Video

Ultimamente mi è capitato di trovare un Nikon FM con qualche problemino e li ho risolti tutti tranne uno: quello che mi hai risolto tu con questo video. Grazie! Ottimi video per sintesi e competenza ti faccio i mie complimenti. Un esempio, a mio parere, di come dovrebbero essere fatti questi video.

There are two Ks in Nikkor. Why do you keep calling them Nykors? I get put off by mispronounciation, so I’m out.

Of all the activities I enjoyed in my long life, Photography 📸 with an excellent quality 35mm SLR Camera has to top the list. In my youth, during the 1960's, 70's, 80's and 90's, I shot thousands of frames. For myself, family, friends, and (yes even Paying Customers!) the public. I've shot people, whales, wildlife and weddings. And there is still a THRILL when (by return post) I open up a package of prints, fresh from the Lab and share those captured images with my peers. You can keep your Digital zip boxes! Give me an old Nikon, Canon or Pextax! And I'll bring home the "MONEY SHOT" every time. GOD BLESS GENUINE PHOTOGRAPHY 📸

Bought one of these back in1973 at Ritz Camera w/case for $100.Nice Robust camera,even with its stop down metering,good picture taker😊.,

I like the humour and the review. I heard someone say this was a social media camera in that it works great for Instagram or something like that due to the half-frame. Since I am a social media Luddite, I wouldn't know. But I do know I love old cameras, and was lucky enough to find a 90+ year-old Zeiss Ikon folder whose bellows was still light tight, and with a little TLC works like when new. $35 on eBay. And a friend just found me a TLR Yashica Mat that is pristine and working great for $50 at a camera show. There is just something cool about these old cameras, but then again, since I am a relic, I like cameras that are relics too! Cheers!

I just finished putting light seals in my Spotmatic SP2 it also needed a mirror bumper. I have a number of M42 Pentax lenses to go with the camera

It’s bigger advantage on many winders was to keep a tracking eye in the viewfinder with only having to worry about shutter press. Then remote trigger on a stand or it’s optional vertical grip shutter button.

It’s a pity that they could’ve be fitted with a coupling shoe for use with pre-ai cameras such as the Nikkormats.

I am a grumpy old man too and agree with 99.99% of what you said in your video. This Pentax is too expensive for what it is, which is a over glorified point and shoot camera. All the examples of cameras you gave are much better than the Pentax 17 and cheaper. I never liked half frame and never will. I think most people that will buy this camera want to buy a new film camera, and its a novelty. I liked very much how you explained why the Pentax 17 is not a good camera for serious photographers,

My opinion exactly. My voits are all almost 70 years old. I see no reason they won't double or triple that.

Had one of these in the 70s,nice robust camera,paid $100. New with case at Ritz camera.SEARS also sold the same camera with no name on front plate.

Have my dad's old CL. Would love to service and use it again at some point

I was GIVEN one with 50mm f1.7 and 35-105mm lenses and the Flash -- it worked FINE then has stopped working -- press shutter button -- nothing -- I looked in Book about the Batteries including the 'Hidden ' one -- all seemed OK -- what has gone wring -- has a small resistor gone in base-plate ?

Thanks for the video.. Crazy battery tray.. I almost threw it away thinking it was just some old batteries in weird packaging.

As a German, I don't understand the healthcare point, but I like the cameras.

50-year-old camera with selenium cell is a hit or miss, mostly misses in my experience. A cleaned, restored camera with tested selenium cell will cost about the same as a brand new Pentax in my opinion

As a relatively new photographer, I've seen and played with enough of the cameras like the ones you mentioned to know that they're not very intuitive to use and user experience is honestly bad. You said it yourself, you most likely have to get it serviced to get a good one and it would be too much of a hassle by that point. I've serviced a few cameras and maybe its just bad luck but, I've had to send them back multiple times because of issues that arose after the service and that's just too much back and forth and time to be without a camera.

The Pentax 17 is NNNEEEWWW! Why buy old? "Some technicians are around to fix it". Complete nonsense. The photos are excellent using the Pentax 17. "Idiot lights" in cars are enough unless you are driving a race car with a repertoire of gauges. What you are complaining about is included in today's digital cameras with a much higher prize. You're completely unreasonable. Give credit to Pentax to get us out of the misery of buying old junk. 😮🎉

This channel is not about cameras, it's about health care in Europe.

Hey you kids, get off of my lawn!

