It may not be everyone’s cup of tea but I see lots of half frame shooters in Japan so I see why it was made. It’s the first step toward a return to a full film lineup. I look forward to the future.
This is it. This will get into a lot of people's hands, esp in the Japanese market. And they will hopefully take some of the engineering and put out higher level cameras.
@@musa7606 Japanese film market is infinitely younger than in the West or US from where I'm from. Here I'll go out on weekends and see high schoolers using film cameras, and a LOT of half frames. Ever since the Pentax 17 dropped I've seen it a lot. I might pick one up myself because some of the prints I see off half frame aren't bad.
I see a fair amount of interest of half-frame cameras in Hong Kong and a few other Asian cities as well. They generally come from late 10’s and 20’s women who don’t want to carry anything heavy or look too digital-y.
I’m loving my 17. I feel like it nails a casual shooting experience. More frames per roll makes the decision to snap easier. Enough auto control that you don’t need to think about much beyond composition, but manual enough that it all feels hands on, and you don’t forget you’re shooting film. I haven’t had a problem with the winder, but I tend to leave it half-popped. I really love the centerline viewfinder, which feels like it minimizes a lot of the problems with parallax. For plastic I think the build feels good, except maybe right where my thumb goes on the back door. Overall I think it just has good vibes. I feel like where it’s interesting to me is how it fits into a collection of cameras. I find it a lot more fun to use than an old consumer fully-auto compact, it just holds nice and you feel connected to it. Compare to an SLR, it’s not as rewarding as a more premium fully mechanical one (the Nikon FM still has the best film advance I’ve used), but up against an autoexposure SLR that was originally a budget model, I think they feel roughly balanced. And while this doesn’t really come close to a mechanical medium format camera like a TLR, but when I’m out with that I’m metering carefully and using a tripod and cable release, and that’s kinda what makes this camera click for me-it exists to the side. When I want to dig in and be accurate, I have other cameras for that, but this is for casual times. A walk around town taking some snaps, or in my pocket as a B-Camera along side something serious. Value is trickier. $500 isn’t cheap. But I don’t think that it’s unfair. It’s probably not too far off what manufacturing and development costs dictate. Meanwhile, prices keep going up on used cameras, many need service and that raises the effective price. Trying to source vintage gear without experience can be tricky. There are great deals to be found, if you know what you’re looking for and you’re patient. And the fact that this exists as an option, with a warranty, and the meter just works… I don’t think it’s absurd. Not for everyone, but it’s good that it’s out there as an option.
The pattern I see with Pentax 17 reviews is people not recommending it for various reasons, then going on to say they had fun shooting it and provide wonderful and creative sample shots. So ultimately my interpretation is it's a fun camera to use that encourages creativity and therefore ends up yielding good results.
The primary reason across the board though is the cost. Reviewers have to fill the time a lot more beyond that but the cost alone makes it a poor choice purchase for practically everyone.
@@Dvlx1 Imagine someone thinking $500 is an expensive camera when your typical new camera costs over $1000. I think film shooters have gotten so used to buying used $100 SLRs from yesteryear that they forgot what cameras actually cost.
@@88enu and a reissue Leica m6 costs $6000. Sometimes a new iteration of old things can be desirable. Ultimately no product is for all people, so feel free to sit this one out.
This camera is really underrated. When I first saw it, I didn’t like how it looked. However, I've always wanted to try a half-frame camera due to the rising cost of film. So, after seeing the initial reviews, I decided to order the Pentax 17 on the day it was released. Once I received the camera and started taking pictures, it brought me immense joy. I no longer worry about running out of film, and it’s so easy to use, just point and shoot without fussing over settings, allowing me to simply have fun. Its compact size fits perfectly in my Fjällräven High Coast Hip Pack, making it easy to carry around every day.
Unpopular opinion: There are Olympus Pen cameras for USD 80-100, 400 bucks less than Pentax 17, which can instead be used to buy roughly 40 rolls (2,880 photos) of Kodak Gold or 66 rolls of any Fomapan (4,752 photos). It seems strange to pay way more while the idea is to save money. That’s kinda like buying a bakery store in order to save money from buying bread.
@@Rangefinder48 Some people want a new camera with a warranty. If you're willing to go through the used lottery, then of course, there's no point getting the Pentax 17.
@@kylemsguy_ I´d say, some people want a new camera There is pros and cons between new and used. I personally have had a few used cams and there were crappy and nearly perfect underneath them. Important is, that one has fun with whatever cam he buys.
I think I'm one of the few that love how this camera looks and feels. Yes, there are about 5 different black texture surfaces, and the entire top plate is taken up with some sort of dial, switch, or lever. But I think, like a movie that is so bad it's good, the 17 went so ugly/busy it looks great. Every time I look at it, or pull it out of my bag it makes me smile. Feels great in the hand. Not perfect by any means, but it brings me joy.
completely agree. I've been doing film photography for decades (never switched to digital exept for a Leica M9P - there we're talking about an overpriced camera). The Pentax 17 is fun to use. The image quality is smashing. It's light. It's a no-worries camera thatyou carry around all the time. And frankly, look at the pictures in this review: they are great!
Something I didn’t realise having never shot half frame and now working in a lab is that scanners (frontier’s in my case) will take an overall exposure of two frames. So if you have one frame in low light next to a brightly lit frame you are guaranteed to lose one of them because the scanners just can’t equally expose two high contrasting frames like that. So then you can have them scanned as individual frames but, atleast for us, we charge double the scanning cost (like $7 AUD) so maybe not heaps more cost effective
I love the Pentax 17! So glad I picked it up. It’s an amazing camera. It produces super sharp images, and it’s just fun to use. Can’t wait to see what else Pentax gives us!
@@lichtloper I hate this attitude people have against "smaller than 8x10" formats. The thing is photographic film is capable of producing incredible images on very small formats. Most big budget movies in history have used the same format, actually, most of the time they used a smaller negative space. But yeah, keep crying about how the quality is low. If it's good enough for Spielberg, it's good enough for me.
@@denizzagra6423 It's only at 10:25 when (finally) the core issue of the camera's LENSqualities is discussed; 11:13 "[the lens was] quite sharp...". This is an un-precise qualification and I can't call it a serious statement. Nor was it very useful, as I believe it's a matter of fact that a camera+lens should produce sharp results. I believe that the pntx17 is a commercial wanna-have, not a serious photographic instrument. And no, in my comment I was not specifically talking about formats at all, small nor large - nor was I "crying", Deniz; maybe you were when you said "I hate...". .
@@Macuhdohnadadoh As if you utilize every µm when shooting full-frame. Then by your logic, shooting on an APS-C camera is also regrettable since it's not full frame. I can't comprehend how people can bash a format that was designed to be the standard for mega budget movies.
@@Macuhdohnadadoh so it’s not your cup of tea. That’s okay. Move on. This camera isn’t for you. But for many, especially those just getting into film for the first time or getting back into it, this camera is a great entry point into analog photography. So why shat all over that? I have the camera, and it produces stunning results, plus it’s a joy to use overall. That’s all that matters for those who buy it; those who this camera was made for. I think down the road they’ll come out with a full frame camera that’s aimed at serious photographers, but for now, I can see why they went with half frame.
It's worth to mention that this camera is well engineered. Pentax made this camera to be easily repaired or serviced. I saw video from one guy here on youtube taking this camera aparat, and I was positively surprised by that. Let's hope this camera will be success for Pentax, and we may see a 35mm camera too.
You’re the second video I’ve seen that’s actually impressed me with the image quality. Loved your sample photos. I don’t think this is for me, but I’m glad it’s done well. Hopefully we’ll see more new film cameras in the future.
Just received mine and it is worth every penny I’m over the moon and can’t wait to make darkroom prints. This will be a constant companion for capturing just those moments of light, form , stories waiting to happen
I live in colombia and the cost of film is so high here that it literally sopped me from shooting film for 5 whole years. Also, even me, a working photographer for Spotify and music artists, rarely need anything with anything beyond “not bad” resolution. That’s why the half frame is actually a great choice from Pentax and this film has gotten me and other (non photographer) friends excited
Kyle I appreciate you taking the time to remake the video with the perspective of who and why this camera was created. Amazing photos! Watching you create is always a pleasure. With all due respect to what you do for the film community I think Pentax’s biggest mistake was giving this camera to analog film influencers to review. Not one of you has freaked out and said, “Holy sh*t!! A new film camera in 2024”! But Kyle, holy sh*t! A new film camera in 2024! Woulda coulda shoulda, yes, there are things that fall short. Hasselblad asks you to review cameras so of course this is going to feel cheesy but I think a Pen FT type of camera would have been price prohibitive. I have and love some of the more desirable 35mm film cameras but I can’t wait to get a Pentax 17 because holy sh*t! A new film camera in 2024!
