You're the first person I've found that is stating the obvious. I own many Pentax cameras film cameras that are very high quality and the most I paid for any of them is $200. Most were around $100.
When exactly? Used ones from the last century? The price kinda fits when you consider how much older ones would be when you adjust to inflation. Be around $180 in 1980 prices.
@@nathansstuff1547The used ones from the last century are widely available, have much better build quality, a wide range of lens options, etc. For $500 in today’s dollars there are many other slr film cameras that would better serve someone new to film photography.
this camera is not aimed at enthusiasts. it is aimed at people who want a step up from disposable cameras that is better built, gives them more options, a glass lens. makes the film cheaper in the long run, the price is surprisingly normal actually. if you take the release price of comparable cameras from back in the day and account for inflation it is even slightly cheaper. you sir, are not the target audience. WE are not the target audience.
additionally we always take a risk when we buy vintage gear. imagine spending 200 dollars on a highly regarded vintage camera. you checked if it worked. and it works for 2 more days, then the shutter dies. oop well maybe you should have LOOKED BETTER. is the usual reaction from certain snobs. we shouldn't gatekeep this community. the more people enter the hobby the better it will be for us cause the chance of new cameras being made targeted at hobbyist and professionals increases
Why would they move from a film camera to another film camera in 2024 unless they are of a sophisticated niche of pro film esthetic. This is for experienced film shooters like myself that want something new, like a brand new film camera that has some unusual features that tempt a different shooting experience. $500 is not a big deal for this camera.
It is aimed at whoever wants one. I am a very experience film photographer and I bought one cause it is a nice, pocketable casual point-and-shoot. I don't know why people are so enthusiastic to put this camera in a "whos it for" box.
i partially agree, but the lens is not something that compensete the price, if an f3.5 and the price in front of older cameras at the times does not make sense, in past you can't choose, dont exist cheap film cameras today exist cheap film cameras, and way more better :) i understend the target, we are not, but who will buy this camera? maybe collectionists
@@AnalogPhotographyEU Well, a ton of people bought it because it is pretty much sold out, pentax released a press release a day or two ago saying they got orders for way more than anticipated and they probably can't fill all the backorders. Mine arrives on Wednesday. I have a bin of old cameras I bought there were "working" when they were not. The cameras in that bin cost more collectively then the brand new Pentax. You take a gamble on old gear, and if I had to choose on rolling the dice to buy a 50 year old camera for a couple hundred bucks - or a brand new camera that does what I want for $499 - I will buy the new one every time. I have 15+ film cameras I use often and I can't wait to get my hands on a high quality, brand new film camera that has good glass, and nice controls.
This rant makes no sense. :( You hate the grip, but have never held it, while people who have seem to think it's Just Fine. You hate the exposure compensation dial, but have never used it. It only goes down to ISO 50, but you also have +/- 2 stops on the exposure compensation dial. You expect it to be both a better SLR than a vintage SLR and a better half-frame compact than a vintage half-fame compact. It also must compete on price with used fleaBay gear despite being factory new! It's not meant for people like you and me, who have a lot of knowledge and a closet already full of camera gear. It's meant to lower the barrier to entry, and to provide a mid-range option that's not a Lomography plastic toy or a blisteringly expensive Leica. And yes, it's… Odd. Pentax gonna Pentax. My biggest gripe is, I do wish they'd gone with aperture ring and shutter speed dial instead of a bunch of confusing modes. Pentax just love, love, love their mode dials. (Have you looked at the mode dials on most Pentax DSLRs? Haha!) For beginners I'd rather get them started learning the Exposure Triangle, first thing.
No, just being better than a half frame compact vintage would be a good start. That by itself, not anything more. Which it fails to do. There are multiple 1960s cameras better than it on basically every single feature. E.g. the Canon Demi. The Demi can do up to NINE stops of exposure compensation, for example... For $100-120. Why should anyone care about "factory new"? What advantage does that have for my photography, exactly? Does the film know that it's in a factory new camera and behave more sharply les it be disrespectful?
@@gavinjenkins899 The advantage for your photography is a camera that works and doesn't fail irreparably after a roll or two through it-something I've experienced too many times already with decades-old cameras from fleaBay.
the other new plastic film cameras in the market costs 1/6 than Pentax, but comes with plastic lens, super slow lens, zero controls, poor winding/rewinding experience. this new Pentax camera gives the proper feel of a film camera.
So what? Don't buy either of them. If you want sleek sports car premium HALF frame cameras with meters, get a Canon Demi for example. Better manual controls, no batteries (but still a meter), also very sharp glass AND faster than P17 lens, all solid metal much better made than the P17, beautiful, sleeker in your pocket, and like $120.
Your video feels a little over-dramatic to me. I think pentax chose half frame because they are perfectly aware of the fact that they are not aiming to replace all those wonderful old full frame cameras, and rather aiming to compete with old half frame ones with their updated optics. What i dont understand is how a person can compare 30 yr old used camera price to a brand new one with warranty. Sure go ahead and buy as much old gear as you want, that’s what ive been doing also for the past 10 yrs, but pentax 17 price is well justified and doesnt deserve this kind of insult.
Exactly. Lot of the cameras people are talking about from the 70's and 80's that they're comparing it to would've cost more than this new if you look at inflation. The price seems justified too since no one apart from Leica really makes a film camera like this anymore. Would've had to come up with a lot of it from scratch.
@@nathansstuff1547 Yes, unfortunately many people forget to adjust for inflation. And if you consider the reality of the currencies that existed then and now, that €549 (the price of a Pentax 17 in Germany today) would have been only €100 in the 1970s (if the euro had already existed then), today's price is put into perspective enormously compared to then.
@@nathansstuff1547 Yes, unfortunately many people forget to adjust for inflation. And if you consider the reality of the currencies that existed then and now, that €549 (the price of a Pentax 17 in Germany today) would have been only €100 in the 1970s (if the euro had already existed then), today's price is put into perspective enormously compared to then. I have just looked again in dollars: $100 in 1970 = $809.46 in 2024
Or they can revive the Pentax Spotmatic, for example. M42 lenses are plenty and overall affordable. Because nowadays there's only 1 company which still make 35mm cameras: Leica.
I really like the look and features of the new Pentax 17 but for me it's just a bit out of my budget. I'm sure it will be a great success and will hopefully bring more new film cameras to the market. I already own a 1960s half frame camera, the Olympus Pen EE, I only paid £15 for it.😊 I've added your channel, it's good to connect with other analogue photographers 📸
In all honestly the price of that Pentax 17 is very reasonable considering modern camera prices. It has warranty, it's well built, it has a few interesting quirks, flash, electronics, it's automatic. It's essentially the price of a compact Olympus or Sony while offering a quite unique experience and actually putting some life into film photography - a new film camera means new parts, new people trying it out, more film stock sold etc. etc. If anything, analog shooters should be supportive of this project instead of whining they can get an old dirty FM2 or a garden sale digicam for 100$. This is a brand new item with warranty and actually some cool features. It's designed for point and shoot and gives You 72 frames. The automatic nature of it means it's beginner friendly. Pentax is a niche company, and I was very skeptical of this project, but overall I think they did a fantastic job.
