I have 17 since day 2 (ordered at day 1, it was available here in Poland). It is nice piece of camera. Going with the fact that we get new HF camera, nicely working, lovely for use, great look and sound, outstanding lens at pricepoint that is less for mint used half frame there is nothing to complain. I think Pentax really nailed it both from film photography and from fashion sort of PoV attracting people who never shot film. Film future looks a bit brighter now then it was year ago as there is company, not patron money gathering sort of bunch but real photographic company that is investing time and money to educate new generation of film camera engineers for 35mm format. But I think 1500 for fully mechanical SLR his not really realistic. There is too much r&d and manufacturing going on for reinvent wheel for that to be viable at that price. Electronic camera with manual film winder, sort of Pentax 17 but in SLR form - yeah, why not. I expect mechanical SLR to be vanity item, luxury camera Leica style and price range. Electronic with some mechanical elements will be for masses.
@@markgoostree6334 It would be awesome. The hard part is however making one at a reasonable price. If you've ever taken a fully mechanical SLR apart (as I have). They're brutally complicated with a *lot* of highly custom parts. I wish they can pull it off, but it will not be easy to get the price to a reasonable point, especially not without massive production volumes. Film may be on the rise as of recently, but one still has to remember that nowhere near the number of people that shot film in the past when it was your only option are shooting it. So getting to true mass production scale may be hard. It has went from being people's only option for taking pictures, to a hobby. I wish Pentax the best of luck, but it would be a huge challenge.
Expect a semi-manual, autofocus ME-Super that works with Pentax hypersonic focus lenses before the fully mechanical camera. And believe it or not, that should be cheaper than the latter simply because of the greater amount of human handling that would be needed to build the fully mechanical.
And please not half format , or like my old konica autorex switchable from full to half and vice versa. Right now i m waitint for the Rollei 35 af with lidar af and ff.
Absolutely yes. I heard the day they went on sale that they were basically sold out right away, and that what I heard has been confirmed independently is great news. It would have been terrible if they had a warehouse full of these still.
A local reviewer of the Pentax 17 here in Europe said that the wind-on mechanism being quiet is a boon for street photographers because people don't get alerted that you're taking photos. I love the portrait orientation and the fact that you get double the exposures from a film. Very innovative. My daughter would love this camera, but she can't afford it!
Analogue photography has a future, but there is still a big issue: the slow disappearing of qualified technicians to repair analogue cameras. If you find one, you will need to be patient and enter a multiple months long waiting queue because they are overwhelmed by demand.
As a younger film shooter and huge Pentax fan I’m holding out for a k mount slr. Something that can fill the gap for my LX that recently got the battery drain issue, but hopefully a little more competent than my backup k1000. Having just bought a K1 Mkii for paid work and DSLR scanning, I think I’d be more than comfortable paying around that price for a well made new slr from Pentax, especially if it could do what the LX or even the MX could do. The value of a reliable film camera and a backed warranty is really worth it, especially as I start getting more paid work, relying on older cameras when I’m getting paid to photograph someone’s wedding definitely puts some pressure on.
Yeah, and one factor is being missed in most reviews about the chances of the market: We are putting on years and years on those old cameras and altough there is a hype and still a lot of cameras out there, fully mechanical ones are hughly expensive and elctronic ones will get harder to repair. So this, 2024 might just be the perfect time to start up with new models. Like, 2014 was just too close to the latest point and shoots having been sold.
You are right, I just got back from a Las Vegas trip where I took an old digital Olympus OM-d e-m5 and the entire trip I was pining away for my Olympus OM-4… film is not dead.
@@jackmatthews9390 it is also more fun and more rewarding. Nothing is more boring than spending hours in front of a computer monitor tweaking with dials and virtual buttons. 🙂 IMO 😊
@@robblincoln2152 6x9 is a great format too. 6x3 is just a format that has never really been done, and I think that it would be very popular. It would make a 24 shot panoramic camera in a compact format.
Whilst this camera is not for me (as an analog printer I've never had an interest in half-frame), hopefully it will be followed by other new film cameras. A Pentax 66 along the lines of the Pentax 67ii would be my pick.
I also love this camera. At first I was a bit disappointed with the plastic feel but soon learned to really appreciate how light it is which is actually more important for me. I always take it with me which I just don’t do with heavy luxury cameras. Zone focusing is such a good solution as well, very quickly you learn how to evaluate a shot and get immediate instantaneous focus quicker or as quick as auto focus. And it’s amazing how many shots you get on a roll, just crazy
While waiting for my P17 to arrive... your video got me thinking about how pentax could get more of my money. A true panoramic 35mm camera of similar quality as P17 but not too much more expensive - instant purchase (few reasonable and not too complicated options on the second hand market). New GR1 - I would most likely sell part of my collection and buy it, but I would wait a bit. New 645 or preferably 67... certainly would buy but that purchase would have to wait a few years. 35mm SLR would be hardest sell for me because I already have too many "FF" 35mm cameras... maybe maybe some day when my cameras start breaking and I can't find a decent Nikon F3 at a decent price. As long as there is an abundance of 35mm "FF" they don't need to rush out with SLR, but certainly would like them to make a new LX one day...
Something greatly in Pentax favor for an SLR film camera: lens compatibility! Pentax never went all-in on mirrorless. Mirrorless design lenses would need adapters and would change their optical characteristics if it was even possible to adapt to an SLR. A future Pentax SLR will inherit a huge family of K mount and M42 lenses. No adapter required. As always, Pentax is loyal to its users.
I’ve shot 4 rolls on my 17 now, its my second film camera after a kodak h35 plastic point and shoot and i haven’t pickup up my sony a7iv since i got the 17. im totally new to film and loving it. i’d pay $1200 for the slr body and kit lens but anything more i’d just save my money.
I would buy a really good affordable point and shoot street camera. With a fast 35mm lens. I would die for a modern manual focus Nikon F3 with big bright view finder and modern exposure readout. Love my Nikon F3hp and still shoot it all the time. But it could use a couple modern touches.
I really like the Pentax 17. I think I'm going to try to carry it around for casual shooting. Will definitely be a struggle to choose between this and an SLR for vacations though. I like to shoot slides on vacation and prefer to use an SLR for that. Maybe I'll carry both, or maybe I'll try slide film in the 17. I'll have to ask my lab if they will mount that. Would look interesting on the projector.
Thank you for the brief overview of the Pentax 17 David. It is an interesting camera, and very nice to see good quality new film cameras coming to market. Given most of my cameras (both film and digital) and lenses are Pentax K-mount I am looking forward to Pentax releasing a new film SLR as part of this film project. The sales success of the Pentax 17 means the film project is likely to see continued development. I suspect the new Pentax film SLR when it arrives will have a price point nearer to USD $2,000, but time will tell.
I was writing you a comment the other day on a community post on how much I hoped you’d bring back this series!!!! Cameras and coffees was always something I looked forward to. So glad it’s back
Interesting camera. I recently had an FA given to me that I had professional serviced and all light seals done. What a wonderful camera. Shooting that and my Dad's Electro35 GSN (Also redone) is like 1996 all over again. I think the last time I really shot film was around 2005. Recently shot my first roll in a TLR. Even back in the day I had TLR's but I never shot them. Interesting experience. That coffee sounds interesting what level of roast did you get?
Ibteresting video. Subscribed. I think Pentax deserves major kudos for the 17. They've invigorated the brand, created huge buzz, and are back in the conversation. Together with the Ricoh GRIII, I'd say Pentax is not dead yet.
I have used the Pentax 17 for almost a month, and can say that my experience with this camera is very positive. I have used black/white and color negative film for documentaries and nature, and the lens is sharp and zone focus is easy to learn. There is only one "fault" with how this tool works in practice, and it is the mode dial which is too easy to change unconsciously in fast and stressful situations. Otherwise, it's simply a great photographic tool for its use.
Mint camera is coming out with a Rollei autocucus 35 . It is supposedly $800. Actor Jeff Bridges is coming out with brand new Widelux cameras. He and his wife partnered up with a camera company in Germany who is going to be making them. Flimneverdie is coming out with a point and shoot camera. And Alfie cameras is coming out with a half frame camera that has 4 different rotating lenses..And Pentax is coming out with more cameras supposedly. The new Pentax 17 is made by Ricoh Imaging.
