I have about 4 rolls of film through mine. I preordered it the day they started allowing orders. I am an experienced film photographer - and wanted a pocketable, reliable, fast & easy film cam - and it is perfect for that. All the hate / negative critics seem to have the same things in common - they can't wrap their heads around what it actually is vs what they want and none of the most critical reviews I have seen actually have one.
549 EUR is quite steep to buy one for a review if you think that the camera is fundamentally flawed. It's only natural that people having a negative opinion about the 17 don't own one 🤷♂ Weird to expect otherwise... I'm sure, you don't own a lot of things that you don't like and still have a negative opinion about them.
@@OriginalTLab3000 Sure, there are things I have a negative opinion about that I don't own - however I don't / won't put forth all the effort to make a entire video for RUclips about those things without actually trying them first. I don't care if someone likes or dislikes this camera - but many of the heavily critical videos created didn't even bother to watch / read the information Pentax released to why they made this camera, or the choices in it's design. Several I watched commented negatively about the handling of the camera, or it's feel - yet they had never held one. It is/was blatant engagement/view farming. One "reviewer" where I mentioned this even thanked me for "contributing to his channel's algorithm." This is the double edge sword of RUclips, you have people who create honest work - and then you have people who don't care about the truth//integrity of what they create and just want to jump on a bandwagon and get some engagement out of it.
@@theangrymarmot8336 I understand what you're saying. Commenting on the feel of a camera despite never having held one in their hands - yeah, that's stupid. And view farming has reached worrying levels. I have to admit that I'm probably a bit too emotional about the Pentax 17 and I'd really like to make a video about it, but not before having the chance to actually use one. However, to me, it seems that Ricoh is having a good old laugh. I think the 17 is a joke, or maybe even a scam. Ricoh could have done so much better, but they decided not to, and that annoys me. And Ricoh was clever enough to hand out 17s to a huge amount of "reviewers" feeding the hype. All the while it being a disservice getting beginners to buy this camera. Well, whatever. It's not my money. Maybe it makes Ricoh stick to the plan and present the second new analog camera, soon. One that has all the good stuff.
I think that the marketing was kind of off which caused people to be conflicted. It was originally teased a camera for newcomers to film with advanced functions enough to please more advanced photographers. It's effectively a point and shoot "plus" rather than a fixed lens camera with auto modes people were actually hoping for. To me, this cam is a lot of fun. I think it hit the mark better than the Rollei 35 af. Expensive? Yeah maybe. But you'll save lots of money due to it being half frame and you still have a warranty.
This is the kind of review that RUclips is desperately missing. Thank you for taking your time and focusing on use case, not just specs. Got a sub from me!
Thank you so much! I’m not the most technical of people/photographers and so I don’t want to pretend I am. You can get much more detailed reviews on specs from other creators who are brilliant at what they do, all I aim to do is talk about a camera from my perspective and how it fits into my life and workflow. Glad that there are people who enjoy my ramblings haha!
I haven't purchased one yet. I do use a Olympus Pen S often. I use it for snap shots instead of my cell phone when I carry it. That gets me through 72 shots pretty quickly. The auto features will help me get more keepers.
Great review, thanks. One point of reflection, on price the point though is that a Canon R100 costs almost £700 with a lens. that is an entry level camera so really at £500 the Pentax 17, an entry level film camera that comes with a host of user aids, is not that unreasonable. I expect it cost Cannon significant less to develop the R100 than it did Pentax to develop a new camera for film from scratch.
Great review! Thanks! As for Pentax; it must have been an enormous lift to sell the management to make a new film camera. I think i will buy one just as principle to support the effort. It is very brave! I do think they came-up short in the combination. The half-frame would be great with AF; or make a full-frame m42 body (with metering + flash) that fits all M42 lenses. Do not fix what is not broken! If they would make a 645 using the current Pentax 645 lens collection and able to use the old lenses; it would fly of the shelves. Keep it simple; manual settings only with metering, flash sync and AF + ground glass focus plane. Give all people with existing Medium Format lens collections a reason to get the new Pentax 645/F (film).
I definitely agree re: Pentax. I think it’s important to show support for projects like this, and Harman’s development of colour film for example, to show companies and manufacturers that there is still an appetite for film photography. I think the potential of them releasing more cameras off the back of this release, like they mentioned in their Film Camera Project, is really exciting. Fingers crossed that they do move back into medium format, too!