I bought one. I fell for the hype but I'm glad I did. It's just fun. I have a few very good cameras - actually I have some kind of weird illness that drives me to purchase classic cameras. I assign different projects to different cameras so I can resolve indecision when walking out the door. I don't have a project for the Pentax17 yet; it's too new. Whatever I decide, it will include the restrictions of the negative size and the low-tech of it. Reminder: Great photographs were taken with cameras with even lesser attributes than this one. There's something about working with restrictions and using them to accomplish aesthetic choices. Like: people who are only after perfectly focused, pristine digital files are probably not going to buy a pinhole camera.
I didn’t consider this camera when it came out but think it could be quite fun at weddings… for the dance floor / little details / observations at the day. Just fire through a roll without worrying. Do you have any links to full Scans? 🙏🏽
Thank you for your excellent comments on the Pentax 17. I purchased one out of curiosity and, to my surprise, I am using it more than expected - but not for my usual photo tasks. I find that the 72 pictures per roll has encouraged me to take the camera where I would never take my “precious” vintage FM2, Rolleiflex, etc etc. The camera allows me to document a day at the beach without even worrying about damaging the camera (I can easily buy a new one!) or using too much film. I can use filters and I have exposure compensation. The picture look good at A3 which is good enough for “documenting the day” shots. The balance between automation and user control is OK for this purpose. So the camera does not replace any of my other cameras - rather it encourages me to use film where I haven’t done so before - taking into account the camera’s many limitations. Finally it is not clear if modern manufacturers can reproduce those cameras that we love at a price we can afford! How much would a new FM2 cost if built today? Especially at the likely volume. I cannot even imaging what a Mamiya 645 price would be!
I'm sooo interested in this camera. Mostly because of how I use film. I don't use film with intention to create a masterpiece. I simply take it with me during boring trips daily or to work. A lot of the time to the store! It's because I long to create images in time of what stuff looked like during my life. Same way we look back at what random parks and grocery stores look like from the 90s. I specifically use film for snapshots. Because that's what I want to capture the most through my life.
I regret that you can't control the exposure manualy and keep your settings for dyptics. At this price, for me it’s no and it’s a pitty because the image quality’s great for this format. By the way, I find your pairs really good !
@@mainStream-user In certain cases I like to keep the same exposition from an image to the other, e.g. to have a constant density of the sky. But your right, 99% of the time, exposure compensation is enough.
Hey Kyle, thank you for your honest and in depth review of the new Pentax 17. I think your critique is spot on and something I can also relate to. I’m really looking forward to the new Rollei 35 AF. I’m on the pre order list and can’t wait to get my hands on that camera. It has most of the features you addressed on ways Pentax can improve a future model. The biggest advantage in my opinion is the aperture selection along with a light meter. Anyways, have a great day !
The photos you showed looked really beautiful and you had high praise for the quality of the lens. By all accounts the metering is very precise and the camera helps the user produce nicely-exposed photos very easily, with forgiving controls that don't demand a lot of photography knowledge, avoiding frustrating throw-aways, and helping stretch the film supply. To me that sounds like exactly the kind of camera that would be perfect for a new film photographer who is graduating from a smartphone and who wants a tool that can help them produce great photos that they can be proud of. I guess the downside is supposed to be the price, but what's the alternative? Sure old 35mm cameras can be had for 1-200, but they won't have near as many helpful features for beginners or as accurate auto metering, and can sometimes come with age-related problems. You could pay more for a more capable or newer camera to mitigate some of this, but once you're at the 300 mark you really have to ask yourself if the savings is worth the risk on old equipment, and again it probably won't be as easy to use. For someone who isn't a knowledgeable photographer and who just wants to start taking nice photos, it doesn't seem like those are good options.
Been meaning to comment on how much I enjoy your video content here. I don't shoot film but I like your gentle and even style overall, which makes all topics you discuss interesting to me.
Frankly, I think this is a fantastic camera. Results are really good. Cost seems reasonable for what you get. You also get a new camera with guarantee that will just work - how many times haven't I brought a film camera to repair (which is getting crazy expensive)? Using it is a cool experience. The only point I really agree with in your video is the vicinty winder lever - mode selector @10:07 in your review.
The build quality in hand is a lot better than it looks. The film advance is super nice to use, and the top material in particular is really nice. The only thing stopping me buying one issue the range focusing. I am very happy using manual focus, in fact I use mostly manual focus lenses on my mirrorless digital cameras, but I just don’t like the range focusing on any camera. The main reason I stopped using my XA2 and bought an XA instead
I ordered mine on the announcement day and have put a few rolls through it so far. The sharpness and image quality of the lens is more than enough for the average person. I'm used to automatic exposure on my old Ricoh, and if the next camera they release is anything like an R1 or GR1 I might have to trade in the 17 to help with the inevitably high cost...
I was trying the Sony system for comparison and testing. Interestingly enough, colours were different between systems. Reds for example are super saturated after conversion with the Sony.
Posted some of my admiration for the camera in a reply to a comment above. I only have one major gripe. Not zone focus, that is a learned skill, and a reminder to yourself to make sure you have the right zone selected. The LEDs in the view finder. They are far too bright, and right next to your eye. During the day, this may be fine. But if I use it in low light conditions, not only does the LED nearly blind me as my eye is adjusted for the lower levels of light. But when it's dark enough, the light comes on saying there isn't enough light, or the light to signal the flash is powered comes on and actually completely covers my eye's view through the viewfinder. The one work around I had is framing while the camera is off, then quickly turning it on, waiting for flash to charge and then shooting. But this adds a lot of time to the shot.
Just got a Kodak h35n half frame camera and having so much fun and it’s got a flash and a star lens filter doubling as a lens protector as long as you don’t forget to move it out of the way when using for normal shooting, when the flash is off the apperature is a tiny bit smaller like f8 and with flash on it’s like f5 or somewhere like that and like the P17 it has bulb mode activated with a shutter release cable to also allow double and long exposures. The Box comes with zero instructions and that’s fine as it’s only $65. However if you want a much better chance of getting great in focus shots and have infinitely more confidence and control over your final pictures then by all means spend $434 more and buy the P17 to get that extra bit of confidence that is definitely worth the price for the upgrade. So when Pentax does come out with as you say a more refined camera then get that one too when the time comes. I’m not gonna wait. When I held the P17 in the camera store on the day I bought the Kodak I knew immediately that it will be my next half frame camera and hopefully soon. And once I develop approximately 142 rolls of film as a half frame camera the price of the Pentax will become Free.
I love half frame format and love the default vertical framing. Pen-F is one of my favorite cameras to use and really excited about Pentax 17. The core of the camera is great including great lens and generally decent build. Coming from mobile and digital photography i love to have a camera that i can casually use it to document my life without worrying about limitations of number of photos i can take. Some great choices in terms of focal length and the zone focusing is probably the one major miss vs having a good AF.
I pretty much agree with your review but I’m going to hold on to mine and keep shooting with it along with the rest of my other film cameras. I’ve been thinking about returning it and even got the RMA from the retailer but I just can't bring myself to let it go. It’s a fun camera and it’s a challenge which is what it’s all about for me. It does need a little more weight to feel more comfortable in my hand. Maybe a half case would help. I really love the winder!
My 21 yo son recently came back from Thailand talking about a film camera that gave "two shots per frame". It wasn't one of these, but it seems half-frame is pretty big in SE Asia generally. Maybe it's aimed at that market?
Great concise review. This is my very first film camera since a holga (i primarily shooting digital) and has been a joy for me. it's got me really excited for film and has been a great entry point as a snapshot / street photography camera where you think and move on the fly and would be ideal in the style of a photographer like Daido Moriyama, who generally shoots program all the time with his street work from what i read. One interesting point of discovery i didn't see discussed here was that the partial metering doesn't lock when you half press, so i appreciate the ability to think about EV compensation and your focus as you get to where you want to shoot. Its format is a stark contrast to me shooting digitally with a practiced composition and careful metering and the results have often impressed me. There's also a great breakdown on the camera's construction out there in youtube and it's got some interesting modern day tech to make the camera work. All this being said, i'm also quite excited for the next pentax. I love leaf shutter cameras (digitally i shoot on a fujifilm X100VI) and a more robust leaf shutter integrated lens full frame camera with manual settings sounds killer. A Pentax analog version of the Fujifilm X100 sounds phenomenal. I find the weight an appeal for me and would enjoy a similar weight for more Pentax's of this style. Thanks for the video. Loved the study on the phoenix film and your thoughts there. Looking forward to more content.
Hi Kyle, very good review, not for me but I can see the target market. The 17 seems a bit big for a half frame camera, full frame on the way using the same body? I'm amazed that Pentax got this made at the £500 price point. For example in 1970 the Pen EE2 was £428 and a Canon Demi 28 £524, adjusting for inflation (Sources:- prices Wallace Heaton Blue Book 1970/71 and Bank of England inflation calculator).