My one worry with the new Pentax is that it may not be a sustainable product: and by that I mean I worry that while many of us have been waiting for this, once we have ours then sales will dry up, and the experiment will end. I hope I am wrong. And I hope they do revive a true medium format system eventually (like a new film 645).
That's a good point and, were it me in charge, I would approach this as something to be made in batches, not continuously, and I would have designed it to use tooling that could be used for making other products as well. To an extent, that's how a lot of manufacturing works anyway so I have to imagine that Ricoh is on top of that, but yeah, that's a good question to have, will they make it a couple times then never again or on a recurring basis.
@@DavidHancock I own a manufacturing company myself, and to my eyes it looks like a lot of the mechanicals in the Pentax are bespoke and not easily repurposed, at least on the upper works and front end. But, if their next product is some sort of 35mm ILC (rangefinder or SLR), AND if they stick with the half-frame concept, they could get away with reusing some of the body, the winder, shutter, etc.
@@Skipsul makes sense and thank you. And yes, the cost components definitely look bespoke. (Maybe not the baseplate?) I wonder about the internals, like the gearing, meter, and so forth and if that's able to be repurposed. I can't tell how the plastic parts were made, if they were injection molded or additive.
@@DavidHancock Those are injectiion molded. Additive would save you on tooling, but be 10x more expensive at those build resolutions. I have an additive printer that could to that sort of work, and the throughput rates alone would be prohibitive for demand.
David, you don't mention what coffee grinder or brewer (that I've noticed). I've had a Technivorm for a decade, but just recently upgraded to a Eureka Mignon Crono. It's crazy - it's been a couple months and I remain shocked at the different a *really* good grinder makes. RE: the 17, I expect that is the base body to build on - perhaps a rangefinder version and an AF version are coming, which would be amazing. Certainly a good idea to cook content for it. For me, the Rollei 35AF is what I'll end up buying. My sister did buy a P17 replacing her Rebel Ti. I've put a roll through it - a nice little camera, but I don't like zone focus. I have mixed feelings about a Pentax film SLR. I think a throwback to mechanical / manual focus, K2/K1000/manual-focus AE body. that would be a success, as it could match well with readily available cheap lenses. Kicking out a modern film version of the K1 for $1500? I'd pass. Maybe a 645N3 for that price? Essentially re-use the frame and controls of the 645Z/D. I'd buy that for $$$$$. There are pros offering film options for weddings, so perhaps that might be viable from that perspective. The Contax 645s are dying, so are the 645Ns, etc. I'm fine sporting the EOS 3 and stabilized glass shared with my EOS mirrorless, but then again, I'm not a pro so if it dies, I'm not losing business. I hate the EOS 3 controls (of course) but I basically never change the settings (Av, back button AF, center point only, AE lock on shutter button). Pros may appreciate more modern stuff - face detect AF on a film cam, perhaps a rear LCD with a histogram, who knows.
:D For my grinder, I have a KitcehAid (which was about $250, IIRD) burr grinder and I brew at 7.5 (out of 8) for more extraction. I make my coffee strong. We have a $40 Oxo grinder at work and, yeah, there is a HUGE difference with the KitchenAid in terms of bean quality, heat elimination when grinding a lot of beans, and ease of cleaning.
The continual rising prices of used film cameras suggests that film has a future. Is it a fad? Who knows. I expect there will always be a market for film cameras. One thing buyers should realize is that older cameras may or may not work. I recently purchased two cameras that were described as near mint because they were very clean and probably never much used. I had to send both back because halfway through the first roll of film the shutter jammed. That's a $200 repair when you include the shipping. Paying $500 for a new, reliable camera is not a bad deal, and the lens on the Pentax 17 appears to be excellent - probably better than the vintage half frame cameras on the market.
I’ve had the RMA from B&H for a couple of weeks now but just can’t bring myself to return the 17. I really like the feel of the camera I just wish it weighed a little more. This light camera is very had to keep steady for longer exposures as it feels like holding air. So far I’m not happy with Black & White captures that I processed and scanned myself. I shot indoors at a mall as I’m in Arizona and it’s too hot to shoot outside. As a benchmark I did send a roll of T-max I shot outside on a coolish morning to a lab for comparison. If anything this camera is going to push me to become a better photographer and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Consider looking for a ME or ME Super with a winder. Nice weight, well balanced. Back in the day I shot all day long with the A-135 and weight never bothered me.
Hello David. Great video chat and I really wish Pentax every success. Looking forward to your review. Been very big changes in my use of film recently, but that discussion is for another time 🙂 Wishing you well.
Hey, Dave, and it's good to hear from you, too. And yes, I also have changed my film used a LOT. I used to shoot a roll or two a week minimum. I'm having trouble shooting twenty rolls this year. :(
I don't think I have. Mornings, pour-over. It's fast and reliable. I also like to microwave my mug with water in it so that my mug is how when the coffee goes in, which helps the flavor. Afternoons, I often make a cup or two for lunch with my moka pot.
I feel like a compact 6x7 medium format leica would sell extremely well. Also a XPan (35mm panoramic camera) alternative with just as high a quality, but fully mechanical, would probably sell well too.
I agree. I would give my eye teeth for a compact medium-format camera with a fixed and very wide lens. While an interchangeable lens MF camera would be ideal, I'd really like to see something pocketable in that size.
@@DavidHancock why not a 67 zone focus camera with a fixed wide pancake lens? For added versatility give it a film chamber designed to accept a 35 mm panoramic insert!
I'm a Pentax convert but I'm not sure if this makes sense other than to have a whole bunch of 17s on the market in a few years when the novelty runs out. There are a bunch of 1/2 frames available second hand which are better build and 1/2 price or less: Olympus Pen for example. No one seemed to be buying those lately.
Hey Dave. Welcome back. Thanks for your update. Great to hear Pentax are increasing production to meet the demand. Interested to know what are the trends with film sales of late and future projections.
To add the comment, Harman announced investment into new film making equipemnt. Not "buy old one from forgotten factory" but brand new, shiny and tailor-made film machines. If there is ever future for film it is now and seems people in industry are also able to see this.
If they made a full frame rangefinder with manual controls in the $900 US to $1000 range I would actually consider it. Basically a cheaper alternative to Leica M cameras. I just don't like how most of the new cameras are set up for people who care about social media more than the camera itself.
The fact that camera makers once again start making film cameras makes me feel really really . . . really G R E A T ! ! ! And, that they are not just simple aim and click Instamatics, but quite refined pieces. Costly, but film cameras used to cost a lot. I only had one film camera at the time when... before I got my digital cameras. So looking forward to more brands competing... and the global economy improving 😲
Definitely yes and that's a great point that I forgot to make -- a camera used to be a major investment. Film cameras cost two or three months' salary for some people. Used cameras costing a few hours' worth of work now has really skewed the perception of the value of a film camera.
I’ve also used mine pretty well, it’s really a fun experience as a light travel camera where the more important part of shooting is the experience for memories than anything important. I just wish it was a tad bit smaller, especially as a half frame. But, you can certainly tell it’s the platform the engineers intend to spring from, being that many of the necessary components going forward can scale larger and smaller from the current underpinnings. Smart in terms of future development and growth of the model line up.
I have often wondered how they plan to tackle that and if they're going to make a camera with the full KAF4 mount or something scaled back to maybe an older K or KA mount. Honestly there's no way to know until they announce it, but I imagine it's a topic of discussion amongst the design team.
@@DavidHancock for practical reasons, manufacturers of modern DSLRs could use existing DSLR full frame lenses, lens mount hardware, electronics for focusing and exposure on a new film camera. What Pentax (Ricoh?) would use for a modern film SLR I do not know. I also do not know how well lenses designed for digital would affect film as older film camera lenses have been labeled as inferior for digital use.
@@DavidHancock I think Integrating just enough for KAF4 comparability and dumping the slow, noisy worm drive focus mechanism would greatly reduce complexity and therefor cost.