It isn't auto focus for the same reason it isn't auto-advance. They wanted a camera that gave the "film experience/character" in operation and part of that is manual focus (Zone is easy for newbies, but still gives the feeling of manual focus) and manual film advance. If the camera was auto-focus then it would handle just like the eleven billionity point and shoot digitals and they didn't want that. Personally, I like the choice of Zone focus as I find it fast and easy to pre-set for situations.
@@randallstewart1224 because I think there’s a pushback against the disposable nature of digital imagery (ability to shoot hundreds of shots mindlessly & find the story in post), whilst there is simultaneously a pain point being felt in the film photography world around film prices, so I think a half frame camera neatly fits into that gap & as this is a new camera it’ll get more airtime than older half frame cameras so I think this is the one that people will likely be aware of & thus buy
@@thatguyoverthere115 I definitely used to be like that when I transitioned into film, since I shot digitally first, but over the years I think I’ve just got used to savouring the shots (or maybe I’ve been forced to because the price of film has sky rocketed 🤣🤣)
It's definitely interesting to say the leaset- $500 can be a big ask, but if someone is planning to keep it for a long time they're are getting something reliable 100%
I see so many negative recommend said that their 40-year-old film camera can do as well as Pentax 17. But this is a NEW film camera in 2024! Who can promise the old camera can keep maintenance in the future? Their new components are EOL and will be less and less in maintenance market, finally, it will be hard to fix. A new film camera with official warranty in 2024 is invaluable!
@@SophiaCarey Yeah I think that’s why I like using a point & shoot sometimes because it helps tell my brain into feeling the shots don’t need to be perfectly composed, they can just be a document
In Mexico price is 870 usd. So i think it's an insane price for a camera that doesn't even have autofocus nor even a fully manual control of exposure parameters.
In two years, I've bought a minolta x9, Pentax mx, olympus mju 1, radioactive takumar 50mm F1.4, takumar 135 F2. 5, Helios 58, Rokkor 28 F2. 8, Pentax 50 f1.7, scanning kit, adapters from M42 to Pk and MD for less than 650 usd. For me it's a nonsense to buy this half frame camera 😔.
You can drone on forever about what you like or dislike re this camera, and its feature set is a weird mix of technology used or missing, but who cares? The real question is who would buy and use this camera, and that relates to what it can do. What it can do is more easily defined by what it cannot do. It cannot be a camera for professional use, and it was never intended for that role. It is not intended for serious amateurs, who do their own processing, make enlarged images to display, or go out on trips specifically devoted to photography, landscapes and such. That leaves it for casual use: snapshots, parties, babies and pets. The images get scanned and end up on cell phones, Facebook, and videos like this one. But here's the rub, whether the thing costs $500 or $50. My 18-year-old PowerShot SD1100, all 8 megs, will do all of that and a lot more, yielding an image which is already digital, is at least as good when viewed for these purposes, and can be edited and sent on to its final social media grave in less time that it takes to scan one roll of film from a Pentax 17. It's a third the size and weight, used, less than 20% the price of the 17 new, doesn't require 72 photos to access results, and doesn't cost $30 for a roll of film and processing/scanning. Cell phones - same story. So, who exactly makes up that anticipated flood of Pentax 17 buyers? As a sign of film rising like a Phoenix from the ashes of digital, I think it is a dud on arrival. (Too bad if I'm right. Imagine the "17 project" guys going before the Ricoh board with "We can make it different next time.")
@@SophiaCarey Fully agree. I was simply pointing out the usage limits and economic conflicts which purchasers of the Pentax 17 will face, as the reviews and commentaries commonly gloss over that part of the decision-making process. Over the decades there have been a huge number of cameras, even whole formats, offered which made little sense for existence, but were purchased for all sorts of non-photographic reasons.
I have about 4 rolls of film through mine. I preordered it the day they started allowing orders. I am an experienced film photographer - and wanted a pocketable, reliable, fast & easy film cam - and it is perfect for that. All the hate / negative critics seem to have the same things in common - they can't wrap their heads around what it actually is vs what they want and none of the most critical reviews I have seen actually have one.
Completely agree with you! I think that some people, especially when it comes to film photography, just want something to complain about haha
549 EUR is quite steep to buy one for a review if you think that the camera is fundamentally flawed. It's only natural that people having a negative opinion about the 17 don't own one 🤷♂ Weird to expect otherwise... I'm sure, you don't own a lot of things that you don't like and still have a negative opinion about them.