I think this camera is more for people who are familiar with 35mm format and who has never been interested in half format. Half format used to mean worse image quality, but with advanced optics the images are actually turning up nice, so its a new light shined for the overlooked format. Also it really offers some kind of new experience to film photographers.
@@lai2ke4 so don't get it. Keep buying used gear, never buy new, the be surprised the prices of the used gear go up. Because they do, because there are no new analogs being made, and vintage stuff keeps going up in price.
This is a brand new, warrantied camera from a great manufacturer. A new film camera in 2024. The price is completely fine. I pre-ordered mine Monday. I would have paid more. I will by buying the MiNT Rollei 35AF too - and I can't wait to see all the smooth brains have a collective stroke over what that costs. Zone focus is fine. Half frame is fine. Fixed shutter / variable aperture is fine. I don't understand the lack of working brain cells people are demonstrating by trying to compare this to SLRs, or complaining about "manual" controls, or whining about half-frame. News flash - this is a "point-and-shoot." Say it with me now, party people - "POINT AND SHOOT." That is why zone focusing, 72 shots per roll, and program mode make sense. That is why it doesn't have manual control, that is why it doesn't have a hot shoe. Just like all the other point-and-shoots they made for decades. Why is this so hard to grasp? And now that we have cleared that up - $499 is perfectly acceptable price. Most of this camera's predecessors when adjusted for inflation are in the same range. Quality fixed lens digitals these days are way more money than this camera. This mentality of "Film camera = cheap" is B.S. Also, why are people so hung up on "who this camera is for?" Who gives a flying fornication. Everyone has their thongs all tangled up because it is for "influencers" and "new to film" people. No it isn't. It is for whoever wants it. I am on the upper, upper level of film retarda....erm enthusiast - I shoot 110,35,120, and 4x5. I develop my own film, print my own prints, make my own mattes and frames. I bought this camera cause it is the perfect "in the pocket" everyday "spray and pray" casual camera. WOW! Now it makes sense right? Maybe everyone can stop with the engagement / click bait - and just be thrilled we are getting a new film camera in 2024 that *actually* is- priced well. Hell, I paid more than what this cost for my MiNT instax camera........
It's stupid. People are seeing the prices of used film cameras then just thinking this should be lower priced cause of them. Must be forgetting that Pentax would've spent a decent bit of money developing it and getting equipment to make them.
Way to go sir you’re spot on with that comment if I had enough wedge I’d be buying one , so it’s still using my Pentax mx for now or maybe go pre-decimal and get a box camera 😊
I mean, you're precisely the target group I imagine for this camera. Someone who is more into buying cameras than using them. A collector with a buying obsession who will probably never shoot more than 5 rolls through the P17.
@@Fauxbourg I mean, you're assuming a lot there skipper. I have been shooting film for more than 30 years. I don't leave the house without one of my cameras. I probably shoot a minimum of two - four rolls a week (or 35mm and/or 120) and at least a couple sheets of 4x5 a month - for decades. The Pentax is a perfect replacement for my old HiMatics that are getting a bit worn out at this point causing me to carry my Fuji GS645W which is substantially larger (and also a zone focus like the Pentax ) and much more expensive/fragile than the Pentax. While you are right, I collect cameras - but I also use my cameras heavily. You have really went all out with your hating of this camera - replying to nearly every person supporting it on this video. Why do you care so much if it isn't something you are interested in?
@@theangrymarmot8336 I'm not necessarily hating on the camera even though I must admit that I think it's a weird product with weird specs and weird pricing that will find it hard to find its audience. Lots of people are just bending over backwards to explain this product and that's what I don't like. 1, pricing: Yes, 550€ might be a fair price for what the camera offers and vintage film cameras were much more expensive back in the day. But that's not the point. They're dirt cheap now and most of them offer much more than the Pentax 17. Wether it's fair or not, this new camera will have to compete with used market prices and it will struggle to do so. 2, targeting a young audience: Again this comes down to a pricing issue, 550€ is just too much of an entry barrier for young people (say 14 to 20 years old). If you're interested in trying out film at that age, you'll pick up your dads/grandfathers old gear and see if film works for you. OR you'll buy a cheap disposable at a super market. The P17 is not priced as a low barrier entry camera and it doesn't offer enough to enthusiasts to warrant a purchase, besides the "It's great they're building a new film camera"-argument. So who will this camera be for, really? Collectors, probably, in the long run. 3, being "sold out": I used to work in logistics and this argument is currently regurgitated all over the place. But just because the Pentax warehouse might be empty right now, that doesn't mean the camera is sold out. It just means that they have sold their company stock to photography shops. I've been to a few of them this weekend and also checked online in Germany, and I can buy the Pentax 17 from every single shop that stocks them, right now. It is definitely not sold out.
One there are no parts for those old cameras anymore. Even here in NYC many of them cannot be repaired. $499, a fraction of the price of the cheapest beginner digital camera, for a beautiful mostly metal camera, repairable for decades with a full Ricoh warranty is not too expensive. It’s the price of one third party prime lens. Lastly people spend hundreds on ancient compacts like the Olympus XA-1. If you love film, Pentax 17 is a no brainer.
You can get an ALL metal, not mostly metal, half frame camera, with a better lens than this (2.8, even sharper), superior manual controls, more portable shape, no annoying focus by wire weirdness, no battery that can run out (it has a meter, but it's like a solar panel one it powers itself), better in every single way, camera than this, for $100-120, called a Canon Demi. Then you can buy 3 more of them as backups if you want (which also means you DO have parts for them. x3 of every part, in fact, though why bother to repair at all when you have 4 copies?), and still be saving money. Zero reason to choose P17 over that.
I don't get all the negative comments by many people. They are claiming it's too expensive & better to buy a used 1970s camera. The thing is Used film cameras are not cheap & are not reliable at all. I can't give explanation for some people who might find it pleasing when their used old film camera brokes (mechanical) or just dies (electronic). Maybe they like self inflected pain 😬. Many of us don't have the knowledge to repair it ourselves when it breaks & cameras with electronics (like the canon Ae1, Nikon f3, Pentax me) need someone skilled to do so. And quite a lot of us are not lucky to have a person/store near our place that still repairs film cameras in this day & age. And how can anyone buy Leica film camera? It cost the same as a car where I'm based. So I'm really happy Pentax has launched this new film camera.
Yes they are cheap. Better cameras than this by far are for sale as I speak for $100 in fully working condition. Konica Eye. Canon Demi. Canon Twist 35. Yashica Samurai (that one is half frame and autofocus and has a zoom lens, all for $100) And yes they are plenty reliable. I've bought dozens of ebay cameras, never once have I had one single one. Not one. Ever fail after the 30 day ebay warranty (if it's before that it cost you $0). And you don't need to repair anything anyway even if one did happen to break. Just buy a second one if you dont' want to repair. You'll still be hundreds of dollars ahead of a P17. And then buy a 3rd one. And a 4th one. You'll STILL be ahead of the cost of a P17.