I tend not to like half frame either because 72 exposures takes me forever to go through. But I do really like using it. As a proof of concept for the future, it makes me really excited for what's on the horizon.
Economy isnt better by any stretch of the imagination. But people are getting better at managing their finances, eating out less, less vacations, and dropping cable like we did. Etc, etc....... But well, still splurge for a luxury item every know and again for ourselves.
The Rollei 35 AF will cost 800$ or 850€, so it's 300 bucks more expensive than the Pentax. I wouldn't say that that's so much more as long as Mint keeps their promises on the quality of it.
I’ve been waiting for this to come back in stock since it was released. While it’s a bummer, it makes me super stoked that people are into it. Film is not dead…… yet 😅
I would miss the autofocus. Point and shoot cams of the 90th had a and autofocus. Especially for bokeh mode, you need precise focus on Spott. With small aperture, that will not be an issue. Everything will be sharp.
@DavidHancock of course, it's fair to say that it would be a toy for die hard film geeks (and I guess rich people) but it would also be nice to have a seriously pro medium format camera avalible new. I feel like it would be a good push back to film being some 'retro hipster thing' to equal footing with digital photography. Also I want a Mamiya 7 with a warranty.
I'd love to see Pentax reissue classics like the K ("king" from 1957, not the K1000), the SV, or the SPII. Leica reissued the original M6, so why not Pentax?
There are some GOOD reasons not remake the AP, K, or S. The main reason is that the while they were mechanically simple they also weren't mechanically refined. The H/S bodies were where the cameras started getting nice. To me, the SV/H3V was the best of those and I prefer the SV to anything in the Spotmatic lineup, too. There's something about the shutter feel and handling that are simple delightful with that camera.
@@DavidHancock agreed. I have a K with a stuck advance lever, and it needs shutter curtains. Pentax expert repairman Eric Hendrickson wouldn't touch it. He did refurbish my SV, though, and it is a gem. Same with the SPII and ES II he worked on.
@@andrewrothman7805 Yeah, Eric doesn't make new curtains any more. Check with the Fix Old Cameras channel; he may know someone. Also if cost isn't a concern, check to see if Kamera Store in Finland would do the repair.
@@christinasmith9032 it does not feel cheap. Yeah, it had plastic, and yes, I think a lot of the people reviewing this wanted something made of solid gold for less than $100. There were a lot of unreasonable expectations placed on this and a lot of people who are trashing it are likely doing that to get views.
MSRP for the F2 in 1972 was USD $660, which adjusted for inflation would today be USD $4,960, according to the historic currency conversion website. Even though there was often some discount versus MSRP with camera sales (they used to be sold like cars with negotiation and dickering) the general cost magnitude would still be about the same.
@DavidHancock in some areas they were Fair Traded . Could only be sold for manufacturers list price . The brands policed that well. In the late 60s,I think, that was challenged by ,what was then comming along, big discount stores. That ended that. I got this history from a friend of mine, that was in the camera retail since 1957 here in Portland Oregon.
I don't get the point of shooting 35mm (not MF or larger) plain color negatives (like Gold or ColorPlus) AND scanning them (esp with digital cameras). One can/AI will make any scanned film (or digital shots) look like any other film. I have seen presets for Cinestill 800T, Lomo Purple and Metropolis Is there a point if analog printing is not involved? (I don't feel shooting film=>mindful process coz a 1/4 charged battery and 1GB card with a 45MP camera gives the same limitations.)
I have Nikon DSLRs but kept my film cameras for use. Unless someone produces affordable digital adaptors for 35 mm and 120 format film cameras, scanning is the only practical way to use a film camera and share my images with friends.
There's an art to working with film AND preserving the image character that it creates. I do think there's a point to digitization with film which is that, done well, digitization can preserve the look of the original film stock, but also make it a bit easier to achieve good final results with film. Having the benefit of learning film in a darkroom and seeing how the different darkroom techniques work, for me, has always informed my use of film and how I plan to shoot, develop, and digitize. Quite honestly, I'm not sure how that looks for someone who never used film in a darkroom.
@@DavidHancock Re:your first point: Agreed that preserving the negative film's look is an art all by itself. Debatable whether current digitization is preservation grade. Stable film has been around 60+ years, but digital storage has not: ever tried reading a hard drive from 2004? QQQ: Other than drum scans, what else is archival preservation?
@@DixonLu I totally get your point about bit rot. A couple years back I opened up my old college Zip drive on my desktop and none of the text files were in a format I could use. I didn't know that drum scans are even archival because no archived file has a longevity beyond the standard that governs the software which accesses it. Some image formats have been around a long time now, but will they be in 20 or 50 years? I don't know.
I have to wonder who the Pentax 17 is aimed at. Serious amateurs with a penchant for nostalgia I'm guessing. The limited control would put professionals off, but I suppose professionals would be using digital anyway. If I had $500/$600 to spend on a film camera, I'd be more inclined to buy used and CLA'd SLR for similar money or a 'new in box' Nikon F3/F2/Canon F1 (e.g.) at three times the price, but giving three times the image quality (and flexibility of use).
Good question and I think the best bet is film photographers looking to cut their film cost. Also, it's probably for people who want to support the film camera project so that Pentax releases a full SLR.
I disagree, it's pure crap to me and a bad way to start film photography. The worst of our era with influencers and consumerism, no plastic anymore. I got a Contax with a Zeiss Planar 50mm for $ 10. We have a responsability to guide people in the right path. Honestly R&D didnt cost much.
I'd be curious to know if you've used one of these and where you heard that R&D didn't cost that much. R&D always costs a lot and, from the perspective of a film camera user who has some experience with film cameras across the spectrum, this is a really delightful camera to use.
Welcome in the year 1975, with half frame. I wonder who wants this with so many almost free analog film cameras for sale. And it`s half frame........WHY.
@@brugj03 it supports the Pentax initiative to build new film cameras for one, it's far less likely to die tomorrow than a used camera from the past 40 years for two, and it's new and hadn't been forgotten about on an attic or car trunk to get like aperture blades or fungus for three.
The Pentax 17 is vastly overpriced for its feature set. It only has a ONE year warranty. I don't see any new or even improved technology. No actual focusing, no user settable aperture or shutter speed. A Pentax ME SLR is more advanced that this thing. It looks good and maybe feels good but so what? I am a Pentax fan for lack of a better description. But I don't give two sheets about marketing philosophy. I'd like a 35MM SLR film camera with the features of Pentax cameras of the 1990's but with modern technology to make it reliable. AND I don't want to have to choose from a dozen models that only slight differences. Make three or four distinct models with simple price tiers.
Well, there's not a whole lot of new technology in film writ large -- it's a mature industry from a technological perspective. Most of the new technology has to do with formulating new emulsions as chemicals become hard to find or are made illegal due to health concerns. But as for 17 pricing in terms of historical pricing for cameras, this is on the cheap side, especially considering the features it does have. By historical standards, adjusted for inflation, it's less expensive than an Olympus D2 (the second-highest-tier Olympus fixed-lens half-frame camera) was upon the D2's release. And inarguably, this camera has a much better feature set than the D2.
@@DavidHancock Oh I should have been a little more specific, I'm not complaining about the FILM technology. It's the camera hardware technology that should be modernized. You've probably seen the inside of a late 1990's camera, circuit boards squeezed into every space with discrete soldered wires interconnecting them. Gears, levers, springs that need precision adjustment. Dozens of different sized screws. YIKES! I opened a Pentax Spotmatic (I think) once and found a freaking piece of leather used to give some resistance to some levers! DOUBLE YIKES! A modern film camera should be designed with modules that can be easily serviced or replaced. Something that could be done with an iFixit kit or something as modular as a Framework laptop. @adamson3748 mentioned the lack of repair services for film cameras. Even if you do find someone to fix your old film camera do you really want to pay $500 or more and wait three or more months? Thanks.
You ever wonder how many film photographers there are in the world? We need dual use machines that can give us good $3 film, I hope North Korea corners the market on film, somebody....