@@OriginalTLab3000 Sure, there are things I have a negative opinion about that I don't own - however I don't / won't put forth all the effort to make a entire video for RUclips about those things without actually trying them first. I don't care if someone likes or dislikes this camera - but many of the heavily critical videos created didn't even bother to watch / read the information Pentax released to why they made this camera, or the choices in it's design. Several I watched commented negatively about the handling of the camera, or it's feel - yet they had never held one. It is/was blatant engagement/view farming. One "reviewer" where I mentioned this even thanked me for "contributing to his channel's algorithm." This is the double edge sword of RUclips, you have people who create honest work - and then you have people who don't care about the truth//integrity of what they create and just want to jump on a bandwagon and get some engagement out of it.
@@theangrymarmot8336 I understand what you're saying. Commenting on the feel of a camera despite never having held one in their hands - yeah, that's stupid. And view farming has reached worrying levels.
I have to admit that I'm probably a bit too emotional about the Pentax 17 and I'd really like to make a video about it, but not before having the chance to actually use one. However, to me, it seems that Ricoh is having a good old laugh. I think the 17 is a joke, or maybe even a scam. Ricoh could have done so much better, but they decided not to, and that annoys me. And Ricoh was clever enough to hand out 17s to a huge amount of "reviewers" feeding the hype. All the while it being a disservice getting beginners to buy this camera.
Well, whatever. It's not my money. Maybe it makes Ricoh stick to the plan and present the second new analog camera, soon. One that has all the good stuff.
I think that the marketing was kind of off which caused people to be conflicted.
It was originally teased a camera for newcomers to film with advanced functions enough to please more advanced photographers.
It's effectively a point and shoot "plus" rather than a fixed lens camera with auto modes people were actually hoping for.
To me, this cam is a lot of fun. I think it hit the mark better than the Rollei 35 af.
Expensive? Yeah maybe. But you'll save lots of money due to it being half frame and you still have a warranty.
This is the kind of review that RUclips is desperately missing. Thank you for taking your time and focusing on use case, not just specs. Got a sub from me!
Thank you so much! I’m not the most technical of people/photographers and so I don’t want to pretend I am. You can get much more detailed reviews on specs from other creators who are brilliant at what they do, all I aim to do is talk about a camera from my perspective and how it fits into my life and workflow. Glad that there are people who enjoy my ramblings haha!
Agreed - I can read a spec sheet all on my own.
Thanks for your detailed review! :)
Thank you for watching!
Just got mine, looking forward to use it to document my life
Hope you enjoy it!
I haven't purchased one yet. I do use a Olympus Pen S often. I use it for snap shots instead of my cell phone when I carry it. That gets me through 72 shots pretty quickly. The auto features will help me get more keepers.
Great review, thanks. One point of reflection, on price the point though is that a Canon R100 costs almost £700 with a lens. that is an entry level camera so really at £500 the Pentax 17, an entry level film camera that comes with a host of user aids, is not that unreasonable. I expect it cost Cannon significant less to develop the R100 than it did Pentax to develop a new camera for film from scratch.
I’d love a compact camera like this! Thanks for the review ❤
I think you’d actually love it and use it loads precisely because it is so compact!
Great review! Thanks!
As for Pentax; it must have been an enormous lift to sell the management to make a new film camera. I think i will buy one just as principle to support the effort. It is very brave! I do think they came-up short in the combination. The half-frame would be great with AF; or make a full-frame m42 body (with metering + flash) that fits all M42 lenses. Do not fix what is not broken!
If they would make a 645 using the current Pentax 645 lens collection and able to use the old lenses; it would fly of the shelves. Keep it simple; manual settings only with metering, flash sync and AF + ground glass focus plane. Give all people with existing Medium Format lens collections a reason to get the new Pentax 645/F (film).
I definitely agree re: Pentax. I think it’s important to show support for projects like this, and Harman’s development of colour film for example, to show companies and manufacturers that there is still an appetite for film photography.
I think the potential of them releasing more cameras off the back of this release, like they mentioned in their Film Camera Project, is really exciting. Fingers crossed that they do move back into medium format, too!
It isn't auto focus for the same reason it isn't auto-advance. They wanted a camera that gave the "film experience/character" in operation and part of that is manual focus (Zone is easy for newbies, but still gives the feeling of manual focus) and manual film advance. If the camera was auto-focus then it would handle just like the eleven billionity point and shoot digitals and they didn't want that. Personally, I like the choice of Zone focus as I find it fast and easy to pre-set for situations.
@@theangrymarmot8336 I completely agree. I think it’s clever positioning.
I think this camera is going to sell really well
To whom and why?
@@randallstewart1224 because I think there’s a pushback against the disposable nature of digital imagery (ability to shoot hundreds of shots mindlessly & find the story in post), whilst there is simultaneously a pain point being felt in the film photography world around film prices, so I think a half frame camera neatly fits into that gap & as this is a new camera it’ll get more airtime than older half frame cameras so I think this is the one that people will likely be aware of & thus buy
I like this. Used a Pentax since the early 90s, good to see a young hepcat the gang!