It's funny to see people viciously attacking those who mention the very, very obvious shortcomings of this camera and the shortcomings of the direction it points to. Just be honest folks, you cheer for this camera not because it's a good product. It's absolutely mediocre. You cheer for it because you wan't it to "save film." Only, it won't, not that it needs "saving" to begin with. You're selfishly throwing the novices that might buy this camera under the bus because it supposedly "supports the cause." That's a very bad reason to support a product.
A half-frame gives half the resolution of a 35mm film, which is already limited. And $500 bucks? No way! For $500, buy a medium-format vintage camera and call it a day. You get better results with it.
The price makes perfect sense, people in the last few days have shown you get plenty of "resolution" from images using the Pentax 17 too. A lot of what you can buy used is from the 70's and 80's with questionable service history, and technically cost more than this one when they were new. Edit: I see you've stopped me from making any new comments. What things did you not like me saying? That it's silly to compare used camera prices to it? Ricoh exists to make money, they don't make film, so they're not going to sell their cameras at a loss. They spent money developing this camera too, which as well as manufacturing costs, goes into what the consumer pays. Everyone sells things for more than they "cost". They price them so "high" cause they need to make money back on what they spent creating a product.
Copium. The K1000 is roughly the same price when adjusted for inflation with none of the limitations. The $500 price tag hurts even more when you consider our living costs in 2024 compared to the 80's 90's.
At the times, you cant choose film cameras, there was only thaht ones, but today you can choose to have more for less price and cameras like the nikon, olympus, or the spotmatic itself , works perfect still today
@AnalogPhotographyEU So just cause you're comparing it to the used market, you think it's overpriced. Forgetting they would've spent a decent bit of money on R&D and actually getting a lot of the tooling to make these. If these do well and they make SLRs like they're planning, will you say they're overpriced when they inevitably cost close to $1000?
@@nathansstuff1547 Yeah but your argument doesn't matter. The Pentax 17 competes with the used market wether you like it or not. And in most (almost every) instances, it makes more sense to go for a high-end used camera than this.
So to talk about the handling of the camera and its sense or nonsense without having had it in my hands is very ambitious. In my opinion, you can only really form an opinion once you've held the camera in your own hands and tried it out. Before that, a judgement is more like hearsay and prejudgement, sorry. And since you are only showing the camera and these are only pictures that you have not taken with the camera yourself, the statements are not really worth much and I say that as a trained photographer who doesn't really have much to do with half-format cameras per se.
czcams.com/video/6ehj45farwc/video.html this is olympus pen D . i shoot half prame, this is my italian channel, as you can see ive used a lot of cameras and if is lighter then the pen d or any pentax, and i can use those cameras without grip, i really think this grip is not really neccessary :) i dont have in my hands, but is something called experience :)
@@AnalogPhotographyEU You can gain experience with so many other cameras or even half-format cameras and yet you can't form a judgement about a new half-format camera that you've never held in your hands or photographed with before without having held it in your hands or photographed with it. I have never photographed with so many cameras, but I have photographed with so many others. However, I would never dare to make a judgement about a camera in terms of handling or the feeling of shooting with it, or the quality of the workmanship, or the usefulness or quality of the functions, if I have never held it in my hands or photographed with it. This experience with other cameras is then worth nothing, except to spread prejudices. And to be honest, when I look at the testimonials of those who have actually tried out this camera so far, I have to say that by far the majority were more than positively surprised, which is not without reason.
Hey, you're the first one who is noticing that the ISO can't be set to anything lower than ISO 50. I agree with the other comments here that the Pentax 17 is not made to replace an old SLR! It's a simple-to-use compact camera, and I don't see anything wrong there. It's made for photographers who maybe want to get their first-ever analog camera, they don't want to worry too much about settings and things ... it's a cool little camera and I'm actually pretty happy it's not just a "remake" of some old camera, but a really clever new design! The price ... yeahh 549 Euros is a bit steep for what it is. But prices for all cameras (new from the store) are just ridiculous ... it's the times, they maybe just can't produce any cheaper today. BUT the ISO thing is really weird. There are some interesting films out there that have less than ISO 50 and they're on sale by Lomography and all those other brands ... so you go into an analog camera store, buy that brand-new analog camera, and then you can't get every film that they have in the same store cause some ISO settings are missing. I really don't get why Pentax did that !! (Yeeeah you can use the exposure compensation dial ... but c'mon that's no excuse for the missing ISO settings.)
Regarding the ISO, there's a bit of a work-around if you want to shoot lower than ISO 50. You can still go "lower" by adjusting the exposure compensation. So you can go two stops lower, which would make the lowest ISO 12, I think. And if you want to shot slower film than that, I think this would not be the camera most people would go for anyways.
Your video is funny. Your channel title is "analog photography", but it doesn't look like you do a lot of "analog photography"... based on your video listing 🤔. I think that this Pentax 17 is rather made for young people who have never used film and who photographed with a smartphone (hence the vertical framing)... This is the opinion of an old guy who bought his first Pentax spotmatic SLR in 1966...😊 Bravo PENTAX !
So in other words, people ignorant of how much they're getting ripped off by buying a worse, less featured, flimsier version of better cameras for 5x the money. Yes, actually, I fully agree with you, that is indeed the target market. (I've also never used any of my multiple half frame cameras that did not have vertical default framing by the way. That's not new, that's the normal way...)
Didn't test the Pentax 17, doesn't research his claims, proceeds to compare apples to oranges and then moves on to insults. Well done Sir! You have achieved the level of grade A certified bullshitter!
@@AnalogPhotographyEU You compared used camera prices to it. Ricoh exists to make money. They aren't going to lose money just to get a bunch of people to start using film which they don't make.
@@nathansstuff1547 Even if the P17 is adequately priced, it will always compete with the used market. It's not better than the old cameras you can buy used, it's not better build quality (arguably worse than most) and it's much more expensive. Yeah you get warranty, but in the EU you also get warranty for used cameras purchased in professional stores. So I kinda have to agree, I don't see who this camera is for.
I honestly say the camera is cool and stylish. BUT the price is really way too high for this type of camera. I see the camera more as a beginner point and shoot but a beginner would never want to spend that much money on a film camera
For what is, it's actually priced pretty well, even if it seems expensive for a lot of people. A lot of people complaining about it are comparing it to the cost of a used camera, and say it should be priced closer to them, which doesn't really make sense.
