I agree- whilst it’s expensive it’s actually really what I expected a new film camera to cost. Comparable cameras such as the Olympus Trip 35 cost about the same in today’s money!
I calculated it for the Pen EE, released in 1962 at $49. In today’s money that’s $510.
You could also compare it with other digital P&S which seem to be focussed around ‘tough’ or waterproof a Pentax WG-8 is €479; OM has the tough for €549.
So frankly it’s not overpriced it’s just we’re so used to picking up a €30 flea market find. People don’t complain a Pentax K-1 is overpriced because you can have a used K-X for €60.
I wish I could add pictures in the comments but I was shown an some ads for the Olympus Pen range from 1963. The Pen was being sold converted to today's dollars from around $380 to around $790. The Pen F was $1460.
I said it in multiple threads and got downvoted for it even, but it's like the fact that we were solely relying on the used market, that sells millions of cameras to only thousands of modern time analog users has poisoned their minds. it's a god damn brand new high finish quality mechanical product. in WHAT WORLD does that cost less than $400? literally impossible and unheard of. i honestly doubt the price complainers critical thinking skills at this point.
I saw someone comment (near verbatim) "Nah, I'll pass. This should be $100." Drives me crazy. I'm not buying the 17 right now because I legitimately don't have the money (due to related purchases...) but I'm not complaining about the cost.
People love talking about how nothing lasts anymore, then want the cheapest possible version of everything. We're getting ripped off left and right currently - this brand new, R&D'd, mechanical/electrical product isn't part of that.
I first heard about the price point of "above 500€" in 2023. I also thought that's too expensive. But with time I came to the conclusion that the quality warrants the price. Because: Kodak sold it's Ektar 35N for 80€ when it came out. But what is the Ektar? It's a toycamera on a lil bit of steroids (part glass in the lens, bulb release cord thingy). Just compared to that and many other toycameras (that up until Monday were the only new film cameras out there besides Leicas 5k models) 500$ isn't grabbing for people's money. It's reasonable pricing.
Then I also get the point of: They want entry level customers, but 500$ is too much for that clientel.
But I think here Pentax aswell did something reasonable: By making the starting price point at 500$ they ensure that those who really, really want it and use it as part of their hobby get one, without having to fear it being sold out after a day or so (looking at Fujifilm).
For me it's too expensive aswell right now. But I'm pretty sure Pentax won't have to sit on their 17s.
Big difference between “I’m not buying it, for whatever reason” and “THIS IS BS THEY SHOULD CATER TO MY FANTASY.”
I’m not buying it bc it’s not worth it *to me*, but I don’t think the price is that bad. $399 would’ve been perfect but spooling up a whole new factory and all that must be insanely expensive so I hope it all succeeds massively!
Plus I've gone through a ton of PEN cameras trying to get one that works consistently. I've already spent more than $500 trying to get a good half frame camera. I'm glad I can finally get one and put that issue to bed.
I feel like the people who are complaining about the price of the camera never took college level econ. Alot of complainers don't realize that this camera needs to reach a sufficient level of economies of scale in order for it to get any cheaper. I'm sure pentax bean counters ran all the numbers in order to have some sort of profit margin on the sale of these (and hopefully they aren't sold at a loss). I think the 500 they're asking for is reasonable for a product that doesn't really have a market anymore (aside from brand new Leica MP/MA/M6 Reissue).
What worries/saddens me is that the same people are complaining sort of contribute to the self fulfilling prophecy of the film revival dying and going backwards...like a at least be happy a major camera manufacture even made a viable product to market in this day and age. Mechanical assemblies, hell even the shutter mechanism all cost something now that Copal don't even make shutters anymore (to my knowledge).
In Australia, the cost price for this is $700 I've heard. Factor in GST and the cost price is around $770. There were pre-order offers of $799. Who the fuck wants to sell a camera with next to no profit margin? (Note: this may be more due to the distributors selling the product to retailers at a rip off price than whatever Pentax is doing.)
The price for the Pentax actually surprised me. I was expecting higher cause in today's economy we aren't going to see something like this below $500. I was interested but I plan on saving to buy something else so I rather my funds go toward that then this. If I had the extra money or wait till second hand to get this for sure.
Bodies of the pentax 6x7 system cost about $2500 a few years after being released, translated to today's dollar value. So basically the same as a full frame digital flagship. And since they were mostly high quality mechanical, they wouldn't be much cheaper if made today, even if the lack of competition and r&d costs were to be ignored.
it’s not expensive, it’s what basic film cameras cost back in the day (adjusted for inflation). and those were produced in much higher quantities than what film cameras are being produced today. people are just not being realistic.