I don't get the lack of autofocus, the choice of half-frame format, the slow lens, the limited shutter speed range. Not for the price point. Film is now a dollar a shot (or more). For those who want the full analog process, from shutter snap to developing and enlarging, would they not want a more sophisticated camera that can deliver true large print quality? For the hipster niche why not something like the Leica Sofort 2 for an even lower price and instant gratification? For $500 there are many old but good condition prosumer film cameras available used. My worry is it deflects investment from a GR IV, Ricoh's cash cow. (For the record I own a GR II and III, love both.)
A Spotmatic F was 335 dollars in the mid-70’s. It would be over 1500 dollars now. A 500-600 dollar camera today would have been under 100 then. The Pentax 17 is a simple test to see if a specific niche market supports the huge engineering effort to develop a film camera. Pentax has stated many times this is a first test before spending far more for a true SLR with modern features. It is very inexpensive by comparison to a true SLR; I hope Pentax is successful enough to see a future for a sophisticated SLR. At least they don’t have to come to market with an entirely new lens family for a future SLR. ALL their existing K mount and M42 will be at home! There are good videos on the effort needed to create this camera. Many retired engineers came back to educate current staff on the esoterics of film camera design. They make fun viewing.
I get your point and I wondered about that, too. It seems odd and the motor-drive focus placement seems overly complex (unless it's part of a larger design plan?). I would have just used a simple helical for focusing, detents if needed at different points, honestly. But there has to be some logic behind it and why they were interested in developing that system. RE: pricing, I went back and looked up some Olympus Pen pricing from the early 1960s. An EE, which was WAY less of a camera than the 17, was USD $45 in 1962, which is about USD $470 today. The prices went up from there and the highest-end fixed-lens Olympus Pen available in 1962 sold for USD $75 -- about USD $850 today. The 17 is still better than that (I believe the $75 price was the D3, but don't quote me on that as I can't prove it.) By comparison, the Pen F sold for USD $120-140 (depending on lens) in 1962, which would be like USD $1,230 to USD $1,450 today. So given the build, feature, set, and development that went into the 17, $500 is probably a good price and low compared to similar cameras of the past when adjusted for inflation. All that assumes technology exists in a vacuum and never changes or gets cheaper -- especially production technologies -- and that's an incorrect assumption. But the point is intended just to be illustrative -- yeah, $500 (or in my case $620....) is a big check to cut at once for half-frame camera, but simultaneously not unreasonable compared to historical pricing. (Also, camera sales back in the day like car sales often included some dickering so MSRP was often higher than what people actually paid for a camera, and that's just not the case any more.)
I fear about false focused pictures in macro mode or bokeh mode. In this case, you need a precise focus. It is a bit cumbersome to measure the distance between the lens and the object with a measure tape to adjust the right distance.
I feel like they should just release a dslr/film type camera body alone and just let people choose from all their lenses. It would cut down the cost of the product and people can choose glass within their price range. There are crazy amounts of lenses for the K mount and many adapters for other lenses to be used. That's the safe option in my mind, but I know everyone wants to see a vintage style slr or a medium format camera.
I'm very glad that Pentax gave it a shot and I hope they make a lot of money on this camera. I hope more people return to film. But the truth is that $500 is way too much money for a camera with this many compromises. Think about it. You can buy a Nikon F100 in excellent or even like-new condition for $500. I'm sure the same is true for comparable bodies from other brands. These are full featured cameras that are far superior to the Pentax and offer a wide range of excellent lenses at a wide range of prices. You can use manual and autofocus lenses on it. With its various settings it can be used like a point and shoot for the beginner or as manual as you want it to be. If you want a vintage looking manual focus body you can get a Nikon Fm3A, one of the best manual focus cameras ever made in excellent condition for under $1000 or the vastly underrated Nikon FA for under $300 in excellent condition. In this regard the Pentax doesn't make a whole lot of sense at $500.
For the love of all that is holy and decent, please edit out the gulps or use a microphone that doesn't record them. Drinking and eating sounds in the audio are thee worst.
I don't care about photography anymore. It's too expensive. I will not get a digital camera. EVER. That's not photography to me. I grew up on film. I'll take pictures on my iphone but that is not photography. That's just me. I agree with you on so much of what you say but ...
I hear you on the price. I've had to completely revamp my approach to film-related videos because it's gotten prohibitive to keep the All About Film videos the same as they were.
@@DavidHancock And I truly appreciate the hard work, time and money you spend. I have a decent amount in the freezer. I'm waiting until my daughter is a little older before I burn through it all. After that I'm really not sure what I will do. EVERYTHING is becoming cost prohibitive.
As good as this news is about the Pentax 17 selling out: £500 is a lot of cash for a single camera with a fixed lens. I would much rather spend that on a few good lenses and a beat up old MX or FM2 for that money. And get better quality images.
That used to be my thought too, but actually what I now use film for an SLR makes much less sense. I basic compact camera with a good 35 to 50mm lens is much more useful for travel or general walk about shots than the versatility that an SLR brings as an SLR will never be as versatile as an digital camera. Though I have plenty of film SLRs and 120 cameras I invariably choose to use my Olympus 35 RC or Konica C35 over my "better" SLRs. The Pentax 17 does not fit my bill because it's half frame, but it could be relatively easy to make it FF as the body is more than big enough.
I wish they had started with an SLR because there are plenty of cheap viewfinders to be found, especially with Mint ,or Lomography and used consumer market. Now Pentax is competing with that, but there is literally NO competition with SLR at this point an and they would have a monopoly. I teach photography at high school and still teach darkroom, and they would’ve made absolute bank off of me and every other school for that matter. Still crossing my fingers
They'll get there. They had to get from the ground up on these, pretty much, and the interest my videos on this camera have sparked really shows how much people are interested in this.
I have 17 since day 2 (ordered at day 1, it was available here in Poland). It is nice piece of camera. Going with the fact that we get new HF camera, nicely working, lovely for use, great look and sound, outstanding lens at pricepoint that is less for mint used half frame there is nothing to complain. I think Pentax really nailed it both from film photography and from fashion sort of PoV attracting people who never shot film.
Film future looks a bit brighter now then it was year ago as there is company, not patron money gathering sort of bunch but real photographic company that is investing time and money to educate new generation of film camera engineers for 35mm format.
But I think 1500 for fully mechanical SLR his not really realistic. There is too much r&d and manufacturing going on for reinvent wheel for that to be viable at that price. Electronic camera with manual film winder, sort of Pentax 17 but in SLR form - yeah, why not. I expect mechanical SLR to be vanity item, luxury camera Leica style and price range. Electronic with some mechanical elements will be for masses.
Next year is the 50th anniversary of the K mount. Wouldn't it be a lovely way to mark it with an SLR?
You hit it! That is what I'm hoping for... fully adjustable, SLR, manual camera. I hope the "17" will convince Pentax to make that happen!
@@markgoostree6334 It would be awesome. The hard part is however making one at a reasonable price. If you've ever taken a fully mechanical SLR apart (as I have). They're brutally complicated with a *lot* of highly custom parts. I wish they can pull it off, but it will not be easy to get the price to a reasonable point, especially not without massive production volumes. Film may be on the rise as of recently, but one still has to remember that nowhere near the number of people that shot film in the past when it was your only option are shooting it. So getting to true mass production scale may be hard. It has went from being people's only option for taking pictures, to a hobby.
I wish Pentax the best of luck, but it would be a huge challenge.
Expect a semi-manual, autofocus ME-Super that works with Pentax hypersonic focus lenses before the fully mechanical camera. And believe it or not, that should be cheaper than the latter simply because of the greater amount of human handling that would be needed to build the fully mechanical.
And please not half format , or like my old konica autorex switchable from full to half and vice versa.
Right now i m waitint for the Rollei 35 af with lidar af and ff.
they would print money if they made a new $1000 travel rangefinder, imo.
Completely agree!
That's great news that Pentax is having trouble keeping up demand, for ALL the right reasons, i.e. there is still interest in film photography
Absolutely yes. I heard the day they went on sale that they were basically sold out right away, and that what I heard has been confirmed independently is great news. It would have been terrible if they had a warehouse full of these still.
A local reviewer of the Pentax 17 here in Europe said that the wind-on mechanism being quiet is a boon for street photographers because people don't get alerted that you're taking photos. I love the portrait orientation and the fact that you get double the exposures from a film. Very innovative. My daughter would love this camera, but she can't afford it!