Nice video, finally someone with brain 🙂 I have Voigtlander Vito II, I've load Ilford Pan F50 (34 years old) in it, I love this camera, and I never ever gonna replace it with this Pentax piece of shi., I mean- piece of photo equipment 😊

Pentax 17 is more akin to a 90s point and shoot, but with some options for shooting, creative control, auto exposure. Comparing it to all manual everything bricks from the 50s doesn’t really make any sense. Pentax are also set to launch more cameras, with this one being the first. I imagine more features with manual input and slr interface will be coming. Best to celebrate that a new film camera is actually being made in 2024 and not bemoan what it’s not. This is a good sign for film staying in production and supported in future!

i think their argument for not making it fully mechanical was that it's too costly for a cam that isn't a safe bet. they also mentioned that the team had to learn about the mechanics from the old school designers, so it would have probably taken them longer on top of that I would agree with you if the market/demand for these cameras was the same as back when I wasn't even born. But times have changed and compromises had to be made bc of where these cameras currently stand

Your points are fair enough. I'd add one more point to your last list. That would be the close focus ability. I like my Olympus Trip a lot but often wish I could get closer to things I'm shooting. I got curious about half frame cameras so ordered a Canon Demi ee17. I got my Trip for about 65 dollars and the Canon for 130 bucks. Would I like to try the new Pentax? Sure! But they are sold out and I don't have the cash in hand for one anyway so I'll stick with my classic cameras as long as they keep working. I'm a Pentax film and digital camera shooter, btw.

There are brand new Leica mp/m6 selling above $5000, Lomo LCA+ and Wide at $300 which has lesser zone control and significantly lower built quality and a few plastic f8 lens like Kodak h35. There is a $500 Pentax 17. A 30-50 years old camera don't even get the right shutter at lower shutter, regardless how well the service are, it need springs replacements, hinges and peeling skins, viewfinders thats 1/3 of its original visibility for $100? I will take the Pentax 17 thanks.

Economically it starts to make sense only if you take about 4000 photos with it when compared to normal 35mm FF compact camera that cost $20 on 2nd hand market and has AF and some manual controls. In Europe it cost $750 equivallent which is insane. It might make some sense with $250-300 price tag, but for $500-750 camera one would expect at least full manual control, shutter able to do 1/1000s and possibly even AF. But Ricoh is famous for GREED and strange cameras. Btw there are some half frame vintage cameras too. Some cheap some expensive. Olympus PENs are famous.

Hey! Just bought this camera! Cheap as heck. Thanks for your videos.

I hope they sell really well, it may help to bring the price of film down.

Never heard as much bullshit about a camera.

Clearly, the pen tax 17, is not your type of camera. For me is a good balance at a cost. You are comparing a 40-50 year old camera with a brand new. I am tired cleaning fungus, broken cameras, seals etc. So for me a fresh camera for new people is a nice introduction.

I was looking forward to seeing this camera and all I can say is I'm very disappointed. This is what happens when digital engineers try to design a film camera. They try to simplify it by making it more complicated. Why the f*ck didn't they just make a good camera with manual, aperture priority and fully manual zone focus. I don't think I could use one if you gave it to me for free.

They did it this way because they go after hipsters who do not have and do not want to have basic knowledge about photography, and who just want to have something trendy hanging about their neck. A gadget.

I'm a Pentaxian and while I probably won't get the 17 , its because of half frame, plus I have some old 35mm film bodies and plenty of lenses that'll work on them. The problem with vintage cameras is if there is a meter, its most like gone or won't last much longer, so a noob will need at least a hotshoe light meter to take pictures, or a proper light meter on a 70 year old "Panzer" camera. Plus not to mention the hundreds of dollars of maintenance after you buy a second hand one thats been in someone's attic for 50-60 years. These cameras are junk by now, and to get them into good condition takes hundreds of dollars by specialist camera repairers to put back into operation if its possible at all. I'm probably about to get burned on a vintage camera, and many people have bought cameras with failed systems on them too. If you put $50 to $100 bucks into a vintage camera that needs $200 on a teardown service and if you're lucky the light meter still works just get a $100 hotshoe light meter incase the inbuilt light meter breaks down in a middle of a roll. Then they need light seal kits too. Telling people to buy a 60 to 70 year old camera is really really dumb dude. The 17 is designed for noobs who do not know how to use a manual mode. You can't tell a film noob to rush out and buy a 60-70 year old camera sight unseen, and find a tech repair it and hope it will actually work, because of a manual mode that they won't know how to use........ The Pentax 17 is not aimed at manual film shooters, but noobs. They're given a zone focus system to learn about depth of field and to practice visually assessing distance, as they will eventually learn how to use "Hyper Focal Distance Photography" in the future. Its about distance scales and hyper focal distance photography used in large format and 6x7 and the smaller formats. Its not about auto focus as they could have put in an auto focus system and then the user would have been detatched from the process of a semi-manual manual focus experience.

"the darn thing.." Muahahahahaha hahahahahahaha!

The FT2 has the advantage of a modern 1.5 volt battery vs a discontinued 1/3 volt, hot shoe and plastic advance lever which was an improvement over the FTn, and for about the same price on e-bay. This is a great camera to tap into the older Nikon lenses.

Yeah...ANY old SLR film camera by ANY of the common manufacturers is light years more "advanced" in picture-taking capability and flexibility. If you decide you don't like film you will be able to sell the classic camera for what you paid for it. ;)

definately Pen-F series! with that you can use different angle lenses and most importantly focus precisely lol. But anyway still thanksful for Pentax to release the film camera

I’m not rushing out to get one. It doesn’t do anything for me. There might be a large contingent of folks who might find this camera useful. I’m not one of them.