I enjoyed the review and understand why it's not for you. The suggestions you have for improvements would be nice but as people are complaining about the price now, what would the improvements cost. Another $100 or more? It's a great fun camera for me and I already have about 250 cameras with 5 half-frames and have been shooting adjustable cameras since 1960.
These photos are all so gorgeous! I think the diptych style is so fun and different and I like the implied juxtaposition. I was on the fence but I think I’ll be buying this camera. I think part of shooting film is it’s fun! I think if you’re looking for fun this camera captures that essence for me. Take a picture of your friends and not worry about the film counter kinda fun. They designed something new and I’m glad they went this route. I’ll also be buying the more professional ones down the road as we all love that image quality as well. Auto focus and a sharp lenses would be such a game changer.
Should be a great step forward with what they have to offer next. I also was not crazy when I picked mine up for the first time. Hope I can bond with it !
Is the warranty worth the price? I can buy any other half frame that will still last a long time and enjoy it without spending the 500. I feel this should have been 250, maybe 300. I've seen plenty of reviews and the build seems bad for this price.
Problem with half frame and film labs is that they’ll double their scanning fee… which somewhat negates any cost benefits. The Rollei 35AF is more interesting, but at $800 it’s blisteringly expensive. Would love to see it at $500.
I just reviewed a plastic Tudor point and shoot focus free camera that gave me exceptional results. It is hard to justify (for me), paying that amount of money for a half frame, range focus camera. I love Pentax for giving it a go and hope they do more. Imagine a new range finder camera!!
The Canon Demi EE17 is a very similar half frame camera with zone focusing, but it has shutter priority auto exposure as well as full manual shutter and aperture. It also has a much faster f1.7 lens, a self-timer (which the Pentax 17 does not have) and full metal construction (with leatherette on the back!). The only feature lacking on the Demi is a built-in flash, but it's easy enough to add one when needed. All in all a nice option at less than half the price of the Pentax.
@@musa7606 Yes, that's the trade-off. I'm among the group of photographers who enjoys using classic gear and are willing to put up with the inevitable consequences (broken unfixable cameras or expensive repairs). If you're not in that group, a brand new camera like the Pentax 17 makes a lot of sense.
Excellent review and perhaps the highest quality set of images I’ve seen from the 17. It’s hard to sell this camera as a way to save money when it costs $500! Last year I bought a Nikon N80 w kit zoom lens for $30 and that was the going rate. But I know what to look for and I have seen people getting into film who do not and basically are ripped off by people selling them broken/junk cameras stating ‘it worked last time I used it’…. This Pentax would prevent that being new w warranty. And there is that something about getting a new camera!
Yes, there is definitely a market for this camera. As mentioned in the video, I'm comfortable taking the risk with older gear, but for those new to film, a headache free experience at the start is important.
I love it as a travel camera and for documenting everyday experiences. I don't drag my thumb across the dial to advance the film so I haven't had an issue with the mode dial but I think a release buttom for the mode dial like what they did for the iso was a missed opportunity.
I would love to get one - we are travelling to Europe soon and I would love to do some fun touristy travel recording. But I'm already taking an XT50. I don't want to take my beautiful Kodak Retina ii that was may grandfather's and has been fully CLAd - it would kill me for it to be broken or stolen. So this would be a fun camera for fun snaps that I can digital scan and then print on my Canon Selphy fora travel journal or zine to share with friends and family
As a fan of half frame I really like the 17. I’ve tried a few really loved the UX. I didn’t like my Pen EE and found that most users complained about the over exposure and the general image quality. My Yashica/Kyocera Samurai is huge but offers better quality pics which proves you can take great photos with half frame
I'm sure someone will unfairly comparing the Pentax 17 with something like Canon F1 bought around $250. Yes, the F1 is a pro camera with nice features, shoots bigger negatives... but it's a dead system. I'm pretty sure Canon won't service those anymore. And most likely FD lenses are not being made anymore. Well, you get the point. The Pentax 17, on the other side, it's a brand new camera that's still supported by the manufacturer, so reparing isn't an issue.
Looking forward to having anyone do a side by side comparison. Compare any half frame film (at any iso) to that of any digital sensor. To be fair though, that could have to be limited. An ideal comparison would be between half frame film to a very similar sized m43 digital - but most of those m43 digital sensors have an ideal iso limited to iso 200. Most film images are almost expected to be printed, but could also be scanned in to have a digital image. Have already seen the direct side by side comparisons. Depending upon iso used, it’s going to be difficult for any half frame film camera to get a quality portrait type image that could go beyond a printed size of 11x14. As iso drops of when light sensitivity increases, the printed results will go down hill fast. To make a more direct comparison… The best half frame film images taken at iso 200, are easily surpassed by a m43 digital sensor at iso 400-500.
We are at opposite parts of the world! You love Large Format,Medium large and I like only small formats. I watch your videos and are enjoyable! I quit LF, Linhof etc a very long time ago.. Would I buy the new Pentax 17? No No ! I use tiny cameras with tiny sensors..Perfect for my needs! I used 1/2 frame! Made prints as large as 16x20!
Funnily enough, this review kinda makes me want to get one. I don’t have the money to spend at the moment, and I haven’t been shooting a ton of film lately anyway, but I LOVE the design of the camera, and I really like that the limiting factor for image quality seems to be the film stock, not the lens. Dang. Yeah, I want one now. 😀 But I might find myself missing control over the camera’s settings. Sometimes I feel that way with my 90s point-and-shoot.
Do yourself a favor and look into an Olympus Pen F or FT. They're full-fledged SLRs for less than half the price of this camera. You could even get it serviced and still come in quite a bit lower, and have a way nicer camera to show for it.
@@calebj5852 I have looked into the Pen F (not FT yet), but I don’t need it. I have an SLR and a point and shoot and don’t really want to expand my film camera kit... with the Pentax 17, it’s also the design that I like so much. Because I think it’s an oddly satisfying balance of vintage design cues coupled with a late 80’s aesthetic. I haven’t seen anything like this in a camera.
i own for black painted pen-ft which i can control everything(from accurate focus to exposure) for decades so i think i should just keep that one, pass this new one :)
I think a big missed opportunity was, they didn't bother trying m42 or pentax K mount. The ability to use interchangeable lenses / vintage lenses would of been huge! And would of offset the half frame aspect. I would of dropped everything to get it at that point...
The one thing you failed to mention, and something singularly lacking in the images from modern high-end cameras, is that the half frame images from the Pentax 17 have CHARACTER.
This is a good travel camera as an older person it's light weight which is good an SLR can get heavy after awhile but you young guy's are just looking for a re-hash of an older model.
hey Kyle: I can't say i am overly interested in this one. The camera is $676 here in Canada all i am going to say is not for me. Half frame is something that has never been a thing for me it really feels like a thing for entry-level shooters. The camera is a good start for a return to film, and for the shooters of today. I might find a camera like this a fun experience but I am sure there will be a point when the simplicity would end up being frustrating. I am just to jaded in my advancing age. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Imagine a Pentax 6x7 style camera with a fix 80mm lens and a 65:24 insert for pano shots. Fully Manual lenses with more current optics. With a rechargeable battery system for the auto mode and light meter. Just dreaming 😊
@@musa7606I’m sure it would cost a pretty penny. A used Xpan goes for around $5,000 now. But, the fact that it would have an active warranty and a service center, may make it worth it to professional that use film for commercial shoots.
It's a miss for me, great for half frame enthusiasts. The looks aren't for me, neither is the half frame format. Hopefully there is a full frame model in the works, it's great for the film community.
The camera is somewhat interesting and functionality seems fine - but too expensive. At least for me, no matter production cost, as that's not here nor there for the buyer. And it might be the deciding factor for its success (or lack thereof). You're the second one to mention the missing dial lock - a serious oversight by the design team in my regard; the solution might be to make the dial harder to turn (and since this isn't a dial to constantly change when shooting, this might be already enough).
I've been dragged so much on threads for saying I just am not impressed with it, and it's not meant for me. I am glad they are making a new film camera, but this is really for the millennials in my opinion. I just didn't buy into the notion that I have to back it and purchase it or else they wouldn't make another. Maybe true but it doesn't guarantee they will make something that ill like in the future.
People who like one should go buy one. But I also thought the idea someone should spend $500 (or £ or €) on something they don’t want to subsidize some hypothetical hope that Ricoh/Pentax might one day make a camera they actually want makes no sense.
