2003, fairly well brassed 2003 black paint MP that had just come in. Has a 35 Summaron on it. There’s an either or question…

 

[Bingley]

I have never shot half-frame. And I already have a nice collection of small, point-and-shoot-ish cameras (Rollei 35, Olympus XA, Olympus Trip). But I’m intrigued by the Pentax 17 and don’t think it’s too expensive for a brand new camera. So far, I’m impressed by the image quality (I follow Ned Bunnell on Insta and also saw the pics in the review on 35mmc). I saw that someone started a Flickr group for the 17, although as of yesterday no one had posted any photos. The older I get, the more I value small, lightweight, and simpler cameras; the 17 might be a good pairing w/ a small digicam, and getting 72 photos from a roll sounds attractive given how film prices keep rising.

 

[KoNickon]

Was having a look at James Tocchio's clever (as usual) review. He's had the camera for a month, so the effort feels quite a bit more solid (here) than the average ones on YT. To be honest, I was struck by the picture quality. Some are beyond my expectations, especially the ones by Ned Bunnell. Worth having a look.

PS: 1 CR2 reportedly lasts some 10 rolls. Ouch that's kind of F5 style 🙂

I noted that about the CR2. The Ricoh GR1 (with a CR2) had about the same battery life. A bit of a downside I think.

I guess I need to read more about this camera. I mean, what's a bokeh setting -- just setting the camera to f3.5? And a depth of field setting for taking pictures of your dinner? That is so very Millennial -- but wouldn't you just use your phone for that (and then of course post it immediately)?

I think other posters are right that this is the precurser of more ambitious cameras (full frame 35, for instance) using the same chassis. I think of how Cosina first came out with the Bessa L and then followed up with the R(x) and T.

 

[Godfrey]

...
And as anyone who have tried halfies, it is buttpain to scan or print.

Huh? Why? Half-35 format is as easy as anything else to scan or print, presuming you know what you're doing.

G

 

[Deleted member 65559]

How many MPs do you see used enough to get brassed. MP & Summaron?..... hands down no question!

[/url]

 

[Pioneer]

...And as anyone who have tried halfies, it is buttpain to scan or print.

That's odd, I have no problem scanning half frame. I don't have the lab scan my film anyway.

 

[Godfrey]

I think Mint's camera will be closer to $800. Also, though I haven't held either camera in my hand, I have a suspicion that the Pentax, while cheaper, will be somewhat better made than the Mint Rollei 35AF. Mint has much less manufacturing know-how and most of what they have made is very plasticky.

I would prefer to reserve judgement on either/both cameras until I see them, handle them in person. MiNT Camera's efforts have been very good so far. The InstantKon RF70 and InstantFlex TL70 Plus both have a quality feel, if not quite a Voigtländer folder or Rolleiflex TLR feel. The SLR670 series Polaroid SX-70 variants are all very nicely done and well finished. I'm waiting to see what the Rollei 35AF is like.

Pentax has made some very nice cameras but also some very cheap feeling cameras, in my opinion. I hope the Pentax 17 is on the very nice feeling side of the fence, but can't say one way or the other until I handle one. To their credit, even the cheap feeling Pentax cameras have performed very nicely. It's just too bad they put so little effort into making the Pentax 17 look elegant rather than funky.

G

 

[tortellini_man]

as a younger person who doesn't really do much with negatives, i definitely see the appeal of half frame - i really enjoy using my Olympus Pen EE-2, which doesn't even have any kind of zone focusing

however the price does seem a bit steep for a half frame camera considering the going rate for most used half frame cameras

 

[aw614]

I think other posters are right that this is the precurser of more ambitious cameras (full frame 35, for instance) using the same chassis. I think of how Cosina first came out with the Bessa L and then followed up with the R(x) and T.

Watching the videos yesterday before reading other reviews and thoughts on here, I also kept thinking the same thing that the chassis is probably going to evolve over time and this feels like a proof of concept to stir interest.

Something like a modern but with more control Minolta HiMatic AF2, Himatic G, Konica C35af, scale focus and autofocus models feel like the plan. Im dreaming, but a rangefinder like the Canon A35f? heh

 

[agentlossing]

And as anyone who have tried halfies, it is buttpain to scan or print.

I am thinking my Pacific Image XAs would handle scanning fine; the scan area can be selected easily. And I could scan two frames before fully advancing to the next - depending on whether the scanner behaves as if the frames are normal 35mm and moves forward two half frames, or if it tries to detect the frameline and advance one actual (half) frame. Not sure how it would behave in this instance.

 

[agentlossing]

I would prefer to reserve judgement on either/both cameras until I see them, handle them in person. MiNT Camera's efforts have been very good so far. The InstantKon RF70 and InstantFlex TL70 Plus both have a quality feel, if not quite a Voigtländer folder or Rolleiflex TLR feel. The SLR670 series Polaroid SX-70 variants are all very nicely done and well finished. I'm waiting to see what the Rollei 35AF is like.

Pentax has made some very nice cameras but also some very cheap feeling cameras, in my opinion. I hope the Pentax 17 is on the very nice feeling side of the fence, but can't say one way or the other until I handle one. To their credit, even the cheap feeling Pentax cameras have performed very nicely. It's just too bad they put so little effort into making the Pentax 17 look elegant rather than funky.

G

I was surprised at the build the Pentax 17 ended up with; I think others are right in surmising that this is the first of a series of cameras using at least some of the chassis. It's a more robust camera than I thought their first foray would be given their own language leading up to it.