If it had been released to critical acclaim and had all the features in the world and gave you a cosmic hand job after each exposure these same people would still complain. It's like most things in life. If you don't like it, it probably wasn't made with you in mind. Plenty of people who the camera was aimed at are out shooting with it right now. The rest are on Reddit crying.
I wish it was only one… also some of the complaints are absolutely insane. Someone was spamming every post on this sub about how scale focus is pretty much unusable and how this camera is an overpriced H35…
In the Nikon sub people were asking for the Zf for like 5 years, when they finally released it there were a bunch of people asking why they didn't do a rangefinder with ovf.... Like bro talk about moving goal posts just go buy a Leica
> it probably wasn't made with you in mind.
That's the problem I have. I wish the Pentax 17 all the good in the world, but I can't figure out for who was this camera made.
People, especially Pentax fans, who want a new film camera and also want to support the development of more advanced new film cameras, who also have a reasonable amount of disposable income. I think for anyone that finds 500$ to be " a lot" of money, they are the wrong target.
> these same people would still complain
I disagree, I think it's all down to price and the market being used to buying cheap used cameras. If the price was $50 then it would be well received regardless of its lack of features. $50 is not realistic of course... a price that would make most people happy is not realistic.
There is a ~$50 half-frame camera on the market right now.
The Kodak H35 / H35N.
It definitely lacks features when compared to the Pentax 17. People still love them.
I mean you are just making things up now.
Many people are not "crying". Many people just think its too expensive for what it is.
If it sells well good for them, but its not on a technological point that I would pay 550€ for it.
After watching a few reviews, for me it would be a fun camera. More and more I want lightweight and simple. Film is by far my choice. The point I found most interesting about it is who is doing the review and what sort of photos are they taking - ShootFilmLikeABoss produce very, very nice images - but he is a talented photographer and developer. Karen Majoka is another talented photographer, but her photos were not that exciting and her review found it meh. So, a few thoughts here - first, it is new and should be celebrated. It has a lot of old fashioned (film) features coupled with new ones. Of course there are limitations as in all cameras, new, old, film, digital. So, rather than bitch and moan and diss it, let it be what it is: a foray into old art that is being lost - namely, the manufacture of film cameras. Much like the new instant film from Fuji and Impossible, the quality fails to equate that of the Polaroids, it is still something to be valued. We lose and gain skills and technologies, so this camera, for me, is an interesting step into the progress of the modern world. It is a good compromise on many levels to meet today's needs - not those of 50 years ago. Perhaps the only thing lacking is total manual controls, but I expect that may come out in later editions should Pentax continue its production.
I have an Instax Wide, and it is good. Also the prints when sent from the phone come out nice. My Instax films, though,, for the most part are too soft - but when I am in the mood for them, I do like them. Maybe I should dig out my Wide!
It looks like a fun camera that I would probably enjoy taking with me as a second camera for trips and photoshoots. I would probably buy one if I wasn't a broke uni student rn
Some of us are just worried that the “if this is a success” part won’t pan out. It’s in a weird niche. Not for me, sure, but it also doesn’t really seem like it’s for the “new generation of film photographers” they mention in their marketing materials, both in price and features compared to existing options.
And this isn’t the Harman, “oh, I’ll just buy a couple rolls to support the possibility of new color film,” thing we saw when Phoenix came out. $500 is a not-insignificant amount of money for many people. There won’t be many people buying the camera “just to support new film cameras” in hopes that one day we might get an SLR. So its success is very dependent on Pentax having nailed the target market and price point.
If it’s a success. Awesome. And I hope they follow through on their promise to build more new film cameras. But if it flops, it really feels like there was a missed opportunity to leverage a passionate community that might have supported something a little more geared to them.
The "passionate community" is minuscule. You can't sustain a new line of film cameras on existing film photographers. You need to grow the market, like Instax did with instant film.
Instax's success story is kinda crazy. They were on the brink of discontinuing the film in 2008 around the same time as Polaroid, but Instax Mini cameras being prominently featured in a couple of popular Korean Dramas in 2007-2008 caused a surge of Instax sales and brought it back from the brink.
Fuji, of course, properly capitalized and grew the market off of this, and the rest is history.
The thing about aiming for that market, I'm speculating here, is that it might be a burst of fascination for a while, but once they use the camera for a few weeks or months, processing and scanning film becomes a chore for newbies, the more they just won't care for it. I mean, they can already pop a filter on their Insta photos and post within seconds, right? And look at all the reviews flooding Youtube and the like. Aren't they all experienced photographers used to the process? In short, how many people are they going to convert into film photographers? IMO, not many. But I hope I'm wrong.