There are lots of fullframe cameras and barely any halfframe different camera models out there. I wished it was a full manual halfframe. I get the market. But it kind of crushed my hopes. If rumors and hints are true, the other cameras will be fullframe. Bummer
The camera wasn't aimed at photographers like me so I guess I won't be buying one. It's a shame I was kinda looking forward to it. I need a range of shutter speeds and apertures all properly labelled, I need a proper focus distance scale on the upper side of the lens, with a DOF scale I don't even need a meter, but if it has one then hey ho. I'll wait until the fully manual version comes out. Otherwise everything else is fine. Even the price. It seems to be a 90's film point and shoot at half frame and with restricted manual overrides.
Yes, but you are buying used. Used 30+ year old cameras. Which I am perfectly fine with. But if you want new, the price will be completely different. A new film SLR would probably cost around $2500. When NIkon reproduced the S3 and SP, they were priced like new Leicas.
I'm not really sure that argument holds well. The used cameras are just getting just old. They need service, they need cleaning, adjustments and calibration. That is also not cheap. You are also overestimating worldwide availability and support for repair and parts. Pentax is not a mere startup building cameras from a garage. This a huge commitment for Pentax. I would definitely buy a 35mm version of this.
One of my "100 buck" 35mm cameras died recently and I doubt it's repairable. To get another one I would have to spend at least half the cost of the Pentax (albeit not a half frame, but still) to replace it, and that's still a 40 year old camera. There's a lot of value in something new with warranty and parts/serviceability behind it. That doesn't invalidate your point though, but it is a gamble.
there would have been less backlash if 1. it was not so expensive (inflation/rnd discussion aside) since you can get a CLA'd 35mm for way less 2. it was 35mm 3. it was not zone focus
"since you can get a CLA'd 35mm for way less" Wait till you find out what a new 35mm SLR would cost... This camera is very cheap, just not as cheap as 40 year old cameras.
@@musa7606 Yes it's a new camera, but it also missing a lots of features compare to many(Yes, MANY) old cameras what still work like a tank. 500 buck is not cheap for a camera like this, even it's new.
And yet it wouldn't be as good. So backlash =/= bad product, people are just close-minded. If this was actually a manual focus lens it would be way less practical. And if it was AF people wouldn't be happy either.
I have not used Pentax 17, so I can't say how it works. Seems like it is nice quality and your images looked good enough. With 199€$£ I would have bought it. Now I asked Kodak Ektar H35N for present and got it. Much cheaper. In Finland 17 is 579€ and H35N is 79€. 17 is better in quality but not on price.
I really dislike this design/marketing philosophy where in order to make a camera beginner friendly we have to remove basic functionality from it Is having the OPTION to choose your shutter speed and aperture really so advanced as to scare new people away?
I feel as a company making a film camera, they could've done so much more with this idea but went with some really odd ideas. (Yes im commenting before the videos finished)
@@rickbiessman6084 zone focusing, cheap plastic as the body.. you could for the price they are asking get some really nice glass, or some premium compacts just for what they are asking alone.
There were reports of the Japanese preorders for this camera selling out from when they were opened, so while it's not a price *I'd* want to pay for a fairly basic point and shoot camera (my Konica C35 set me back $50) it's nice to see such a great response to the reintroduction of 35mm.
Ever heard of fun? Seriously, how can you be so whiny about a new film camera that is well made, reasonably priced for that, and explicitly not targeted at you? They said that this would pave the way a new mechanical SLR and in the end maybe even a new medium format camera. This did supposed to cater to the market that is dying the fastest. Reliable, high quality point and shoots for beginners. I can really just recommend the Analog Insides video on the Pentax 17. Not just because they actually understand something about manufacturing, but also because they can actually review a camera that isn’t targeted at them without getting all sad about it. I first thought it wasn’t for me either. Then I learned some things about the camera that changed my mind and right now I’m so glad I got it. But you know, it isn’t gonna replace my Leica.
Ever heard of ‘Critical thinking’? If the camera meets your standards and you can afford spending 500€ on sometihing slightly better than a toy camera I’m happy for you. And btw ‘fun‘ is subjective.
These very aggressive comments praising Pentax 17 have been the biggest red flags warning me off against buying one. I’m skeptical of anything requiring this much of a hard sell.
@@williamlasl I don't see "aggressive comments praising Pentax 17"... I see people trying to compare 50 year old SLRs with a new product and not realizing the difference.
IMO if it wasnt expensive, I would get this one, aside from it being a half frame it has a couple of nice feats for setting.. but the price is just....painful LOLZ (in the philippines, it's 45,000php / $785) with that price, I could buy 1 Kodak ektar HALF FRAME, a TON of films to use, some camera accessories, a decent meal and still have money to save. lolz So maybe I'll consider this once the price is below srp/even below 2nd hand prices.
Just because this is fun, doesn't mean it's worth $500 of fun. AE-1 at $100 will leave you ~40-50 rolls of basic film. The Pentax you'd need to spend an additional $200 for the equivalent budget. So for people who are starting with film, an upfront cost of $500 just to see if you even like film is a huge investment. At my home town that would be $10 film, $15 dev, $15 print. A beginner has to spend this just to get their feet wet, which I think is a huge cost proposition. I think a $200 price point would have been better. If they made their own film they could sell this even at $100 just to profit off film. Last weekend I picked up an immaculate K1000 w/lens for $12, OM10 w/lens and OM2s body for $40. All barely used condition. Yesterday I bought an EOS K2 for $20 just because it came with 11 rolls of film(I got it for the film). All those savings I could buy $400 worth of film that will last for awhile, and even dance with E100 film for giggles. So it's really hard to justify spending $500 is all I'm saying with what I compared above.
Used film gear, unless purchased from a reseller that services and checks gear (which will be more expensive), will always be a gamble. Sometimes you luck out, others you don't. I'm all for finding used gear and taking the risk, and many times I've got great cameras that work fine, but I've always experienced headaches. As mentioned in the video, I wouldn't want to spend $500 for the Pentax, but I'm sure there's a lot of people out there would be fine paying that for the guarantee.
God knows why. I have to say one of the least appealing aspects of the camera, as trivial as it is, is all the bloody text and nonsense over it. Given that the likely market for this camera would be as much fashion conscious as photographically inclined, and at USD$500 it is a ‘premium’ option over almost all the secondhand cameras available, you’d think they would have given it a clean, minimalistic, Leica-adjacent aesthetic to appeal to that crowd.
My thoughts exactly. Personally, I’ll pass. If I want to do half-frame, I’ll stick to my far more beautiful and capable Olympus Pen F. Best half-frame ever.
It may not be everyone’s cup of tea but I see lots of half frame shooters in Japan so I see why it was made. It’s the first step toward a return to a full film lineup. I look forward to the future.
This is it. This will get into a lot of people's hands, esp in the Japanese market. And they will hopefully take some of the engineering and put out higher level cameras.
@@musa7606 Japanese film market is infinitely younger than in the West or US from where I'm from. Here I'll go out on weekends and see high schoolers using film cameras, and a LOT of half frames. Ever since the Pentax 17 dropped I've seen it a lot. I might pick one up myself because some of the prints I see off half frame aren't bad.
Full film lineup
Could that include an eventual interchangeable lens camera? If so, what lenses would work with it?
@@ronaldckrausejr7762 probably their current lens lineup. Pentax glass is woefully underrated and actually not bank breakers either.
I see a fair amount of interest of half-frame cameras in Hong Kong and a few other Asian cities as well. They generally come from late 10’s and 20’s women who don’t want to carry anything heavy or look too digital-y.
I’m loving my 17. I feel like it nails a casual shooting experience. More frames per roll makes the decision to snap easier. Enough auto control that you don’t need to think about much beyond composition, but manual enough that it all feels hands on, and you don’t forget you’re shooting film. I haven’t had a problem with the winder, but I tend to leave it half-popped. I really love the centerline viewfinder, which feels like it minimizes a lot of the problems with parallax. For plastic I think the build feels good, except maybe right where my thumb goes on the back door. Overall I think it just has good vibes.
I feel like where it’s interesting to me is how it fits into a collection of cameras. I find it a lot more fun to use than an old consumer fully-auto compact, it just holds nice and you feel connected to it. Compare to an SLR, it’s not as rewarding as a more premium fully mechanical one (the Nikon FM still has the best film advance I’ve used), but up against an autoexposure SLR that was originally a budget model, I think they feel roughly balanced. And while this doesn’t really come close to a mechanical medium format camera like a TLR, but when I’m out with that I’m metering carefully and using a tripod and cable release, and that’s kinda what makes this camera click for me-it exists to the side. When I want to dig in and be accurate, I have other cameras for that, but this is for casual times. A walk around town taking some snaps, or in my pocket as a B-Camera along side something serious.
Value is trickier. $500 isn’t cheap. But I don’t think that it’s unfair. It’s probably not too far off what manufacturing and development costs dictate. Meanwhile, prices keep going up on used cameras, many need service and that raises the effective price. Trying to source vintage gear without experience can be tricky. There are great deals to be found, if you know what you’re looking for and you’re patient. And the fact that this exists as an option, with a warranty, and the meter just works… I don’t think it’s absurd. Not for everyone, but it’s good that it’s out there as an option.