Meanwhile I can get through 72 frames within like 1-2 hours walking around. I just adore daily life snapshots!
Hahaha love that!! I definitely think it’s just a mindset shift, going from shooting so few frames to having the flexibility to shoot so many
@@SophiaCarey for sure! Then again I blast through my 8 shots on my 6x9 Mamiya. It's never enough to me!
@@thatguyoverthere115 I definitely used to be like that when I transitioned into film, since I shot digitally first, but over the years I think I’ve just got used to savouring the shots (or maybe I’ve been forced to because the price of film has sky rocketed 🤣🤣)
hopefully i’ll be able to snag one on the used market
It's definitely interesting to say the leaset- $500 can be a big ask, but if someone is planning to keep it for a long time they're are getting something reliable 100%
That’s very true! Although I guess time will be the test on reliability and longevity
what film stocks did you use?
A massive range! From Cinestill 800T to Kodak Ultramax 400, I shot loads of different stocks.
I see so many negative recommend said that their 40-year-old film camera can do as well as Pentax 17.
But this is a NEW film camera in 2024!
Who can promise the old camera can keep maintenance in the future?
Their new components are EOL and will be less and less in maintenance market, finally, it will be hard to fix.
A new film camera with official warranty in 2024 is invaluable!
Can you compare this vs something like a ee3?
Let me get my hands on one, and I will do!
It takes me an age to shoot a full roll of 35MM as it is, I’d never finish one if I had this camera 🤣
Hahaha that’s been me! But it’s also kind of made me less precious about the photos I take on film, which I think is a good thing in the long run.
@@SophiaCarey Yeah I think that’s why I like using a point & shoot sometimes because it helps tell my brain into feeling the shots don’t need to be perfectly composed, they can just be a document
In Mexico price is 870 usd. So i think it's an insane price for a camera that doesn't even have autofocus nor even a fully manual control of exposure parameters.
Agreed, that's definitely steep!
In two years, I've bought a minolta x9, Pentax mx, olympus mju 1, radioactive takumar 50mm F1.4, takumar 135 F2. 5, Helios 58, Rokkor 28 F2. 8, Pentax 50 f1.7, scanning kit, adapters from M42 to Pk and MD for less than 650 usd. For me it's a nonsense to buy this half frame camera 😔.
All the videos I’ve seen the results are horrid. They should have released an LX MK2
You can drone on forever about what you like or dislike re this camera, and its feature set is a weird mix of technology used or missing, but who cares? The real question is who would buy and use this camera, and that relates to what it can do. What it can do is more easily defined by what it cannot do. It cannot be a camera for professional use, and it was never intended for that role. It is not intended for serious amateurs, who do their own processing, make enlarged images to display, or go out on trips specifically devoted to photography, landscapes and such. That leaves it for casual use: snapshots, parties, babies and pets. The images get scanned and end up on cell phones, Facebook, and videos like this one. But here's the rub, whether the thing costs $500 or $50. My 18-year-old PowerShot SD1100, all 8 megs, will do all of that and a lot more, yielding an image which is already digital, is at least as good when viewed for these purposes, and can be edited and sent on to its final social media grave in less time that it takes to scan one roll of film from a Pentax 17. It's a third the size and weight, used, less than 20% the price of the 17 new, doesn't require 72 photos to access results, and doesn't cost $30 for a roll of film and processing/scanning. Cell phones - same story. So, who exactly makes up that anticipated flood of Pentax 17 buyers? As a sign of film rising like a Phoenix from the ashes of digital, I think it is a dud on arrival. (Too bad if I'm right. Imagine the "17 project" guys going before the Ricoh board with "We can make it different next time.")
It’s okay to let people enjoy a camera. If you don’t like it or want to use it, that’s fine.
@@SophiaCarey Fully agree. I was simply pointing out the usage limits and economic conflicts which purchasers of the Pentax 17 will face, as the reviews and commentaries commonly gloss over that part of the decision-making process. Over the decades there have been a huge number of cameras, even whole formats, offered which made little sense for existence, but were purchased for all sorts of non-photographic reasons.
我也曾經這樣懷疑，但當底片處理後看到照片時你才知道原來底片拍出來的照片那種感覺是非常自然和諧的影像，銀鹽的感光方式與CMOS 的感光方式是完全不同的感受，而17是提供一個簡單能拍出好照片的相機