@@nathansstuff1547 i read many comments but this is just not true. A digital camera is magnitues complexer and more difficult to manufacture. Even new ones. You can get the EOS r100 with a lens for less. A new full auto / autofocus camera with every quirk there is. The only difference is, that it is not analog. The high cost is only because the development cost as much and there is not enough people buying it (compared to a mirrorless digital) and this drives the price. But if you objectively look at what you get, it is way to expensive. The shutter tech existed 40 years ago, zone af is less complex, it has a fixed lens and therefore easier focus. It does not even have an image-processor, this is essentially the filmstock. Furthermore, all the compared cameras (used) have many more functions and are considered professional cameras and flagships at the time... This is not.
Even if it's not for us, it's very good that they made it. It confuses me that they decided to reinvent the logic of automatic shooting, when the usual rings with the A position worked just fine from the 70s to modern Fuji. They believe that this is more convenient for beginners, but I can argue with this, besides, for at least some conscious shooting it is much easier to work with conventional semi-automatic modes than to try to deceive all these modes, forcing them to do what you want. But nevertheless, I'm glad that this camera exists. This camera will make Pentax a LOT of money, not as much as Instax makes Fuji, but I think it will be a very good profit for the company. This camera will also bring a lot of benefits to film photography in general.
I disagree, they made it instead of other thigns they could have made instead, there is an opportunity cost. They could have made a new camera that was not wholly redundant, and that used new technology we've discovered in the last 60 years. If you want to get real crazy, you could use technology from the last, dare I say 20 years even? 10?! Making this instead means we didn't get that, which would have been great for all shooters, new ones and old ones.
It's a camera targeting influencers, not anyone who actually wants quality returns from use. It's priced out of itself with conflicting design choices that both rob you of control and overcomplicates auto modes.
Just sent for a Nikon f601 30euros their not mechanical but Nikon generally build tough cameras I can shoot it in manual and aperture priority with my manual focus nikkors or put it on program with an af lens how much film can you buy for 520 euros Pentax are barking up the wrong tree on this one Fuji have shown people still prefer the old analogue control system 1/2 frame ok cuts costs fixed lens yes but f3.5 on such a large camera olympus done the same on the xa2 but that was truly pocket sized I think it's been so long Pentax have forgotten how to build a film camera
No it doesn't do that. Because nothing was stopping you from buying any of 20 different models of half frame camera just like this one that already existed, and saving exactly as much on film, a year ago. So it did nothing to "let you" do that thing you were already capable of doing. And you were (and still are) able to do it for $400 less, too. You did want to save money, right? So you are super excited to hear that you can save half on film AND also save $400 by getting an even better half frame camera than this for $100, then?
Just discovered your Channel. And will subscribe. Fellow Europeans unite. The Pentax 7, i really do not like it. Halfframe. Plastic build. Not aimed at general photography. And the price. You can buy 2 full analog systems for that. OM1, Pentax ME, Nikon FE, Canon AE1. I spit on it indeed.
Thank you. I do not understand this camera. The lens makes it look super cheap. the modes seem to indicate it is just a complicated point-and-shoot. I'm not a fan of half frame as 36 exp is already a lot to get through when you take your time with the film. The whole thing is just disappointing, and at $500, it's crazy. I've seen comments saying, "but it has a warranty!" I'd wager my 40 yr old Minolta will outlast these new cameras and if it dies, I can buy another 4 'high-end' SLR's second hand for less than this 'budget' Point-and-shoot. I know we have to buy new cameras if manufacturers will ever be motivated to build new ones, but you have to at least make a camera worth buying!
I feel like this camera could be a good gift, and that's all imo especially the packaging for a film lover. With the price you can get a bunch of good Professional cameras like you said, hell 100 dollar can get you a way better option like the Yashica Electro. But still, it's Pentax's wetting their feet. We might get something better if this is a good one
Hey a fellow film tuber who's keeping it reel! I also posted a critical take on the Pentax 17. So many budget vintage gear alternatives for a half frame cam that have better features. Thanks for sharing man! Hopefully Pentax doesn't try to cancel us! Lol Subbed. Good luck and god speed! Happy snapping.
El caso es que en los juicios se ve algo objetivo, que no es fácil tenerlo en la mano para ver que no entra en el manual, o que el lío es fuego y estimado! objeto ciertamente se pueden hacer consideraciones sin verlo en la mano
People bitching about the price saying that “well you can get blah blah blah for there same price and a better camera “ are missing the point. Yes you can get an old camera does the same or more or less but the fact that PENTAX are keeping film analogue alive by investing in new cameras is a marvellous thing. Don’t forget film cameras back in the days were also not cheap. A canon Demi 1963 would cost you 1200 GBP in today’s equivalent. The price of a brand new film camera considering the investment in producing this products is amazing. Yes its not for everyone but the real film communities should support this produce even if they do not intend in buying one. Also how can you review a product without actually have one and using it extensively?? Too many wannabe film CZcamsr photographers jumping on the wagon.
there is a small but fundamental difference in terms of prices in 1960 you had no alternatives, either you bought the camera for 1200 pounds, or you didn't take photos today you either pay 550 euros for this piece of plastic or for 50 euros you get a real camera built to last forever! I agree that it's a good thing that film cameras are produced today! but if there's a demand for film, companies produce film, and this doesn't necessarily require the production of new ones since there are an infinite number of them in circulation I've had more than 200 analogue cameras in my hands I've dismantled many of them to the core! I usually shoot with film, I think I have a say in the matter! as for the review I made some considerations on facts, I don't need to hold it in my hand to know that it doesn't shoot in manual, and the focus is by estimate
The camera is in stock at every single photography store in my city. Selling like hotcakes should be reserved to something like the 100VI that is backordered for probably a year into the future at least. I could go out tomorrow and buy the Pentax 17 from 10 different stores.
@@Fauxbourg Considering that, according to Pentax RIcoh, the camera is "scheduled for release on July 12, 2024" I find rather strange that you can buy it everywhere. However it's a fact that they are not accepting more pre-orders since the pre-orders have outpaced the prodution.
You're the first person I've found that is stating the obvious. I own many Pentax cameras film cameras that are very high quality and the most I paid for any of them is $200. Most were around $100.
Thank's a lot , really! 😁😁😁
When exactly? Used ones from the last century? The price kinda fits when you consider how much older ones would be when you adjust to inflation. Be around $180 in 1980 prices.
@@nathansstuff1547The used ones from the last century are widely available, have much better build quality, a wide range of lens options, etc. For $500 in today’s dollars there are many other slr film cameras that would better serve someone new to film photography.
there is a thing called inflation. An FM2 from the 1980s would cost roughly 1200 dollars today. But sure, $500 is waaaay too much.
@@MrFilipcee There’s also a thing in economics called economic value.
this camera is not aimed at enthusiasts. it is aimed at people who want a step up from disposable cameras that is better built, gives them more options, a glass lens. makes the film cheaper in the long run, the price is surprisingly normal actually. if you take the release price of comparable cameras from back in the day and account for inflation it is even slightly cheaper. you sir, are not the target audience. WE are not the target audience.
additionally we always take a risk when we buy vintage gear. imagine spending 200 dollars on a highly regarded vintage camera. you checked if it worked. and it works for 2 more days, then the shutter dies. oop well maybe you should have LOOKED BETTER. is the usual reaction from certain snobs. we shouldn't gatekeep this community. the more people enter the hobby the better it will be for us cause the chance of new cameras being made targeted at hobbyist and professionals increases
Why would they move from a film camera to another film camera in 2024 unless they are of a sophisticated niche of pro film esthetic. This is for experienced film shooters like myself that want something new, like a brand new film camera that has some unusual features that tempt a different shooting experience. $500 is not a big deal for this camera.