The pattern I see with Pentax 17 reviews is people not recommending it for various reasons, then going on to say they had fun shooting it and provide wonderful and creative sample shots. So ultimately my interpretation is it's a fun camera to use that encourages creativity and therefore ends up yielding good results.
The primary reason across the board though is the cost. Reviewers have to fill the time a lot more beyond that but the cost alone makes it a poor choice purchase for practically everyone.
@@Dvlx1 new things are expensive 🤷♂️
@@Dvlx1 Imagine someone thinking $500 is an expensive camera when your typical new camera costs over $1000. I think film shooters have gotten so used to buying used $100 SLRs from yesteryear that they forgot what cameras actually cost.
@@rjbiiiNormally expensive because there's been some development.
This camera is just repackaging 40-50 year old technology. It's not new.
@@88enu and a reissue Leica m6 costs $6000. Sometimes a new iteration of old things can be desirable. Ultimately no product is for all people, so feel free to sit this one out.
I tried Pentax 17 and it's amazing. It's the best half frame camera.
Is sharp, is easy to use. Large viwfinder. Good flash. Focusing is easy.
It's the best half frame camera ever made. 500 if fair
I fully agree with you. Excellent image quality, ultra precise exposure meter and super sharp pictures, especially in the close-up setting.
not sharp. don't lie, please.
This camera is really underrated. When I first saw it, I didn’t like how it looked. However, I've always wanted to try a half-frame camera due to the rising cost of film. So, after seeing the initial reviews, I decided to order the Pentax 17 on the day it was released. Once I received the camera and started taking pictures, it brought me immense joy. I no longer worry about running out of film, and it’s so easy to use, just point and shoot without fussing over settings, allowing me to simply have fun. Its compact size fits perfectly in my Fjällräven High Coast Hip Pack, making it easy to carry around every day.
Unpopular opinion: There are Olympus Pen cameras for USD 80-100, 400 bucks less than Pentax 17, which can instead be used to buy roughly 40 rolls (2,880 photos) of Kodak Gold or 66 rolls of any Fomapan (4,752 photos). It seems strange to pay way more while the idea is to save money. That’s kinda like buying a bakery store in order to save money from buying bread.
@@Rangefinder48 Some people want a new camera with a warranty. If you're willing to go through the used lottery, then of course, there's no point getting the Pentax 17.
@@kylemsguy_ I´d say, some people want a new camera
There is pros and cons between new and used. I personally have had a few used cams and there were crappy and nearly perfect underneath them.
Important is, that one has fun with whatever cam he buys.
I think I'm one of the few that love how this camera looks and feels. Yes, there are about 5 different black texture surfaces, and the entire top plate is taken up with some sort of dial, switch, or lever. But I think, like a movie that is so bad it's good, the 17 went so ugly/busy it looks great.
Every time I look at it, or pull it out of my bag it makes me smile. Feels great in the hand. Not perfect by any means, but it brings me joy.
completely agree. I've been doing film photography for decades (never switched to digital exept for a Leica M9P - there we're talking about an overpriced camera). The Pentax 17 is fun to use. The image quality is smashing. It's light. It's a no-worries camera thatyou carry around all the time. And frankly, look at the pictures in this review: they are great!
Something I didn’t realise having never shot half frame and now working in a lab is that scanners (frontier’s in my case) will take an overall exposure of two frames. So if you have one frame in low light next to a brightly lit frame you are guaranteed to lose one of them because the scanners just can’t equally expose two high contrasting frames like that. So then you can have them scanned as individual frames but, atleast for us, we charge double the scanning cost (like $7 AUD) so maybe not heaps more cost effective
I love the Pentax 17! So glad I picked it up. It’s an amazing camera. It produces super sharp images, and it’s just fun to use. Can’t wait to see what else Pentax gives us!
"It produces super sharp images" Really, are You serious?
@@lichtloper I hate this attitude people have against "smaller than 8x10" formats. The thing is photographic film is capable of producing incredible images on very small formats. Most big budget movies in history have used the same format, actually, most of the time they used a smaller negative space. But yeah, keep crying about how the quality is low. If it's good enough for Spielberg, it's good enough for me.
@@denizzagra6423 It's only at 10:25 when (finally) the core issue of the camera's LENSqualities is discussed;
11:13 "[the lens was] quite sharp...". This is an un-precise qualification and I can't call it a serious statement. Nor was it very useful,
as I believe it's a matter of fact that a camera+lens should produce sharp results.
I believe that the pntx17 is a commercial wanna-have, not a serious photographic instrument.
And no, in my comment I was not specifically talking about formats at all, small nor large - nor was I "crying", Deniz; maybe you were when you said "I hate...".
.
@@Macuhdohnadadoh As if you utilize every µm when shooting full-frame. Then by your logic, shooting on an APS-C camera is also regrettable since it's not full frame. I can't comprehend how people can bash a format that was designed to be the standard for mega budget movies.
@@Macuhdohnadadoh so it’s not your cup of tea. That’s okay. Move on. This camera isn’t for you. But for many, especially those just getting into film for the first time or getting back into it, this camera is a great entry point into analog photography. So why shat all over that? I have the camera, and it produces stunning results, plus it’s a joy to use overall. That’s all that matters for those who buy it; those who this camera was made for. I think down the road they’ll come out with a full frame camera that’s aimed at serious photographers, but for now, I can see why they went with half frame.
It's worth to mention that this camera is well engineered. Pentax made this camera to be easily repaired or serviced. I saw video from one guy here on youtube taking this camera aparat, and I was positively surprised by that.
Let's hope this camera will be success for Pentax, and we may see a 35mm camera too.
You’re the second video I’ve seen that’s actually impressed me with the image quality. Loved your sample photos.
I don’t think this is for me, but I’m glad it’s done well. Hopefully we’ll see more new film cameras in the future.
Dear Kyle: I wish there were more people like you around, just as bright, just as frank and calm. Thnak you for the video / greetings from Spain
Cheers.
the image quality from pentax 17 looked amazing, great sharpness and tons of details when it came to a half-frame camera, color looked gorgeous
Just received mine and it is worth every penny I’m over the moon and can’t wait to make darkroom prints.
This will be a constant companion for capturing just those moments of light, form , stories waiting to happen
I live in colombia and the cost of film is so high here that it literally sopped me from shooting film for 5 whole years. Also, even me, a working photographer for Spotify and music artists, rarely need anything with anything beyond “not bad” resolution. That’s why the half frame is actually a great choice from Pentax and this film has gotten me and other (non photographer) friends excited
Kyle I appreciate you taking the time to remake the video with the perspective of who and why this camera was created. Amazing photos! Watching you create is always a pleasure.
With all due respect to what you do for the film community I think Pentax’s biggest mistake was giving this camera to analog film influencers to review. Not one of you has freaked out and said, “Holy sh*t!! A new film camera in 2024”! But Kyle, holy sh*t! A new film camera in 2024!
Woulda coulda shoulda, yes, there are things that fall short. Hasselblad asks you to review cameras so of course this is going to feel cheesy but I think a Pen FT type of camera would have been price prohibitive.
I have and love some of the more desirable 35mm film cameras but I can’t wait to get a Pentax 17 because holy sh*t! A new film camera in 2024!
I bought one. I fell for the hype but I'm glad I did. It's just fun. I have a few very good cameras - actually I have some kind of weird illness that drives me to purchase classic cameras. I assign different projects to different cameras so I can resolve indecision when walking out the door. I don't have a project for the Pentax17 yet; it's too new. Whatever I decide, it will include the restrictions of the negative size and the low-tech of it. Reminder: Great photographs were taken with cameras with even lesser attributes than this one. There's something about working with restrictions and using them to accomplish aesthetic choices. Like: people who are only after perfectly focused, pristine digital files are probably not going to buy a pinhole camera.
Thanks for posting this Kyle. I think I will stick with my 6x7 and my Olympus XA. I have 9 other film cameras to go to as well. Thanks for sharing.
I didn’t consider this camera when it came out but think it could be quite fun at weddings… for the dance floor / little details / observations at the day. Just fire through a roll without worrying. Do you have any links to full Scans? 🙏🏽
Thank you for your excellent comments on the Pentax 17. I purchased one out of curiosity and, to my surprise, I am using it more than expected - but not for my usual photo tasks. I find that the 72 pictures per roll has encouraged me to take the camera where I would never take my “precious” vintage FM2, Rolleiflex, etc etc. The camera allows me to document a day at the beach without even worrying about damaging the camera (I can easily buy a new one!) or using too much film. I can use filters and I have exposure compensation. The picture look good at A3 which is good enough for “documenting the day” shots. The balance between automation and user control is OK for this purpose.