I bought my first Pentax, an H1a, in 1966. Have owned many since and still shoot an ME and MX, ALL of which have better specs than the 17. All of which are less expensive. The people touting the 17 have hairstyles that cost more than some of my best lenses. I'd also throw in the Olympus RC and RD, incredible little beasts. Let the style & status conscious hipsters throw their money away and learn the hard way. Gerat video, my friend.

Vintage has zero warranty, often dirty lenses. I happily imported a Rollei 35 SE (which I zone focus - Ilford HP5 pushed to 1600, f11, about 2m focus distance) from Japan for about £500 with odd parts/covers and am aware it can break anytime with no recourse to the manufacturer. Have an Agfa Super Silette as well and several working Zeiss Ikons (6x6, 6x9) ... The 17 camera is for the Instagram generation dipping their toes in film. It is ludicrous to judge it by any other standard. Pentax states it is the first in a series. So leave it at that.

I was happy to see a new film camera on the market. A little shocked at the price tag for such a basic camera. Will be interesting to see how many they sell. Hopefully, we might see other new film cameras that helps to keep film photography going. I must admit, when I found out how much the Pentax 17 cost, I did think you would be better buying any one of a number of old used compact 35mm cameras. However, maybe there is a market where people want a new 35mm because they lack the knowledge or experience to buy or use a vintage camera? Bigest surprise was the zone focusing. At $500, did wonder why they couldn't have added AF or some type of rangefinder. Go back a few decades and there were lots of 35mm compacts for sale with more tech that cost lor less.

The enormous development and massification of photography in the 20th century occurred due to the consumer market; not all of us can be professional photographers. I celebrate Pentax's decision to produce the Pentax 17 and I hope they continue to design and manufacture more cameras in the future. 🥳

"Because free healthcare isn't really free" --- WTF kind of comment is that? Do you think the Pentax 17 costs more in Europe because healthcare? Btw, the US spends WAY MORE on healthcare than any European country. I guess that I should have expected someone with strong opinions about a camera they haven't touched would also have strong opinions about other subjects they don't understand.

They are, at least, trying to open up the film market with a new camera, and this is the first of a planned future release of other film cameras. It is not aimed at pro photographers, it is designed to be fun without worrying about settings. You just sound like a grumpy old man, photo snob. Oh! Yeah...our "free" health care maybe something we pay with our taxes, but it is still a lot cheaper than having to pay out insurance, in which there will be clauses.

Spent two seconds watching this until I heard your idiotic comment about healthcare. Get real.

At least they are trying to do something about bringing a new film camera into the market. I guess there will always be people complaining about everything and bring others down.

Just get a Pentax ME with a 50 mm lens and call it a day! More versatility and value!

Hi Brian, the problem here is certainly not the camera or the price. The problem that some analog photographers and analog enthusiasts have is that this camera was designed for a completely different main target group. The main focus is on all those who have never held an analog camera in their lives and have so far mainly or entirely photographed with a smartphone. There are also many analog enthusiasts who will get involved with the new Pentax 17, try it out and learn to appreciate it as an always-on camera. You can see this not only in the CZcams videos of other photo influencers, but also in all the photo forums, on all the social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Discord and so on. This camera is new, there will be spare parts for this camera for the next 20 years, this camera has a warranty and a manufacturer that can be contacted directly. The camera is designed for the viewing habits of the smartphone generation and offers the chance that analog photography can live on in 20 or 40 years with further models from Pentax and other manufacturers. So instead of complaining and comparing the Pentax 17 with old cameras, I'm looking forward to the fact that maybe the kids, teens and young adults can break away from their smartphones and possibly secure the future of analog photography. Consider the Pentax 17 for what it is: As an attempted and apparently also functioning link between the generations, some of whom no longer understand each other at all. Not understanding in the sense of arguing or anything like that, but understanding in the sense of understanding what makes the other generation tick. Maybe that's a better way of looking at the Pentax 17 and, by the way, I know a few people over the age of 60 or 70 who have bought a new Pentax and were as enthusiastic as little children. Just a little anecdote to think about. Greetings Lutz

The Pentax 17 is counterintuitive to the reasons for people shooting with film. Film shooters are better off with one of those classics than the 17. All the best.

I think Pentax have probably done their market research on this and you pretty much hit the nail on the head when you said its for street photography (most of which doesn't rely on fine grain) and you get twice the number of shots for your cost of film. Would I buy one ... nope; I'll buy a cheaper camera that can do more things, however of course cheaper means older and more likely to jam up quicker. Its a bit like trading in your car due to repair costs for a more expensive, newer, simpler but more reliable new one. Fortunately, you don't have to pay insurance or road tax on cameras .... Talking of taxes ... 'free health care isn't really free', you're quite right. People who have more expendable income pay more in Value Added Tax by buying goods ( percentage variable from one EU country to the next) which subsidises the basic health care for those that can't afford it. If I break my leg health care is free at point of need, when I'm buying a new car the VAT pays for that medical care; if I buy a yacht it pays for my health care and for the health care of a poor family as well. Sort of state sanctioned Good Samaritan.