It is aimed at whoever wants one. I am a very experience film photographer and I bought one cause it is a nice, pocketable casual point-and-shoot. I don't know why people are so enthusiastic to put this camera in a "whos it for" box.
i partially agree, but the lens is not something that compensete the price, if an f3.5
and the price in front of older cameras at the times does not make sense, in past you can't choose, dont exist cheap film cameras
today exist cheap film cameras, and way more better :)
i understend the target, we are not, but who will buy this camera? maybe collectionists
@@AnalogPhotographyEU Well, a ton of people bought it because it is pretty much sold out, pentax released a press release a day or two ago saying they got orders for way more than anticipated and they probably can't fill all the backorders. Mine arrives on Wednesday. I have a bin of old cameras I bought there were "working" when they were not. The cameras in that bin cost more collectively then the brand new Pentax. You take a gamble on old gear, and if I had to choose on rolling the dice to buy a 50 year old camera for a couple hundred bucks - or a brand new camera that does what I want for $499 - I will buy the new one every time. I have 15+ film cameras I use often and I can't wait to get my hands on a high quality, brand new film camera that has good glass, and nice controls.
This rant makes no sense. :(
You hate the grip, but have never held it, while people who have seem to think it's Just Fine. You hate the exposure compensation dial, but have never used it. It only goes down to ISO 50, but you also have +/- 2 stops on the exposure compensation dial. You expect it to be both a better SLR than a vintage SLR and a better half-frame compact than a vintage half-fame compact. It also must compete on price with used fleaBay gear despite being factory new!
It's not meant for people like you and me, who have a lot of knowledge and a closet already full of camera gear. It's meant to lower the barrier to entry, and to provide a mid-range option that's not a Lomography plastic toy or a blisteringly expensive Leica.
And yes, it's… Odd. Pentax gonna Pentax. My biggest gripe is, I do wish they'd gone with aperture ring and shutter speed dial instead of a bunch of confusing modes. Pentax just love, love, love their mode dials. (Have you looked at the mode dials on most Pentax DSLRs? Haha!) For beginners I'd rather get them started learning the Exposure Triangle, first thing.
Yeah but it doesn't lower the barrier to entry with its 550€ price tag, that's the problem.
No, just being better than a half frame compact vintage would be a good start. That by itself, not anything more. Which it fails to do. There are multiple 1960s cameras better than it on basically every single feature. E.g. the Canon Demi. The Demi can do up to NINE stops of exposure compensation, for example... For $100-120. Why should anyone care about "factory new"? What advantage does that have for my photography, exactly? Does the film know that it's in a factory new camera and behave more sharply les it be disrespectful?
@@gavinjenkins899 The advantage for your photography is a camera that works and doesn't fail irreparably after a roll or two through it-something I've experienced too many times already with decades-old cameras from fleaBay.
the other new plastic film cameras in the market costs 1/6 than Pentax, but comes with plastic lens, super slow lens, zero controls, poor winding/rewinding experience. this new Pentax camera gives the proper feel of a film camera.
ok i agree, but is not the double the price , is 7 times more, and also a piece of plastic like others cost too much 70$ for what they are >:)
So what? Don't buy either of them. If you want sleek sports car premium HALF frame cameras with meters, get a Canon Demi for example. Better manual controls, no batteries (but still a meter), also very sharp glass AND faster than P17 lens, all solid metal much better made than the P17, beautiful, sleeker in your pocket, and like $120.
Your video feels a little over-dramatic to me.
I think pentax chose half frame because they are perfectly aware of the fact that they are not aiming to replace all those wonderful old full frame cameras, and rather aiming to compete with old half frame ones with their updated optics.
What i dont understand is how a person can compare 30 yr old used camera price to a brand new one with warranty. Sure go ahead and buy as much old gear as you want, that’s what ive been doing also for the past 10 yrs, but pentax 17 price is well justified and doesnt deserve this kind of insult.
And if you look at what a new digital camera from Pentax, Nikon, Sony, Canon etc. would cost, the price of the Pentax 17 is more than justifiable.
Exactly. Lot of the cameras people are talking about from the 70's and 80's that they're comparing it to would've cost more than this new if you look at inflation. The price seems justified too since no one apart from Leica really makes a film camera like this anymore. Would've had to come up with a lot of it from scratch.
@@nathansstuff1547 Yes, unfortunately many people forget to adjust for inflation. And if you consider the reality of the currencies that existed then and now, that €549 (the price of a Pentax 17 in Germany today) would have been only €100 in the 1970s (if the euro had already existed then), today's price is put into perspective enormously compared to then.
@@nathansstuff1547
Yes, unfortunately many people forget to adjust for inflation. And if you consider the reality of the currencies that existed then and now, that €549 (the price of a Pentax 17 in Germany today) would have been only €100 in the 1970s (if the euro had already existed then), today's price is put into perspective enormously compared to then.
I have just looked again in dollars:
$100 in 1970 = $809.46 in 2024
Or they can revive the Pentax Spotmatic, for example. M42 lenses are plenty and overall affordable. Because nowadays there's only 1 company which still make 35mm cameras: Leica.
I really like the look and features of the new Pentax 17 but for me it's just a bit out of my budget.
I'm sure it will be a great success and will hopefully bring more new film cameras to the market.
I already own a 1960s half frame camera, the Olympus Pen EE, I only paid £15 for it.😊
I've added your channel, it's good to connect with other analogue photographers 📸
thanks a lot :DD
In all honestly the price of that Pentax 17 is very reasonable considering modern camera prices. It has warranty, it's well built, it has a few interesting quirks, flash, electronics, it's automatic. It's essentially the price of a compact Olympus or Sony while offering a quite unique experience and actually putting some life into film photography - a new film camera means new parts, new people trying it out, more film stock sold etc. etc. If anything, analog shooters should be supportive of this project instead of whining they can get an old dirty FM2 or a garden sale digicam for 100$.
This is a brand new item with warranty and actually some cool features. It's designed for point and shoot and gives You 72 frames. The automatic nature of it means it's beginner friendly. Pentax is a niche company, and I was very skeptical of this project, but overall I think they did a fantastic job.
A beginner probably isn’t spending $500 on their first camera
With that kind of money, you can get yashica T4, Olympus epic, though second hand, they are much much better that this newly produced toy.
I think this camera is more for people who are familiar with 35mm format and who has never been interested in half format.
Half format used to mean worse image quality, but with advanced optics the images are actually turning up nice, so its a new light shined for the overlooked format.