So the camera does not replace any of my other cameras - rather it encourages me to use film where I haven’t done so before - taking into account the camera’s many limitations.
Finally it is not clear if modern manufacturers can reproduce those cameras that we love at a price we can afford! How much would a new FM2 cost if built today? Especially at the likely volume. I cannot even imaging what a Mamiya 645 price would be!
I'm sooo interested in this camera. Mostly because of how I use film. I don't use film with intention to create a masterpiece. I simply take it with me during boring trips daily or to work. A lot of the time to the store! It's because I long to create images in time of what stuff looked like during my life. Same way we look back at what random parks and grocery stores look like from the 90s. I specifically use film for snapshots. Because that's what I want to capture the most through my life.
I regret that you can't control the exposure manualy and keep your settings for dyptics. At this price, for me it’s no and it’s a pitty because the image quality’s great for this format. By the way, I find your pairs really good !
You have exposure compensation, so what else do you need?
@@mainStream-user In certain cases I like to keep the same exposition from an image to the other, e.g. to have a constant density of the sky. But your right, 99% of the time, exposure compensation is enough.
Hey Kyle, thank you for your honest and in depth review of the new Pentax 17. I think your critique is spot on and something I can also relate to. I’m really looking forward to the new Rollei 35 AF. I’m on the pre order list and can’t wait to get my hands on that camera. It has most of the features you addressed on ways Pentax can improve a future model. The biggest advantage in my opinion is the aperture selection along with a light meter. Anyways, have a great day !
The photos you showed looked really beautiful and you had high praise for the quality of the lens. By all accounts the metering is very precise and the camera helps the user produce nicely-exposed photos very easily, with forgiving controls that don't demand a lot of photography knowledge, avoiding frustrating throw-aways, and helping stretch the film supply. To me that sounds like exactly the kind of camera that would be perfect for a new film photographer who is graduating from a smartphone and who wants a tool that can help them produce great photos that they can be proud of.
I guess the downside is supposed to be the price, but what's the alternative? Sure old 35mm cameras can be had for 1-200, but they won't have near as many helpful features for beginners or as accurate auto metering, and can sometimes come with age-related problems. You could pay more for a more capable or newer camera to mitigate some of this, but once you're at the 300 mark you really have to ask yourself if the savings is worth the risk on old equipment, and again it probably won't be as easy to use. For someone who isn't a knowledgeable photographer and who just wants to start taking nice photos, it doesn't seem like those are good options.
Been meaning to comment on how much I enjoy your video content here. I don't shoot film but I like your gentle and even style overall, which makes all topics you discuss interesting to me.
Thank you.
Frankly, I think this is a fantastic camera. Results are really good. Cost seems reasonable for what you get. You also get a new camera with guarantee that will just work - how many times haven't I brought a film camera to repair (which is getting crazy expensive)? Using it is a cool experience. The only point I really agree with in your video is the vicinty winder lever - mode selector @10:07 in your review.
Good to see a well thought review,
It’s not for me either, but I did appreciate the time and effort you put into it.
The build quality in hand is a lot better than it looks. The film advance is super nice to use, and the top material in particular is really nice. The only thing stopping me buying one issue the range focusing. I am very happy using manual focus, in fact I use mostly manual focus lenses on my mirrorless digital cameras, but I just don’t like the range focusing on any camera. The main reason I stopped using my XA2 and bought an XA instead
Half frame with a 25mm 3.5 lens, manual focusing is pretty pointless IMO. Very little change in depth of field
That's a fair review. We don't all want or need the same thing. As a way back to film though, it's a great idea and yes, I want one.
I ordered mine on the announcement day and have put a few rolls through it so far. The sharpness and image quality of the lens is more than enough for the average person. I'm used to automatic exposure on my old Ricoh, and if the next camera they release is anything like an R1 or GR1 I might have to trade in the 17 to help with the inevitably high cost...
I think it’s an awesome camera
Did you switch from the gfx to Sony for scanning ? Are you seeing much of a difference?
I was trying the Sony system for comparison and testing. Interestingly enough, colours were different between systems. Reds for example are super saturated after conversion with the Sony.
Posted some of my admiration for the camera in a reply to a comment above. I only have one major gripe.
Not zone focus, that is a learned skill, and a reminder to yourself to make sure you have the right zone selected.
The LEDs in the view finder. They are far too bright, and right next to your eye. During the day, this may be fine. But if I use it in low light conditions, not only does the LED nearly blind me as my eye is adjusted for the lower levels of light. But when it's dark enough, the light comes on saying there isn't enough light, or the light to signal the flash is powered comes on and actually completely covers my eye's view through the viewfinder.
The one work around I had is framing while the camera is off, then quickly turning it on, waiting for flash to charge and then shooting. But this adds a lot of time to the shot.
Just got a Kodak h35n half frame camera and having so much fun and it’s got a flash and a star lens filter doubling as a lens protector as long as you don’t forget to move it out of the way when using for normal shooting, when the flash is off the apperature is a tiny bit smaller like f8 and with flash on it’s like f5 or somewhere like that and like the P17 it has bulb mode activated with a shutter release cable to also allow double and long exposures. The Box comes with zero instructions and that’s fine as it’s only $65. However if you want a much better chance of getting great in focus shots and have infinitely more confidence and control over your final pictures then by all means spend $434 more and buy the P17 to get that extra bit of confidence that is definitely worth the price for the upgrade. So when Pentax does come out with as you say a more refined camera then get that one too when the time comes. I’m not gonna wait. When I held the P17 in the camera store on the day I bought the Kodak I knew immediately that it will be my next half frame camera and hopefully soon. And once I develop approximately 142 rolls of film as a half frame camera the price of the Pentax will become Free.
I love half frame format and love the default vertical framing. Pen-F is one of my favorite cameras to use and really excited about Pentax 17. The core of the camera is great including great lens and generally decent build. Coming from mobile and digital photography i love to have a camera that i can casually use it to document my life without worrying about limitations of number of photos i can take. Some great choices in terms of focal length and the zone focusing is probably the one major miss vs having a good AF.
I pretty much agree with your review but I’m going to hold on to mine and keep shooting with it along with the rest of my other film cameras. I’ve been thinking about returning it and even got the RMA from the retailer but I just can't bring myself to let it go. It’s a fun camera and it’s a challenge which is what it’s all about for me. It does need a little more weight to feel more comfortable in my hand. Maybe a half case would help. I really love the winder!
very thoughtful and helpful review - thank you
My 21 yo son recently came back from Thailand talking about a film camera that gave "two shots per frame". It wasn't one of these, but it seems half-frame is pretty big in SE Asia generally. Maybe it's aimed at that market?
Great concise review. This is my very first film camera since a holga (i primarily shooting digital) and has been a joy for me. it's got me really excited for film and has been a great entry point as a snapshot / street photography camera where you think and move on the fly and would be ideal in the style of a photographer like Daido Moriyama, who generally shoots program all the time with his street work from what i read.
One interesting point of discovery i didn't see discussed here was that the partial metering doesn't lock when you half press, so i appreciate the ability to think about EV compensation and your focus as you get to where you want to shoot.
Its format is a stark contrast to me shooting digitally with a practiced composition and careful metering and the results have often impressed me. There's also a great breakdown on the camera's construction out there in youtube and it's got some interesting modern day tech to make the camera work.
All this being said, i'm also quite excited for the next pentax. I love leaf shutter cameras (digitally i shoot on a fujifilm X100VI) and a more robust leaf shutter integrated lens full frame camera with manual settings sounds killer. A Pentax analog version of the Fujifilm X100 sounds phenomenal. I find the weight an appeal for me and would enjoy a similar weight for more Pentax's of this style.
Thanks for the video. Loved the study on the phoenix film and your thoughts there. Looking forward to more content.
Glad you enjoyed this one. Cheers.
Hi Kyle, very good review, not for me but I can see the target market. The 17 seems a bit big for a half frame camera, full frame on the way using the same body?
I'm amazed that Pentax got this made at the £500 price point. For example in 1970 the Pen EE2 was £428 and a Canon Demi 28 £524, adjusting for inflation (Sources:- prices Wallace Heaton Blue Book 1970/71 and Bank of England inflation calculator).
Great review with some wonderful photos. You maybe forgot the beautiful dyptics you can make, you have some great examples here
Thank you.
I enjoyed the review and understand why it's not for you. The suggestions you have for improvements would be nice but as people are complaining about the price now, what would the improvements cost. Another $100 or more?
It's a great fun camera for me and I already have about 250 cameras with 5 half-frames and have been shooting adjustable cameras since 1960.
These photos are all so gorgeous! I think the diptych style is so fun and different and I like the implied juxtaposition.