I think street photography would be awesome with this.
Analogue photography has a future, but there is still a big issue: the slow disappearing of qualified technicians to repair analogue cameras. If you find one, you will need to be patient and enter a multiple months long waiting queue because they are overwhelmed by demand.
In the US, that's a significant issue for sure. When I was in Finland last month I toured Kamera Store and their repair capacity is incredible.
@@DavidHancockI need to visit Finland!
I dislike the term analog cameras. I really would rather film photography, film camera. Just the Ludeite in me.
But, to each his own.
@@michaelcase8574 You`re right, the sensor in every digital camera is just as analog as film.
As a younger film shooter and huge Pentax fan I’m holding out for a k mount slr. Something that can fill the gap for my LX that recently got the battery drain issue, but hopefully a little more competent than my backup k1000. Having just bought a K1 Mkii for paid work and DSLR scanning, I think I’d be more than comfortable paying around that price for a well made new slr from Pentax, especially if it could do what the LX or even the MX could do. The value of a reliable film camera and a backed warranty is really worth it, especially as I start getting more paid work, relying on older cameras when I’m getting paid to photograph someone’s wedding definitely puts some pressure on.
I totally agree. It is not 2005 anymore when film was supposed to "die". Film photography is definitely expanding.
Goodwill's auction website does a very good business selling old film cameras and expired film
Yeah, and one factor is being missed in most reviews about the chances of the market: We are putting on years and years on those old cameras and altough there is a hype and still a lot of cameras out there, fully mechanical ones are hughly expensive and elctronic ones will get harder to repair. So this, 2024 might just be the perfect time to start up with new models. Like, 2014 was just too close to the latest point and shoots having been sold.
@@lelandfitz1762 Buy one to go, one to stow.
You are right, I just got back from a Las Vegas trip where I took an old digital Olympus OM-d e-m5 and the entire trip I was pining away for my Olympus OM-4… film is not dead.
@@jackmatthews9390 it is also more fun and more rewarding. Nothing is more boring than spending hours in front of a computer monitor tweaking with dials and virtual buttons. 🙂 IMO 😊
Hoping I live long enough to see new MF cameras hit the market.
I wish someone would make 6x3 MF camera. I think that would be such a useful format.
@@ArthurFellig and here I was wanting to go the other way: 6x9
@@robblincoln2152 6x9 is a great format too. 6x3 is just a format that has never really been done, and I think that it would be very popular. It would make a 24 shot panoramic camera in a compact format.
Whilst this camera is not for me (as an analog printer I've never had an interest in half-frame), hopefully it will be followed by other new film cameras. A Pentax 66 along the lines of the Pentax 67ii would be my pick.
I won't lie, if I had the resources, I'd absolutely build a simple 120 camera like a 1930s folder. A new 120 camera would be awesome.
I also love this camera. At first I was a bit disappointed with the plastic feel but soon learned to really appreciate how light it is which is actually more important for me. I always take it with me which I just don’t do with heavy luxury cameras. Zone focusing is such a good solution as well, very quickly you learn how to evaluate a shot and get immediate instantaneous focus quicker or as quick as auto focus. And it’s amazing how many shots you get on a roll, just crazy
While waiting for my P17 to arrive... your video got me thinking about how pentax could get more of my money. A true panoramic 35mm camera of similar quality as P17 but not too much more expensive - instant purchase (few reasonable and not too complicated options on the second hand market).
New GR1 - I would most likely sell part of my collection and buy it, but I would wait a bit.
New 645 or preferably 67... certainly would buy but that purchase would have to wait a few years.
35mm SLR would be hardest sell for me because I already have too many "FF" 35mm cameras... maybe maybe some day when my cameras start breaking and I can't find a decent Nikon F3 at a decent price. As long as there is an abundance of 35mm "FF" they don't need to rush out with SLR, but certainly would like them to make a new LX one day...
Something greatly in Pentax favor for an SLR film camera: lens compatibility! Pentax never went all-in on mirrorless. Mirrorless design lenses would need adapters and would change their optical characteristics if it was even possible to adapt to an SLR. A future Pentax SLR will inherit a huge family of K mount and M42 lenses. No adapter required. As always, Pentax is loyal to its users.
Absolutely yes, and even more so counting the vintage third-party lenses.
I’ve shot 4 rolls on my 17 now, its my second film camera after a kodak h35 plastic point and shoot and i haven’t pickup up my sony a7iv since i got the 17. im totally new to film and loving it. i’d pay $1200 for the slr body and kit lens but anything more i’d just save my money.
Nice!
I would buy a really good affordable point and shoot street camera. With a fast 35mm lens. I would die for a modern manual focus Nikon F3 with big bright view finder and modern exposure readout. Love my Nikon F3hp and still shoot it all the time. But it could use a couple modern touches.
I love my Nikon f3. In fact, I have three of them, one the F3P (Press special edition).
I really like the Pentax 17. I think I'm going to try to carry it around for casual shooting. Will definitely be a struggle to choose between this and an SLR for vacations though. I like to shoot slides on vacation and prefer to use an SLR for that. Maybe I'll carry both, or maybe I'll try slide film in the 17. I'll have to ask my lab if they will mount that. Would look interesting on the projector.
I'm shooting slide film in the 17 right now and can't wait to see how it turns out. :D
Thank you for the brief overview of the Pentax 17 David. It is an interesting camera, and very nice to see good quality new film cameras coming to market. Given most of my cameras (both film and digital) and lenses are Pentax K-mount I am looking forward to Pentax releasing a new film SLR as part of this film project. The sales success of the Pentax 17 means the film project is likely to see continued development. I suspect the new Pentax film SLR when it arrives will have a price point nearer to USD $2,000, but time will tell.
Thank you, Ross! I agree and I'm very hopeful about the next Pentax film cameras now.
I was writing you a comment the other day on a community post on how much I hoped you’d bring back this series!!!! Cameras and coffees was always something I looked forward to. So glad it’s back
I have been SO BUSY since September. I really want to go back to making one of these a week, or at minimum two a month.
Interesting camera. I recently had an FA given to me that I had professional serviced and all light seals done. What a wonderful camera. Shooting that and my Dad's Electro35 GSN (Also redone) is like 1996 all over again. I think the last time I really shot film was around 2005. Recently shot my first roll in a TLR. Even back in the day I had TLR's but I never shot them. Interesting experience. That coffee sounds interesting what level of roast did you get?
That's very nice and yeah, there is something lovely about an FA. I usually go for light roast coffees and tend to like a bit of a brighter cup.
Ibteresting video. Subscribed. I think Pentax deserves major kudos for the 17. They've invigorated the brand, created huge buzz, and are back in the conversation. Together with the Ricoh GRIII, I'd say Pentax is not dead yet.
Thank you!
I have used the Pentax 17 for almost a month, and can say that my experience with this camera is very positive. I have used black/white and color negative film for documentaries and nature, and the lens is sharp and zone focus is easy to learn. There is only one "fault" with how this tool works in practice, and it is the mode dial which is too easy to change unconsciously in fast and stressful situations. Otherwise, it's simply a great photographic tool for its use.
Thank you and I had noticed that, too, and wondered if it was just me that I bump the mode dial sometimes.
Pentax needs to re-release their K1000, or even Spotmatic!! With the number of vintage lenses available, they would be very marketable.
Mint camera is coming out with a Rollei autocucus 35 . It is supposedly $800. Actor Jeff Bridges is coming out with brand new Widelux cameras. He and his wife partnered up with a camera company in Germany who is going to be making them. Flimneverdie is coming out with a point and shoot camera. And Alfie cameras is coming out with a half frame camera that has 4 different rotating lenses..And Pentax is coming out with more cameras supposedly. The new Pentax 17 is made by Ricoh Imaging.
My one worry with the new Pentax is that it may not be a sustainable product: and by that I mean I worry that while many of us have been waiting for this, once we have ours then sales will dry up, and the experiment will end. I hope I am wrong.
And I hope they do revive a true medium format system eventually (like a new film 645).