Also it really offers some kind of new experience to film photographers.
@@lai2ke4 so don't get it. Keep buying used gear, never buy new, the be surprised the prices of the used gear go up. Because they do, because there are no new analogs being made, and vintage stuff keeps going up in price.
60 years of film cameras, and this is innovative beacuse the flash
cammon don't try tu defend this camera only because is write pentax!
This is a brand new, warrantied camera from a great manufacturer. A new film camera in 2024. The price is completely fine. I pre-ordered mine Monday. I would have paid more. I will by buying the MiNT Rollei 35AF too - and I can't wait to see all the smooth brains have a collective stroke over what that costs. Zone focus is fine. Half frame is fine. Fixed shutter / variable aperture is fine. I don't understand the lack of working brain cells people are demonstrating by trying to compare this to SLRs, or complaining about "manual" controls, or whining about half-frame. News flash - this is a "point-and-shoot." Say it with me now, party people - "POINT AND SHOOT." That is why zone focusing, 72 shots per roll, and program mode make sense. That is why it doesn't have manual control, that is why it doesn't have a hot shoe. Just like all the other point-and-shoots they made for decades. Why is this so hard to grasp? And now that we have cleared that up - $499 is perfectly acceptable price. Most of this camera's predecessors when adjusted for inflation are in the same range. Quality fixed lens digitals these days are way more money than this camera. This mentality of "Film camera = cheap" is B.S. Also, why are people so hung up on "who this camera is for?" Who gives a flying fornication. Everyone has their thongs all tangled up because it is for "influencers" and "new to film" people. No it isn't. It is for whoever wants it. I am on the upper, upper level of film retarda....erm enthusiast - I shoot 110,35,120, and 4x5. I develop my own film, print my own prints, make my own mattes and frames. I bought this camera cause it is the perfect "in the pocket" everyday "spray and pray" casual camera. WOW! Now it makes sense right? Maybe everyone can stop with the engagement / click bait - and just be thrilled we are getting a new film camera in 2024 that *actually* is- priced well. Hell, I paid more than what this cost for my MiNT instax camera........
It's stupid. People are seeing the prices of used film cameras then just thinking this should be lower priced cause of them. Must be forgetting that Pentax would've spent a decent bit of money developing it and getting equipment to make them.
Way to go sir you’re spot on with that comment if I had enough wedge I’d be buying one , so it’s still using my Pentax mx for now or maybe go pre-decimal and get a box camera 😊
I mean, you're precisely the target group I imagine for this camera. Someone who is more into buying cameras than using them. A collector with a buying obsession who will probably never shoot more than 5 rolls through the P17.
@@Fauxbourg I mean, you're assuming a lot there skipper. I have been shooting film for more than 30 years. I don't leave the house without one of my cameras. I probably shoot a minimum of two - four rolls a week (or 35mm and/or 120) and at least a couple sheets of 4x5 a month - for decades. The Pentax is a perfect replacement for my old HiMatics that are getting a bit worn out at this point causing me to carry my Fuji GS645W which is substantially larger (and also a zone focus like the Pentax ) and much more expensive/fragile than the Pentax. While you are right, I collect cameras - but I also use my cameras heavily. You have really went all out with your hating of this camera - replying to nearly every person supporting it on this video. Why do you care so much if it isn't something you are interested in?
@@theangrymarmot8336 I'm not necessarily hating on the camera even though I must admit that I think it's a weird product with weird specs and weird pricing that will find it hard to find its audience. Lots of people are just bending over backwards to explain this product and that's what I don't like.
1, pricing: Yes, 550€ might be a fair price for what the camera offers and vintage film cameras were much more expensive back in the day. But that's not the point. They're dirt cheap now and most of them offer much more than the Pentax 17. Wether it's fair or not, this new camera will have to compete with used market prices and it will struggle to do so.
2, targeting a young audience: Again this comes down to a pricing issue, 550€ is just too much of an entry barrier for young people (say 14 to 20 years old). If you're interested in trying out film at that age, you'll pick up your dads/grandfathers old gear and see if film works for you. OR you'll buy a cheap disposable at a super market. The P17 is not priced as a low barrier entry camera and it doesn't offer enough to enthusiasts to warrant a purchase, besides the "It's great they're building a new film camera"-argument. So who will this camera be for, really? Collectors, probably, in the long run.
3, being "sold out": I used to work in logistics and this argument is currently regurgitated all over the place. But just because the Pentax warehouse might be empty right now, that doesn't mean the camera is sold out. It just means that they have sold their company stock to photography shops. I've been to a few of them this weekend and also checked online in Germany, and I can buy the Pentax 17 from every single shop that stocks them, right now. It is definitely not sold out.
One there are no parts for those old cameras anymore. Even here in NYC many of them cannot be repaired. $499, a fraction of the price of the cheapest beginner digital camera, for a beautiful mostly metal camera, repairable for decades with a full Ricoh warranty is not too expensive. It’s the price of one third party prime lens. Lastly people spend hundreds on ancient compacts like the Olympus XA-1. If you love film, Pentax 17 is a no brainer.
You can get an ALL metal, not mostly metal, half frame camera, with a better lens than this (2.8, even sharper), superior manual controls, more portable shape, no annoying focus by wire weirdness, no battery that can run out (it has a meter, but it's like a solar panel one it powers itself), better in every single way, camera than this, for $100-120, called a Canon Demi. Then you can buy 3 more of them as backups if you want (which also means you DO have parts for them. x3 of every part, in fact, though why bother to repair at all when you have 4 copies?), and still be saving money. Zero reason to choose P17 over that.
Horrible design and idiotic price tag for a half-frame camera, you can buy a gorgeous Olympus Pen F for that price.
I just dont see why you'd ever get this Pentax over something like an Olympus XA
EXACTLY , THANKS TO SAYING THATH
I don't get all the negative comments by many people. They are claiming it's too expensive & better to buy a used 1970s camera.
The thing is Used film cameras are not cheap & are not reliable at all. I can't give explanation for some people who might find it pleasing when their used old film camera brokes (mechanical) or just dies (electronic). Maybe they like self inflected pain 😬.
Many of us don't have the knowledge to repair it ourselves when it breaks & cameras with electronics (like the canon Ae1, Nikon f3, Pentax me) need someone skilled to do so.
And quite a lot of us are not lucky to have a person/store near our place that still repairs film cameras in this day & age.
And how can anyone buy Leica film camera? It cost the same as a car where I'm based.
So I'm really happy Pentax has launched this new film camera.
Yes they are cheap. Better cameras than this by far are for sale as I speak for $100 in fully working condition. Konica Eye. Canon Demi. Canon Twist 35. Yashica Samurai (that one is half frame and autofocus and has a zoom lens, all for $100) And yes they are plenty reliable. I've bought dozens of ebay cameras, never once have I had one single one. Not one. Ever fail after the 30 day ebay warranty (if it's before that it cost you $0). And you don't need to repair anything anyway even if one did happen to break. Just buy a second one if you dont' want to repair. You'll still be hundreds of dollars ahead of a P17. And then buy a 3rd one. And a 4th one. You'll STILL be ahead of the cost of a P17.