I was on the fence but I think I’ll be buying this camera. I think part of shooting film is it’s fun! I think if you’re looking for fun this camera captures that essence for me. Take a picture of your friends and not worry about the film counter kinda fun. They designed something new and I’m glad they went this route. I’ll also be buying the more professional ones down the road as we all love that image quality as well.
Auto focus and a sharp lenses would be such a game changer.
Should be a great step forward with what they have to offer next. I also was not crazy when I picked mine up for the first time. Hope I can bond with it !
My sentiments are aligned with yours Kyle!
Nice little thing, just not the thing I was looking to have.
Is the warranty worth the price? I can buy any other half frame that will still last a long time and enjoy it without spending the 500.
I feel this should have been 250, maybe 300.
I've seen plenty of reviews and the build seems bad for this price.
Problem with half frame and film labs is that they’ll double their scanning fee… which somewhat negates any cost benefits.
The Rollei 35AF is more interesting, but at $800 it’s blisteringly expensive. Would love to see it at $500.
I agree with basically everything you said, still oddly don't regret buying it one bit, it's fun for banging around town with.
I just reviewed a plastic Tudor point and shoot focus free camera that gave me exceptional results. It is hard to justify (for me), paying that amount of money for a half frame, range focus camera. I love Pentax for giving it a go and hope they do more. Imagine a new range finder camera!!
The Canon Demi EE17 is a very similar half frame camera with zone focusing, but it has shutter priority auto exposure as well as full manual shutter and aperture. It also has a much faster f1.7 lens, a self-timer (which the Pentax 17 does not have) and full metal construction (with leatherette on the back!). The only feature lacking on the Demi is a built-in flash, but it's easy enough to add one when needed. All in all a nice option at less than half the price of the Pentax.
IF.. you are looking for a camera almost 60 years old.
@@musa7606 Yes, that's the trade-off. I'm among the group of photographers who enjoys using classic gear and are willing to put up with the inevitable consequences (broken unfixable cameras or expensive repairs). If you're not in that group, a brand new camera like the Pentax 17 makes a lot of sense.
Excellent review and perhaps the highest quality set of images I’ve seen from the 17. It’s hard to sell this camera as a way to save money when it costs $500! Last year I bought a Nikon N80 w kit zoom lens for $30 and that was the going rate.
But I know what to look for and I have seen people getting into film who do not and basically are ripped off by people selling them broken/junk cameras stating ‘it worked last time I used it’…. This Pentax would prevent that being new w warranty. And there is that something about getting a new camera!
Yes, there is definitely a market for this camera. As mentioned in the video, I'm comfortable taking the risk with older gear, but for those new to film, a headache free experience at the start is important.
I love it as a travel camera and for documenting everyday experiences. I don't drag my thumb across the dial to advance the film so I haven't had an issue with the mode dial but I think a release buttom for the mode dial like what they did for the iso was a missed opportunity.
I would love to get one - we are travelling to Europe soon and I would love to do some fun touristy travel recording. But I'm already taking an XT50. I don't want to take my beautiful Kodak Retina ii that was may grandfather's and has been fully CLAd - it would kill me for it to be broken or stolen.
So this would be a fun camera for fun snaps that I can digital scan and then print on my Canon Selphy fora travel journal or zine to share with friends and family
As a fan of half frame I really like the 17. I’ve tried a few really loved the UX. I didn’t like my Pen EE and found that most users complained about the over exposure and the general image quality. My Yashica/Kyocera Samurai is huge but offers better quality pics which proves you can take great photos with half frame
I'm sure someone will unfairly comparing the Pentax 17 with something like Canon F1 bought around $250.
Yes, the F1 is a pro camera with nice features, shoots bigger negatives... but it's a dead system. I'm pretty sure Canon won't service those anymore. And most likely FD lenses are not being made anymore. Well, you get the point.
The Pentax 17, on the other side, it's a brand new camera that's still supported by the manufacturer, so reparing isn't an issue.
Well, the photos are great!
Thanks for the great and superfair review!
„17“ reminds me on my Canonet QL17 with a maximum aperture 1.7 and you can use the Canonet still fully manual….
The lens is impressive, tbh. The images look great (which is what really matters, imo).
The lens is not impressive. Optically it’s just barely enough for that size sensor - half frame film
Looking forward to having anyone do a side by side comparison. Compare any half frame film (at any iso) to that of any digital sensor.
To be fair though, that could have to be limited. An ideal comparison would be between half frame film to a very similar sized m43 digital - but most of those m43 digital sensors have an ideal iso limited to iso 200. Most film images are almost expected to be printed, but could also be scanned in to have a digital image.
Have already seen the direct side by side comparisons. Depending upon iso used, it’s going to be difficult for any half frame film camera to get a quality portrait type image that could go beyond a printed size of 11x14. As iso drops of when light sensitivity increases, the printed results will go down hill fast. To make a more direct comparison… The best half frame film images taken at iso 200, are easily surpassed by a m43 digital sensor at iso 400-500.
We are at opposite parts of the world! You love Large Format,Medium large and I like only small formats. I watch your videos and are enjoyable! I quit LF, Linhof etc a very long time ago.. Would I buy the new Pentax 17? No No ! I use tiny cameras with tiny sensors..Perfect for my needs! I used 1/2 frame! Made prints as large as 16x20!
Will be nice to see a full frame 35mm Pentax and a new Pentax 67 III, backwards compatible with the old lenses.
But would Pentax full frame 35 keep a fixed lens, or have an interchangeable lens
@@ronaldckrausejr7762 that’s a good question. My guess is they would just do the fixed lens. I would prefer interchangeable lenses.
Funnily enough, this review kinda makes me want to get one. I don’t have the money to spend at the moment, and I haven’t been shooting a ton of film lately anyway, but I LOVE the design of the camera, and I really like that the limiting factor for image quality seems to be the film stock, not the lens. Dang. Yeah, I want one now. 😀 But I might find myself missing control over the camera’s settings. Sometimes I feel that way with my 90s point-and-shoot.
Do yourself a favor and look into an Olympus Pen F or FT. They're full-fledged SLRs for less than half the price of this camera. You could even get it serviced and still come in quite a bit lower, and have a way nicer camera to show for it.
@@calebj5852 I have looked into the Pen F (not FT yet), but I don’t need it. I have an SLR and a point and shoot and don’t really want to expand my film camera kit... with the Pentax 17, it’s also the design that I like so much. Because I think it’s an oddly satisfying balance of vintage design cues coupled with a late 80’s aesthetic. I haven’t seen anything like this in a camera.
i own for black painted pen-ft which i can control everything(from accurate focus to exposure) for decades so i think i should just keep that one, pass this new one :)
I'm glad it exists, but there's about 1000 cameras I'd spend $500 on before it
I think a big missed opportunity was, they didn't bother trying m42 or pentax K mount. The ability to use interchangeable lenses / vintage lenses would of been huge! And would of offset the half frame aspect. I would of dropped everything to get it at that point...
A relative small half-frame camera is a completely different product than an SLR body using big/full-size lenses, though.
I share your thoughts on this camera, but these are incredible images, Kyle.
Thank you.
This camera is on my list.
The one thing you failed to mention, and something singularly lacking in the images from modern high-end cameras, is that the half frame images from the Pentax 17 have CHARACTER.
This is a good travel camera as an older person it's light weight which is good an SLR can get heavy after awhile but you young guy's are just looking for a re-hash of an older model.
hey Kyle: I can't say i am overly interested in this one. The camera is $676 here in Canada all i am going to say is not for me. Half frame is something that has never been a thing for me it really feels like a thing for entry-level shooters. The camera is a good start for a return to film, and for the shooters of today. I might find a camera like this a fun experience but I am sure there will be a point when the simplicity would end up being frustrating. I am just to jaded in my advancing age. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Half frame is a lot of fun, and worth trying out, especially with a cheaper camera.
Imagine a Pentax 6x7 style camera with a fix 80mm lens and a 65:24 insert for pano shots.
Fully Manual lenses with more current optics. With a rechargeable battery system for the auto mode and light meter.
Just dreaming 😊
Now imagine what that would cost :) A new Pentax 67 in the late 90s was about $5000 in today's money.
And I doubt the market would be very small.
@@musa7606I’m sure it would cost a pretty penny. A used Xpan goes for around $5,000 now. But, the fact that it would have an active warranty and a service center, may make it worth it to professional that use film for commercial shoots.
The pictures look nice and clean I liked it but price is quit steep for me.
It's a miss for me, great for half frame enthusiasts. The looks aren't for me, neither is the half frame format. Hopefully there is a full frame model in the works, it's great for the film community.
Spot on
Is it weird that this made me want to buy this camera?
love the pen got one too, hope the next better, pen ee too
The camera is somewhat interesting and functionality seems fine - but too expensive. At least for me, no matter production cost, as that's not here nor there for the buyer. And it might be the deciding factor for its success (or lack thereof). You're the second one to mention the missing dial lock - a serious oversight by the design team in my regard; the solution might be to make the dial harder to turn (and since this isn't a dial to constantly change when shooting, this might be already enough).