That's a good point and, were it me in charge, I would approach this as something to be made in batches, not continuously, and I would have designed it to use tooling that could be used for making other products as well. To an extent, that's how a lot of manufacturing works anyway so I have to imagine that Ricoh is on top of that, but yeah, that's a good question to have, will they make it a couple times then never again or on a recurring basis.
@@DavidHancock I own a manufacturing company myself, and to my eyes it looks like a lot of the mechanicals in the Pentax are bespoke and not easily repurposed, at least on the upper works and front end. But, if their next product is some sort of 35mm ILC (rangefinder or SLR), AND if they stick with the half-frame concept, they could get away with reusing some of the body, the winder, shutter, etc.
@@Skipsul makes sense and thank you. And yes, the cost components definitely look bespoke. (Maybe not the baseplate?) I wonder about the internals, like the gearing, meter, and so forth and if that's able to be repurposed. I can't tell how the plastic parts were made, if they were injection molded or additive.
@@DavidHancock Those are injectiion molded. Additive would save you on tooling, but be 10x more expensive at those build resolutions. I have an additive printer that could to that sort of work, and the throughput rates alone would be prohibitive for demand.
David, you don't mention what coffee grinder or brewer (that I've noticed). I've had a Technivorm for a decade, but just recently upgraded to a Eureka Mignon Crono. It's crazy - it's been a couple months and I remain shocked at the different a *really* good grinder makes.
RE: the 17, I expect that is the base body to build on - perhaps a rangefinder version and an AF version are coming, which would be amazing. Certainly a good idea to cook content for it. For me, the Rollei 35AF is what I'll end up buying. My sister did buy a P17 replacing her Rebel Ti. I've put a roll through it - a nice little camera, but I don't like zone focus.
I have mixed feelings about a Pentax film SLR. I think a throwback to mechanical / manual focus, K2/K1000/manual-focus AE body. that would be a success, as it could match well with readily available cheap lenses. Kicking out a modern film version of the K1 for $1500? I'd pass. Maybe a 645N3 for that price? Essentially re-use the frame and controls of the 645Z/D. I'd buy that for $$$$$. There are pros offering film options for weddings, so perhaps that might be viable from that perspective. The Contax 645s are dying, so are the 645Ns, etc.
I'm fine sporting the EOS 3 and stabilized glass shared with my EOS mirrorless, but then again, I'm not a pro so if it dies, I'm not losing business. I hate the EOS 3 controls (of course) but I basically never change the settings (Av, back button AF, center point only, AE lock on shutter button). Pros may appreciate more modern stuff - face detect AF on a film cam, perhaps a rear LCD with a histogram, who knows.
:D
For my grinder, I have a KitcehAid (which was about $250, IIRD) burr grinder and I brew at 7.5 (out of 8) for more extraction. I make my coffee strong. We have a $40 Oxo grinder at work and, yeah, there is a HUGE difference with the KitchenAid in terms of bean quality, heat elimination when grinding a lot of beans, and ease of cleaning.
The continual rising prices of used film cameras suggests that film has a future. Is it a fad? Who knows. I expect there will always be a market for film cameras. One thing buyers should realize is that older cameras may or may not work. I recently purchased two cameras that were described as near mint because they were very clean and probably never much used. I had to send both back because halfway through the first roll of film the shutter jammed. That's a $200 repair when you include the shipping. Paying $500 for a new, reliable camera is not a bad deal, and the lens on the Pentax 17 appears to be excellent - probably better than the vintage half frame cameras on the market.
I’ve had the RMA from B&H for a couple of weeks now but just can’t bring myself to return the 17. I really like the feel of the camera I just wish it weighed a little more. This light camera is very had to keep steady for longer exposures as it feels like holding air. So far I’m not happy with Black & White captures that I processed and scanned myself. I shot indoors at a mall as I’m in Arizona and it’s too hot to shoot outside. As a benchmark I did send a roll of T-max I shot outside on a coolish morning to a lab for comparison. If anything this camera is going to push me to become a better photographer and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Consider looking for a ME or ME Super with a winder. Nice weight, well balanced. Back in the day I shot all day long with the A-135 and weight never bothered me.
Not interested in adding to my collection of a dozen used cameras.
Film price should be less now in these days rather than high and very few place develop film
Hello David. Great video chat and I really wish Pentax every success.
Looking forward to your review.
Been very big changes in my use of film recently, but that discussion is for another time 🙂
Wishing you well.
Hey, Dave, and it's good to hear from you, too. And yes, I also have changed my film used a LOT. I used to shoot a roll or two a week minimum. I'm having trouble shooting twenty rolls this year. :(
@@DavidHancock 100% 120 roll film here and all B&W. The Hasselblads have spolit me 🙂
Excellent video 😮!
I can't remember if you mentioned this before, but what is your preferred way of making coffee?
I don't think I have. Mornings, pour-over. It's fast and reliable. I also like to microwave my mug with water in it so that my mug is how when the coffee goes in, which helps the flavor. Afternoons, I often make a cup or two for lunch with my moka pot.
This channel is sooo good. Thank you David!
Thank you, Mike!
I feel like a compact 6x7 medium format leica would sell extremely well.
Also a XPan (35mm panoramic camera) alternative with just as high a quality, but fully mechanical, would probably sell well too.
I agree. I would give my eye teeth for a compact medium-format camera with a fixed and very wide lens. While an interchangeable lens MF camera would be ideal, I'd really like to see something pocketable in that size.
@@DavidHancock why not a 67 zone focus camera with a fixed wide pancake lens? For added versatility give it a film chamber designed to accept a 35 mm panoramic insert!
Nice of you to name your dog after a lovely city in Manitoba Canada.
I'm a Pentax convert but I'm not sure if this makes sense other than to have a whole bunch of 17s on the market in a few years when the novelty runs out. There are a bunch of 1/2 frames available second hand which are better build and 1/2 price or less: Olympus Pen for example. No one seemed to be buying those lately.
Hey Dave. Welcome back. Thanks for your update. Great to hear Pentax are increasing production to meet the demand. Interested to know what are the trends with film sales of late and future projections.
Thank you! Hopefully I can get these back on to a regular schedule now, too.
To add the comment, Harman announced investment into new film making equipemnt. Not "buy old one from forgotten factory" but brand new, shiny and tailor-made film machines. If there is ever future for film it is now and seems people in industry are also able to see this.
That's fantastic news! I hadn't heard that.
I certainly hope these shiny new machines will be cranking out 220 film!
If they made a full frame rangefinder with manual controls in the $900 US to $1000 range I would actually consider it. Basically a cheaper alternative to Leica M cameras. I just don't like how most of the new cameras are set up for people who care about social media more than the camera itself.
I won't lie, I'd have loves this as an FF with a 25mm lens, but the 17 is still pretty great.
The fact that camera makers once again start making film cameras makes me feel really really . . . really G R E A T ! ! !
And, that they are not just simple aim and click Instamatics, but quite refined pieces. Costly, but film cameras used to cost a lot. I only had one film camera at the time when... before I got my digital cameras.
So looking forward to more brands competing... and the global economy improving 😲
Definitely yes and that's a great point that I forgot to make -- a camera used to be a major investment. Film cameras cost two or three months' salary for some people. Used cameras costing a few hours' worth of work now has really skewed the perception of the value of a film camera.
The good news is that the Rollei is about the same price. But the Pentax is $150 more expensive in Europe than if you picked it up in the States.
I’ve also used mine pretty well, it’s really a fun experience as a light travel camera where the more important part of shooting is the experience for memories than anything important. I just wish it was a tad bit smaller, especially as a half frame. But, you can certainly tell it’s the platform the engineers intend to spring from, being that many of the necessary components going forward can scale larger and smaller from the current underpinnings. Smart in terms of future development and growth of the model line up.
I did not pick it up in the states. :D It was USD $620 and change after conversion from Euros. So ouch.
Would be nice if a new film SLR camera body were able to use either vintage SLR lenses or recent, modern DSLR full frame lenses.
I have often wondered how they plan to tackle that and if they're going to make a camera with the full KAF4 mount or something scaled back to maybe an older K or KA mount. Honestly there's no way to know until they announce it, but I imagine it's a topic of discussion amongst the design team.