Personally, if I wanted to shoot film- I'd by a nice second hand K1000... for much less money... and with less constraints !!
It's funny to see people viciously attacking those who mention the very, very obvious shortcomings of this camera and the shortcomings of the direction it points to. Just be honest folks, you cheer for this camera not because it's a good product. It's absolutely mediocre. You cheer for it because you wan't it to "save film." Only, it won't, not that it needs "saving" to begin with.
You're selfishly throwing the novices that might buy this camera under the bus because it supposedly "supports the cause." That's a very bad reason to support a product.
exactly! "IDIOTENCAMERA" for 550 euro... :D
:DDDD
A half-frame gives half the resolution of a 35mm film, which is already limited. And $500 bucks? No way! For $500, buy a medium-format vintage camera and call it a day. You get better results with it.
The price makes perfect sense, people in the last few days have shown you get plenty of "resolution" from images using the Pentax 17 too. A lot of what you can buy used is from the 70's and 80's with questionable service history, and technically cost more than this one when they were new.
Edit: I see you've stopped me from making any new comments. What things did you not like me saying? That it's silly to compare used camera prices to it? Ricoh exists to make money, they don't make film, so they're not going to sell their cameras at a loss.
They spent money developing this camera too, which as well as manufacturing costs, goes into what the consumer pays. Everyone sells things for more than they "cost". They price them so "high" cause they need to make money back on what they spent creating a product.
Copium. The K1000 is roughly the same price when adjusted for inflation with none of the limitations. The $500 price tag hurts even more when you consider our living costs in 2024 compared to the 80's 90's.
At the times, you cant choose film cameras, there was only thaht ones,
but today you can choose to have more for less price
and cameras like the nikon, olympus, or the spotmatic itself , works perfect still today
@s_t_r_a_y_e_d When adjusted for inflation the K1000 was almost $1000 if you included a lens
@AnalogPhotographyEU So just cause you're comparing it to the used market, you think it's overpriced. Forgetting they would've spent a decent bit of money on R&D and actually getting a lot of the tooling to make these. If these do well and they make SLRs like they're planning, will you say they're overpriced when they inevitably cost close to $1000?
@@nathansstuff1547 Yeah but your argument doesn't matter. The Pentax 17 competes with the used market wether you like it or not. And in most (almost every) instances, it makes more sense to go for a high-end used camera than this.
So to talk about the handling of the camera and its sense or nonsense without having had it in my hands is very ambitious. In my opinion, you can only really form an opinion once you've held the camera in your own hands and tried it out. Before that, a judgement is more like hearsay and prejudgement, sorry. And since you are only showing the camera and these are only pictures that you have not taken with the camera yourself, the statements are not really worth much and I say that as a trained photographer who doesn't really have much to do with half-format cameras per se.
czcams.com/video/6ehj45farwc/video.html
this is olympus pen D . i shoot half prame, this is my italian channel, as you can see ive used a lot of cameras
and if is lighter then the pen d or any pentax, and i can use those cameras without grip, i really think this grip is not really neccessary :)
i dont have in my hands, but is something called experience :)
@@AnalogPhotographyEU
You can gain experience with so many other cameras or even half-format cameras and yet you can't form a judgement about a new half-format camera that you've never held in your hands or photographed with before without having held it in your hands or photographed with it. I have never photographed with so many cameras, but I have photographed with so many others. However, I would never dare to make a judgement about a camera in terms of handling or the feeling of shooting with it, or the quality of the workmanship, or the usefulness or quality of the functions, if I have never held it in my hands or photographed with it.
This experience with other cameras is then worth nothing, except to spread prejudices.
And to be honest, when I look at the testimonials of those who have actually tried out this camera so far, I have to say that by far the majority were more than positively surprised, which is not without reason.
You know if you’re already a serious film photographer, you can just enjoy this camera for more casual fun point and shoot stuff.
That is why I bought my Pentax 17. Good pocket camera.
Hey, you're the first one who is noticing that the ISO can't be set to anything lower than ISO 50.
I agree with the other comments here that the Pentax 17 is not made to replace an old SLR! It's a simple-to-use compact camera, and I don't see anything wrong there. It's made for photographers who maybe want to get their first-ever analog camera, they don't want to worry too much about settings and things ... it's a cool little camera and I'm actually pretty happy it's not just a "remake" of some old camera, but a really clever new design!
The price ... yeahh 549 Euros is a bit steep for what it is. But prices for all cameras (new from the store) are just ridiculous ... it's the times, they maybe just can't produce any cheaper today.
BUT the ISO thing is really weird. There are some interesting films out there that have less than ISO 50 and they're on sale by Lomography and all those other brands ... so you go into an analog camera store, buy that brand-new analog camera, and then you can't get every film that they have in the same store cause some ISO settings are missing. I really don't get why Pentax did that !!
(Yeeeah you can use the exposure compensation dial ... but c'mon that's no excuse for the missing ISO settings.)
Regarding the ISO, there's a bit of a work-around if you want to shoot lower than ISO 50. You can still go "lower" by adjusting the exposure compensation. So you can go two stops lower, which would make the lowest ISO 12, I think. And if you want to shot slower film than that, I think this would not be the camera most people would go for anyways.
Your video is funny. Your channel title is "analog photography", but it doesn't look like you do a lot of "analog photography"... based on your video listing 🤔. I think that this Pentax 17 is rather made for young people who have never used film and who photographed with a smartphone (hence the vertical framing)... This is the opinion of an old guy who bought his first Pentax spotmatic SLR in 1966...😊 Bravo PENTAX !
Young people who never used film aren't going to buy a 550€ camera as their entry point.
So in other words, people ignorant of how much they're getting ripped off by buying a worse, less featured, flimsier version of better cameras for 5x the money. Yes, actually, I fully agree with you, that is indeed the target market. (I've also never used any of my multiple half frame cameras that did not have vertical default framing by the way. That's not new, that's the normal way...)
Funny and true
Didn't test the Pentax 17, doesn't research his claims, proceeds to compare apples to oranges and then moves on to insults.
Well done Sir! You have achieved the level of grade A certified bullshitter!
aplles to oranges? is that different a film camera from a film camera? 🤣
@@AnalogPhotographyEU You compared used camera prices to it. Ricoh exists to make money. They aren't going to lose money just to get a bunch of people to start using film which they don't make.
@@nathansstuff1547 Even if the P17 is adequately priced, it will always compete with the used market. It's not better than the old cameras you can buy used, it's not better build quality (arguably worse than most) and it's much more expensive. Yeah you get warranty, but in the EU you also get warranty for used cameras purchased in professional stores. So I kinda have to agree, I don't see who this camera is for.