Zone focus is a no for me, although I’m very glad it’s getting back up and running again
As soon as my H35 bites the dust I will get one.
I've been dragged so much on threads for saying I just am not impressed with it, and it's not meant for me. I am glad they are making a new film camera, but this is really for the millennials in my opinion. I just didn't buy into the notion that I have to back it and purchase it or else they wouldn't make another. Maybe true but it doesn't guarantee they will make something that ill like in the future.
People who like one should go buy one. But I also thought the idea someone should spend $500 (or £ or €) on something they don’t want to subsidize some hypothetical hope that Ricoh/Pentax might one day make a camera they actually want makes no sense.
There are lots of fullframe cameras and barely any halfframe different camera models out there.
I wished it was a full manual halfframe. I get the market. But it kind of crushed my hopes.
If rumors and hints are true, the other cameras will be fullframe. Bummer
The camera wasn't aimed at photographers like me so I guess I won't be buying one. It's a shame I was kinda looking forward to it.
I need a range of shutter speeds and apertures all properly labelled,
I need a proper focus distance scale on the upper side of the lens, with a DOF scale
I don't even need a meter, but if it has one then hey ho.
I'll wait until the fully manual version comes out.
Otherwise everything else is fine.
Even the price.
It seems to be a 90's film point and shoot at half frame and with restricted manual overrides.
I'm optimistic we'll see another model from Pentax in the near future.
Hard to see how it wouldn't be better to buy one of the thousands of 35mm film cameras off Ebay for 100 bucks and saving the other $400 for film.
Yes, but you are buying used. Used 30+ year old cameras. Which I am perfectly fine with. But if you want new, the price will be completely different. A new film SLR would probably cost around $2500. When NIkon reproduced the S3 and SP, they were priced like new Leicas.
@@musa7606yeah exactly!
I'm not really sure that argument holds well. The used cameras are just getting just old. They need service, they need cleaning, adjustments and calibration. That is also not cheap.
You are also overestimating worldwide availability and support for repair and parts. Pentax is not a mere startup building cameras from a garage. This a huge commitment for Pentax.
I would definitely buy a 35mm version of this.
@@raphajptube As someone with a Mamiya 6 who had to have it repaired, I agree with this statement.
One of my "100 buck" 35mm cameras died recently and I doubt it's repairable. To get another one I would have to spend at least half the cost of the Pentax (albeit not a half frame, but still) to replace it, and that's still a 40 year old camera. There's a lot of value in something new with warranty and parts/serviceability behind it. That doesn't invalidate your point though, but it is a gamble.
there’s no more photographers, just unboxers
there would have been less backlash if
1. it was not so expensive (inflation/rnd discussion aside) since you can get a CLA'd 35mm for way less
2. it was 35mm
3. it was not zone focus
"since you can get a CLA'd 35mm for way less"
Wait till you find out what a new 35mm SLR would cost... This camera is very cheap, just not as cheap as 40 year old cameras.
@@musa7606 Yes it's a new camera, but it also missing a lots of features compare to many(Yes, MANY) old cameras what still work like a tank. 500 buck is not cheap for a camera like this, even it's new.
@@michaeltan9512 Key: Old cameras. If you want old cameras, just buy old cameras. But don't confuse old cameras with new.
And yet it wouldn't be as good. So backlash =/= bad product, people are just close-minded. If this was actually a manual focus lens it would be way less practical. And if it was AF people wouldn't be happy either.
@@michaeltan9512 What features is this camera missing compared to another half-frame 35mm camera readily found at under $500?
I have not used Pentax 17, so I can't say how it works. Seems like it is nice quality and your images looked good enough. With 199€$£ I would have bought it. Now I asked Kodak Ektar H35N for present and got it. Much cheaper. In Finland 17 is 579€ and H35N is 79€. 17 is better in quality but not on price.
I really dislike this design/marketing philosophy where in order to make a camera beginner friendly we have to remove basic functionality from it
Is having the OPTION to choose your shutter speed and aperture really so advanced as to scare new people away?
I feel as a company making a film camera, they could've done so much more with this idea but went with some really odd ideas.
(Yes im commenting before the videos finished)
Which ideas are the most odd to you?
@@rickbiessman6084 zone focusing, cheap plastic as the body.. you could for the price they are asking get some really nice glass, or some premium compacts just for what they are asking alone.
There were reports of the Japanese preorders for this camera selling out from when they were opened, so while it's not a price *I'd* want to pay for a fairly basic point and shoot camera (my Konica C35 set me back $50) it's nice to see such a great response to the reintroduction of 35mm.
Ever heard of fun? Seriously, how can you be so whiny about a new film camera that is well made, reasonably priced for that, and explicitly not targeted at you? They said that this would pave the way a new mechanical SLR and in the end maybe even a new medium format camera. This did supposed to cater to the market that is dying the fastest. Reliable, high quality point and shoots for beginners.
I can really just recommend the Analog Insides video on the Pentax 17. Not just because they actually understand something about manufacturing, but also because they can actually review a camera that isn’t targeted at them without getting all sad about it. I first thought it wasn’t for me either. Then I learned some things about the camera that changed my mind and right now I’m so glad I got it. But you know, it isn’t gonna replace my Leica.
Very well said. Couldn't agree more.
Ever heard of ‘Critical thinking’? If the camera meets your standards and you can afford spending 500€ on sometihing slightly better than a toy camera I’m happy for you. And btw ‘fun‘ is subjective.
It didn't seem like he whined about it. Stop being a hater or a fanboy for no reason. Also, it's called Analog Insights😂
These very aggressive comments praising Pentax 17 have been the biggest red flags warning me off against buying one. I’m skeptical of anything requiring this much of a hard sell.
@@williamlasl I don't see "aggressive comments praising Pentax 17"... I see people trying to compare 50 year old SLRs with a new product and not realizing the difference.
I agree the price is a bit too high, considering the Rollei 35af is not that much more but is WAY more capable.
IMO if it wasnt expensive, I would get this one, aside from it being a half frame it has a couple of nice feats for setting.. but the price is just....painful LOLZ (in the philippines, it's 45,000php / $785)
with that price, I could buy 1 Kodak ektar HALF FRAME, a TON of films to use, some camera accessories, a decent meal and still have money to save. lolz
So maybe I'll consider this once the price is below srp/even below 2nd hand prices.
Also passing on this but excited for the Rollei 35AF.
👍
They should have added a mode to where you can shoot it on full frame as well as half frame
Just because this is fun, doesn't mean it's worth $500 of fun. AE-1 at $100 will leave you ~40-50 rolls of basic film. The Pentax you'd need to spend an additional $200 for the equivalent budget. So for people who are starting with film, an upfront cost of $500 just to see if you even like film is a huge investment. At my home town that would be $10 film, $15 dev, $15 print. A beginner has to spend this just to get their feet wet, which I think is a huge cost proposition. I think a $200 price point would have been better.
If they made their own film they could sell this even at $100 just to profit off film.
Last weekend I picked up an immaculate K1000 w/lens for $12, OM10 w/lens and OM2s body for $40. All barely used condition. Yesterday I bought an EOS K2 for $20 just because it came with 11 rolls of film(I got it for the film). All those savings I could buy $400 worth of film that will last for awhile, and even dance with E100 film for giggles. So it's really hard to justify spending $500 is all I'm saying with what I compared above.
Used film gear, unless purchased from a reseller that services and checks gear (which will be more expensive), will always be a gamble. Sometimes you luck out, others you don't. I'm all for finding used gear and taking the risk, and many times I've got great cameras that work fine, but I've always experienced headaches. As mentioned in the video, I wouldn't want to spend $500 for the Pentax, but I'm sure there's a lot of people out there would be fine paying that for the guarantee.
$100 assembly offered with $750 eq. price tag in Europe. That is joke.
why does it say pentax on the camera like a 100 times
God knows why. I have to say one of the least appealing aspects of the camera, as trivial as it is, is all the bloody text and nonsense over it. Given that the likely market for this camera would be as much fashion conscious as photographically inclined, and at USD$500 it is a ‘premium’ option over almost all the secondhand cameras available, you’d think they would have given it a clean, minimalistic, Leica-adjacent aesthetic to appeal to that crowd.
First!
Dang it 😂
Bottom line, it's a £500 piece of plastic. An old and original Pen F with interchangeable lens will have been a much better choice.
I own one and it doesn’t make images that are nearly as nice as these. The Pentax 17 has a much nicer looking lens imo, especially with color.
My thoughts exactly. Personally, I’ll pass. If I want to do half-frame, I’ll stick to my far more beautiful and capable Olympus Pen F. Best half-frame ever.