@@DavidHancock for practical reasons, manufacturers of modern DSLRs could use existing DSLR full frame lenses, lens mount hardware, electronics for focusing and exposure on a new film camera.
What Pentax (Ricoh?) would use for a modern film SLR I do not know.
I also do not know how well lenses designed for digital would affect film as older film camera lenses have been labeled as inferior for digital use.
DSLR would not work due to the shorter flange distance
@@Andy-rk9mu Pentax have never changed their flange distance, and they have no reason to change it now.
@@DavidHancock I think Integrating just enough for KAF4 comparability and dumping the slow, noisy worm drive focus mechanism would greatly reduce complexity and therefor cost.
I think it is really cool that Pentax came out with this. I'm not a half frame guy so will not be buying one.
I tend not to like half frame either because 72 exposures takes me forever to go through. But I do really like using it. As a proof of concept for the future, it makes me really excited for what's on the horizon.
I cant wait for the mint made rollie 35af to come out
Economy isnt better by any stretch of the imagination. But people are getting better at managing their finances, eating out less, less vacations, and dropping cable like we did. Etc, etc....... But well, still splurge for a luxury item every know and again for ourselves.
The Rollei 35 AF will cost 800$ or 850€, so it's 300 bucks more expensive than the Pentax. I wouldn't say that that's so much more as long as Mint keeps their promises on the quality of it.
That's a GREAT price if the quality is there.
I’ve been waiting for this to come back in stock since it was released. While it’s a bummer, it makes me super stoked that people are into it. Film is not dead…… yet 😅
:D
If Pentax made a brand new film SLR with modern autofocus technology or even an EVF coupled with that(lofty ask), I'd easily drop whatever they'd ask.
I would miss the autofocus. Point and shoot cams of the 90th had a and autofocus. Especially for bokeh mode, you need precise focus on Spott. With small aperture, that will not be an issue. Everything will be sharp.
I think if Nikon would make a revised F2 for 2500 € i would buy it in an instant
What if they sold a new pentax 67 for $7k? That would really have me.
@@johnkaplun9619 that price might be a bit high for most people. 😃
@DavidHancock of course, it's fair to say that it would be a toy for die hard film geeks (and I guess rich people) but it would also be nice to have a seriously pro medium format camera avalible new. I feel like it would be a good push back to film being some 'retro hipster thing' to equal footing with digital photography. Also I want a Mamiya 7 with a warranty.
I'd love to see Pentax reissue classics like the K ("king" from 1957, not the K1000), the SV, or the SPII. Leica reissued the original M6, so why not Pentax?
SV
There are some GOOD reasons not remake the AP, K, or S. The main reason is that the while they were mechanically simple they also weren't mechanically refined. The H/S bodies were where the cameras started getting nice. To me, the SV/H3V was the best of those and I prefer the SV to anything in the Spotmatic lineup, too. There's something about the shutter feel and handling that are simple delightful with that camera.
@@DavidHancock agreed. I have a K with a stuck advance lever, and it needs shutter curtains. Pentax expert repairman Eric Hendrickson wouldn't touch it. He did refurbish my SV, though, and it is a gem. Same with the SPII and ES II he worked on.
@@andrewrothman7805 Yeah, Eric doesn't make new curtains any more. Check with the Fix Old Cameras channel; he may know someone. Also if cost isn't a concern, check to see if Kamera Store in Finland would do the repair.
I hear from other RUclipsrs that the Pentax 17 feels cheap. But you’re not really saying that, right?
@@christinasmith9032 it does not feel cheap. Yeah, it had plastic, and yes, I think a lot of the people reviewing this wanted something made of solid gold for less than $100. There were a lot of unreasonable expectations placed on this and a lot of people who are trashing it are likely doing that to get views.
How much was the Nikon f2 in todays dollars? 1500 for a new camera today, would be a real bargain.
MSRP for the F2 in 1972 was USD $660, which adjusted for inflation would today be USD $4,960, according to the historic currency conversion website. Even though there was often some discount versus MSRP with camera sales (they used to be sold like cars with negotiation and dickering) the general cost magnitude would still be about the same.
@DavidHancock in some areas they were Fair Traded . Could only be sold for manufacturers list price . The brands policed that well.
In the late 60s,I think, that was challenged by ,what was then comming along, big discount stores. That ended that.
I got this history from a friend of mine, that was in the camera retail since 1957 here in Portland Oregon.
I'd maybe cosider buying Pentax 17, IF it had 35mm instead of 50mm equivalent lens...
@@tomislavmiletic_ the crop factor on half frame is 1.5x, just like APS-C because the frame size is the same. 25x1.5 = 37.5mm
@@DavidHancock Yp, than 25mm it is ☺
I don't get the point of shooting 35mm (not MF or larger) plain color negatives (like Gold or ColorPlus) AND scanning them (esp with digital cameras). One can/AI will make any scanned film (or digital shots) look like any other film. I have seen presets for Cinestill 800T, Lomo Purple and Metropolis Is there a point if analog printing is not involved? (I don't feel shooting film=>mindful process coz a 1/4 charged battery and 1GB card with a 45MP camera gives the same limitations.)
I have Nikon DSLRs but kept my film cameras for use.
Unless someone produces affordable digital adaptors for 35 mm and 120 format film cameras, scanning is the only practical way to use a film camera and share my images with friends.
There's an art to working with film AND preserving the image character that it creates. I do think there's a point to digitization with film which is that, done well, digitization can preserve the look of the original film stock, but also make it a bit easier to achieve good final results with film. Having the benefit of learning film in a darkroom and seeing how the different darkroom techniques work, for me, has always informed my use of film and how I plan to shoot, develop, and digitize. Quite honestly, I'm not sure how that looks for someone who never used film in a darkroom.
That's a good point. I can't really get the image character out of a medium-format lens when I shoot it on FF.
@@DavidHancock Re:your first point: Agreed that preserving the negative film's look is an art all by itself. Debatable whether current digitization is preservation grade. Stable film has been around 60+ years, but digital storage has not: ever tried reading a hard drive from 2004? QQQ: Other than drum scans, what else is archival preservation?
@@DixonLu I totally get your point about bit rot. A couple years back I opened up my old college Zip drive on my desktop and none of the text files were in a format I could use. I didn't know that drum scans are even archival because no archived file has a longevity beyond the standard that governs the software which accesses it. Some image formats have been around a long time now, but will they be in 20 or 50 years? I don't know.
Film is better for archival purposes
Depending on the film, definitely.
I have to wonder who the Pentax 17 is aimed at. Serious amateurs with a penchant for nostalgia I'm guessing. The limited control would put professionals off, but I suppose professionals would be using digital anyway. If I had $500/$600 to spend on a film camera, I'd be more inclined to buy used and CLA'd SLR for similar money or a 'new in box' Nikon F3/F2/Canon F1 (e.g.) at three times the price, but giving three times the image quality (and flexibility of use).
Good question and I think the best bet is film photographers looking to cut their film cost. Also, it's probably for people who want to support the film camera project so that Pentax releases a full SLR.
I disagree, it's pure crap to me and a bad way to start film photography. The worst of our era with influencers and consumerism, no plastic anymore. I got a Contax with a Zeiss Planar 50mm for $ 10. We have a responsability to guide people in the right path. Honestly R&D didnt cost much.
I'd be curious to know if you've used one of these and where you heard that R&D didn't cost that much. R&D always costs a lot and, from the perspective of a film camera user who has some experience with film cameras across the spectrum, this is a really delightful camera to use.
Welcome in the year 1975, with half frame.
I wonder who wants this with so many almost free analog film cameras for sale. And it`s half frame........WHY.
@@brugj03 it supports the Pentax initiative to build new film cameras for one, it's far less likely to die tomorrow than a used camera from the past 40 years for two, and it's new and hadn't been forgotten about on an attic or car trunk to get like aperture blades or fungus for three.
1500USD for a film camera? i payed 50Euro for great Canon Eos 50E( elan II in US) with eye AF,1/4000 shutter
Yeah, but those have a lot of mileage already and the electronics on 80s and 90s cameras are not consistently holding up well.