I honestly say the camera is cool and stylish. BUT the price is really way too high for this type of camera. I see the camera more as a beginner point and shoot but a beginner would never want to spend that much money on a film camera
For what is, it's actually priced pretty well, even if it seems expensive for a lot of people. A lot of people complaining about it are comparing it to the cost of a used camera, and say it should be priced closer to them, which doesn't really make sense.
@@nathansstuff1547 i read many comments but this is just not true. A digital camera is magnitues complexer and more difficult to manufacture. Even new ones. You can get the EOS r100 with a lens for less. A new full auto / autofocus camera with every quirk there is. The only difference is, that it is not analog. The high cost is only because the development cost as much and there is not enough people buying it (compared to a mirrorless digital) and this drives the price. But if you objectively look at what you get, it is way to expensive. The shutter tech existed 40 years ago, zone af is less complex, it has a fixed lens and therefore easier focus. It does not even have an image-processor, this is essentially the filmstock. Furthermore, all the compared cameras (used) have many more functions and are considered professional cameras and flagships at the time... This is not.
Even if it's not for us, it's very good that they made it.
It confuses me that they decided to reinvent the logic of automatic shooting, when the usual rings with the A position worked just fine from the 70s to modern Fuji. They believe that this is more convenient for beginners, but I can argue with this, besides, for at least some conscious shooting it is much easier to work with conventional semi-automatic modes than to try to deceive all these modes, forcing them to do what you want.
But nevertheless, I'm glad that this camera exists. This camera will make Pentax a LOT of money, not as much as Instax makes Fuji, but I think it will be a very good profit for the company. This camera will also bring a lot of benefits to film photography in general.
I disagree, they made it instead of other thigns they could have made instead, there is an opportunity cost. They could have made a new camera that was not wholly redundant, and that used new technology we've discovered in the last 60 years. If you want to get real crazy, you could use technology from the last, dare I say 20 years even? 10?! Making this instead means we didn't get that, which would have been great for all shooters, new ones and old ones.
It's a camera targeting influencers, not anyone who actually wants quality returns from use. It's priced out of itself with conflicting design choices that both rob you of control and overcomplicates auto modes.
😁😁😁
Very good.
😁😁
The price will tank this camera
And yet every major retailer is sold out of them........
Just sent for a Nikon f601 30euros their not mechanical but Nikon generally build tough cameras I can shoot it in manual and aperture priority with my manual focus nikkors or put it on program with an af lens how much film can you buy for 520 euros Pentax are barking up the wrong tree on this one Fuji have shown people still prefer the old analogue control system 1/2 frame ok cuts costs fixed lens yes but f3.5 on such a large camera olympus done the same on the xa2 but that was truly pocket sized I think it's been so long Pentax have forgotten how to build a film camera
it does - it let people save on film
No it doesn't do that. Because nothing was stopping you from buying any of 20 different models of half frame camera just like this one that already existed, and saving exactly as much on film, a year ago. So it did nothing to "let you" do that thing you were already capable of doing. And you were (and still are) able to do it for $400 less, too. You did want to save money, right? So you are super excited to hear that you can save half on film AND also save $400 by getting an even better half frame camera than this for $100, then?
Just discovered your Channel. And will subscribe. Fellow Europeans unite.
The Pentax 7, i really do not like it. Halfframe. Plastic build. Not aimed at general photography. And the price. You can buy 2 full analog systems for that. OM1, Pentax ME, Nikon FE, Canon AE1. I spit on it indeed.
Thank you. I do not understand this camera. The lens makes it look super cheap. the modes seem to indicate it is just a complicated point-and-shoot. I'm not a fan of half frame as 36 exp is already a lot to get through when you take your time with the film. The whole thing is just disappointing, and at $500, it's crazy. I've seen comments saying, "but it has a warranty!" I'd wager my 40 yr old Minolta will outlast these new cameras and if it dies, I can buy another 4 'high-end' SLR's second hand for less than this 'budget' Point-and-shoot. I know we have to buy new cameras if manufacturers will ever be motivated to build new ones, but you have to at least make a camera worth buying!
yes true 😁😁😁
I feel like this camera could be a good gift, and that's all imo especially the packaging for a film lover. With the price you can get a bunch of good Professional cameras like you said, hell 100 dollar can get you a way better option like the Yashica Electro.
But still, it's Pentax's wetting their feet. We might get something better if this is a good one
Hey a fellow film tuber who's keeping it reel! I also posted a critical take on the Pentax 17. So many budget vintage gear alternatives for a half frame cam that have better features. Thanks for sharing man! Hopefully Pentax doesn't try to cancel us! Lol Subbed. Good luck and god speed! Happy snapping.
Para opinar de una cámara, a lo menos debiera tener una a su disposición y haber la utilizado. Un mal chiste este canal.
El caso es que en los juicios se ve algo objetivo, que no es fácil tenerlo en la mano para ver que no entra en el manual, o que el lío es fuego y estimado!
objeto ciertamente se pueden hacer consideraciones sin verlo en la mano
People bitching about the price saying that “well you can get blah blah blah for there same price and a better camera “ are missing the point. Yes you can get an old camera does the same or more or less but the fact that PENTAX are keeping film analogue alive by investing in new cameras is a marvellous thing. Don’t forget film cameras back in the days were also not cheap. A canon Demi 1963 would cost you 1200 GBP in today’s equivalent. The price of a brand new film camera considering the investment in producing this products is amazing. Yes its not for everyone but the real film communities should support this produce even if they do not intend in buying one. Also how can you review a product without actually have one and using it extensively?? Too many wannabe film CZcamsr photographers jumping on the wagon.
there is a small but fundamental difference in terms of prices
in 1960 you had no alternatives, either you bought the camera for 1200 pounds, or you didn't take photos
today you either pay 550 euros for this piece of plastic or for 50 euros you get a real camera built to last forever!
I agree that it's a good thing that film cameras are produced today!
but if there's a demand for film, companies produce film, and this doesn't necessarily require the production of new ones since there are an infinite number of them in circulation
I've had more than 200 analogue cameras in my hands
I've dismantled many of them to the core!
I usually shoot with film, I think I have a say in the matter!
as for the review I made some considerations on facts, I don't need to hold it in my hand to know that it doesn't shoot in manual, and the focus is by estimate
Since when is 36 divided by 2 = 17?
you lose some space because there is space between the 2 new fotograms 😉
OK, got it. Thank you for claryfying this point. Nice video btw! ;-)
@@fred15ism 😁😁😁😁
I totally agree "this camera makes no sense" and I won't buy it but... we must be both wrong because it's selling like hot cakes.
Thank's a lot :))
The camera is in stock at every single photography store in my city. Selling like hotcakes should be reserved to something like the 100VI that is backordered for probably a year into the future at least. I could go out tomorrow and buy the Pentax 17 from 10 different stores.
@@Fauxbourg Considering that, according to Pentax RIcoh, the camera is "scheduled for release on July 12, 2024" I find rather strange that you can buy it everywhere. However it's a fact that they are not accepting more pre-orders since the pre-orders have outpaced the prodution.