@@DavidHancock had it for few years, no prob. Just like mint condition
The Pentax 17 is vastly overpriced for its feature set. It only has a ONE year warranty. I don't see any new or even improved technology. No actual focusing, no user settable aperture or shutter speed. A Pentax ME SLR is more advanced that this thing. It looks good and maybe feels good but so what?
I am a Pentax fan for lack of a better description. But I don't give two sheets about marketing philosophy. I'd like a 35MM SLR film camera with the features of Pentax cameras of the 1990's but with modern technology to make it reliable. AND I don't want to have to choose from a dozen models that only slight differences. Make three or four distinct models with simple price tiers.
Well, there's not a whole lot of new technology in film writ large -- it's a mature industry from a technological perspective. Most of the new technology has to do with formulating new emulsions as chemicals become hard to find or are made illegal due to health concerns. But as for 17 pricing in terms of historical pricing for cameras, this is on the cheap side, especially considering the features it does have. By historical standards, adjusted for inflation, it's less expensive than an Olympus D2 (the second-highest-tier Olympus fixed-lens half-frame camera) was upon the D2's release. And inarguably, this camera has a much better feature set than the D2.
@@DavidHancock Oh I should have been a little more specific, I'm not complaining about the FILM technology.
It's the camera hardware technology that should be modernized. You've probably seen the inside of a late 1990's camera, circuit boards squeezed into every space with discrete soldered wires interconnecting them. Gears, levers, springs that need precision adjustment. Dozens of different sized screws. YIKES!
I opened a Pentax Spotmatic (I think) once and found a freaking piece of leather used to give some resistance to some levers! DOUBLE YIKES!
A modern film camera should be designed with modules that can be easily serviced or replaced. Something that could be done with an iFixit kit or something as modular as a Framework laptop.
@adamson3748 mentioned the lack of repair services for film cameras. Even if you do find someone to fix your old film camera do you really want to pay $500 or more and wait three or more months? Thanks.
You ever wonder how many film photographers there are in the world? We need dual use machines that can give us good $3 film, I hope North Korea corners the market on film, somebody....
I often wonder that, actually. I didn't know the answer nor do I think anyone has an accurate count. I don't even want to hazard a guess.
@@DavidHancock throw a number out.
I don't get the lack of autofocus, the choice of half-frame format, the slow lens, the limited shutter speed range. Not for the price point. Film is now a dollar a shot (or more). For those who want the full analog process, from shutter snap to developing and enlarging, would they not want a more sophisticated camera that can deliver true large print quality? For the hipster niche why not something like the Leica Sofort 2 for an even lower price and instant gratification? For $500 there are many old but good condition prosumer film cameras available used. My worry is it deflects investment from a GR IV, Ricoh's cash cow. (For the record I own a GR II and III, love both.)
A Spotmatic F was 335 dollars in the mid-70’s. It would be over 1500 dollars now. A 500-600 dollar camera today would have been under 100 then. The Pentax 17 is a simple test to see if a specific niche market supports the huge engineering effort to develop a film camera. Pentax has stated many times this is a first test before spending far more for a true SLR with modern features. It is very inexpensive by comparison to a true SLR; I hope Pentax is successful enough to see a future for a sophisticated SLR. At least they don’t have to come to market with an entirely new lens family for a future SLR. ALL their existing K mount and M42 will be at home! There are good videos on the effort needed to create this camera. Many retired engineers came back to educate current staff on the esoterics of film camera design. They make fun viewing.
I get your point and I wondered about that, too. It seems odd and the motor-drive focus placement seems overly complex (unless it's part of a larger design plan?). I would have just used a simple helical for focusing, detents if needed at different points, honestly. But there has to be some logic behind it and why they were interested in developing that system.
RE: pricing, I went back and looked up some Olympus Pen pricing from the early 1960s. An EE, which was WAY less of a camera than the 17, was USD $45 in 1962, which is about USD $470 today. The prices went up from there and the highest-end fixed-lens Olympus Pen available in 1962 sold for USD $75 -- about USD $850 today. The 17 is still better than that (I believe the $75 price was the D3, but don't quote me on that as I can't prove it.) By comparison, the Pen F sold for USD $120-140 (depending on lens) in 1962, which would be like USD $1,230 to USD $1,450 today. So given the build, feature, set, and development that went into the 17, $500 is probably a good price and low compared to similar cameras of the past when adjusted for inflation. All that assumes technology exists in a vacuum and never changes or gets cheaper -- especially production technologies -- and that's an incorrect assumption. But the point is intended just to be illustrative -- yeah, $500 (or in my case $620....) is a big check to cut at once for half-frame camera, but simultaneously not unreasonable compared to historical pricing. (Also, camera sales back in the day like car sales often included some dickering so MSRP was often higher than what people actually paid for a camera, and that's just not the case any more.)
I fear about false focused pictures in macro mode or bokeh mode. In this case, you need a precise focus. It is a bit cumbersome to measure the distance between the lens and the object with a measure tape to adjust the right distance.
@@thorstenjaspert9394 for close focus, the strap is the correct length to measure that.
I feel like they should just release a dslr/film type camera body alone and just let people choose from all their lenses. It would cut down the cost of the product and people can choose glass within their price range. There are crazy amounts of lenses for the K mount and many adapters for other lenses to be used. That's the safe option in my mind, but I know everyone wants to see a vintage style slr or a medium format camera.
I'm very glad that Pentax gave it a shot and I hope they make a lot of money on this camera. I hope more people return to film. But the truth is that $500 is way too much money for a camera with this many compromises.
Think about it. You can buy a Nikon F100 in excellent or even like-new condition for $500. I'm sure the same is true for comparable bodies from other brands. These are full featured cameras that are far superior to the Pentax and offer a wide range of excellent lenses at a wide range of prices. You can use manual and autofocus lenses on it. With its various settings it can be used like a point and shoot for the beginner or as manual as you want it to be.
If you want a vintage looking manual focus body you can get a Nikon Fm3A, one of the best manual focus cameras ever made in excellent condition for under $1000 or the vastly underrated Nikon FA for under $300 in excellent condition.
In this regard the Pentax doesn't make a whole lot of sense at $500.
For the love of all that is holy and decent, please edit out the gulps or use a microphone that doesn't record them. Drinking and eating sounds in the audio are thee worst.
I meant to and forgot this time.
I don't care about photography anymore. It's too expensive. I will not get a digital camera. EVER. That's not photography to me. I grew up on film. I'll take pictures on my iphone but that is not photography. That's just me. I agree with you on so much of what you say but ...
I hear you on the price. I've had to completely revamp my approach to film-related videos because it's gotten prohibitive to keep the All About Film videos the same as they were.
@@DavidHancock And I truly appreciate the hard work, time and money you spend. I have a decent amount in the freezer. I'm waiting until my daughter is a little older before I burn through it all. After that I'm really not sure what I will do. EVERYTHING is becoming cost prohibitive.
As good as this news is about the Pentax 17 selling out: £500 is a lot of cash for a single camera with a fixed lens. I would much rather spend that on a few good lenses and a beat up old MX or FM2 for that money. And get better quality images.
It is a spendy without a doubt.
That used to be my thought too, but actually what I now use film for an SLR makes much less sense. I basic compact camera with a good 35 to 50mm lens is much more useful for travel or general walk about shots than the versatility that an SLR brings as an SLR will never be as versatile as an digital camera. Though I have plenty of film SLRs and 120 cameras I invariably choose to use my Olympus 35 RC or Konica C35 over my "better" SLRs. The Pentax 17 does not fit my bill because it's half frame, but it could be relatively easy to make it FF as the body is more than big enough.
I wish they had started with an SLR because there are plenty of cheap viewfinders to be found, especially with Mint ,or Lomography and used consumer market. Now Pentax is competing with that, but there is literally NO competition with SLR at this point an and they would have a monopoly. I teach photography at high school and still teach darkroom, and they would’ve made absolute bank off of me and every other school for that matter. Still crossing my fingers
They'll get there. They had to get from the ground up on these, pretty much, and the interest my videos on this camera have sparked really shows how much people are interested in this.