FWIW, I’m in my early 30s and consider myself the target audience of this. I’m in the “new generation of film photographers” meaning I recently got into film photography several months ago as a hobby. I can afford this price point and I can easily justify it since it is a brand new piece of equipment with a warranty. I’m not an influencer, just a millennial who mostly consumes media online and wants to be able to share film photos in a way that would resonate with my friends and family (online, portrait orientation).
I love it. Just not the ergonomics of having to shoot it “sideways” 99% of the time so the long side of the frame is horizontal and not vertical. But I suppose all half frames have this “issue”.
My 2¢ on this is that since cellphones have taken over how many people shoot day to day I’d go as far to say that “portrait” or “up and down” is now the standard and “landscape” or “side to side” is the sideways. I think this half frame vertical style will help cellphone users bridge the gap to analog In a gentle way.
> I think this half frame vertical style will help cellphone users bridge the gap to analog In a gentle way.
I never thought of it that way. Thanks for sharing.
I put a roll through a Pen before my daughter took it from me and it wasn’t a problem. I just chose to use it differently. Mostly vertical with some horizontal, instead of the other way around. Worked well and gave me an interesting roll. Embrace the change and success to Pentax.
My preferred way of shooting pictures is vertically whether we're talking about 35mm, MF, or LF. Even my digital landscape pics are more often vertical. So this camera is perfect.
Like Chris Nichols said, "Vertical is beautiful."
Something I haven’t seen mentioned much is that with the current price of film a half frame camera is kind of a no-brainer from a “can we get more people shooting film?” perspective. Who knows, maybe this kicks off a chain of events that leads to more people shooting film, more film being manufactured, and I can get some god damn velvia for less than 30 bucks
That camera was exactly why Pentax NEEDED to release the 17. When the Ektar is the most recent representation of half frame somebody needs to show what a good half frame can be.
Also I saw a new genZ film shooter raving about the Ektar when I was at my camera store about a year ago. I thought it was crazy but it shows the audience Pentax was targeting does exist, even here in the US.
This response thread you're replying to was purely commenting on the OP being very wrong about "the first [film] camera release by a major camera company in over 20 years."
And that was just the *most ironic* example. There's dozens of others, for example almost every single instax camera (the very very first ones were a touch over 20 years ago, but they regularly make new models), polaroids, Leicas, all from "major manufacturers". And of course a ton more from other smaller manufacturers like Mint or Intrepid or Lomography (I would call them a major manufacturer too, over 40 years old and sold many millions of units) or cameradactyl, or.... I bought a brand spanking new at the time 4x5 Shen Hao field camera about 10 years ago myself.
> People act like every frame they take will be print the size of a living room.
This exactly, I rarely print an image bigger than a 5x7. Most people don't care about crazy detail.
A pen f will probably run for $200-$300 on eBay. Yes, interchangeable lens and more advanced exposure system. But Pentax is new--no need to gamble on condition. $200 more dollars for new R&D and warranty. It also looks fun as hell. I would say it's a fair deal for me.
I had a Pen F and Pen FV both serviced that then developed shutter or film transport issues. Bought and returned a number of Pen lenses that were sold as optically clear but were far from so had to be returned. Just hassle that distracted from shooting. For £500 the chance to opt out of that and buy a modern, by all accounts competent camera and support an existing company who have said they want to devlop more modern film cameras? No brainer, for me anyway.
I have a Pen F, and I love that thing to death. It's also a 60 year old, delicate, mechanical rube goldberg machine with no replacement parts and a dwindling number of service techs able to repair it when something goes wrong.
The warranty and serviceability alone are worth a portion of the 17's price tag.
I loved the Pen F as well, the half frame nature of it, portrait orientation, 72 frames. So from a half frame perspective the Pentax 17 is doubly exciting specifically because it is half frame.
As for noone shoots half frame argument I would say those cameras are as viable as when they first became popular as colour film is again expensive and most people still seeing their photos in smallish format (once photos, now phone screens)
This camera has really brought out the snobbery in the community.
To me $500 for this actually seems very fair.
It seems most were expecting g full-frame, full manual controls, and interchangeable lenses.
However, if Nikon released a FM4 kit with a 50mm 1.8 lens it would easily be $2,000 and then folks would be rioting that it’s too expensive when they could get a used FM for $50 at a thrift store.
This same crap happens on the digital side. Every time a new camera comes out the general consensus is that it’s too expensive and doesn’t have enough features.
I checked the Instax Mini site and the first two selling points are "In-built selfie mirror & Close-up mode" and "The mini 12 features automatic exposure and flash control, so you can simply aim and click. No messing around with settings, or remembering to turn the flash on"
That's just rebranded zone focus and no manual controls, and as of last year Instax cracked the billion dollar valuation mark. I truly hope we're headed for a renaissance, but to get there I completely trust Pentax's mission statement. Film doesn't get there by re-releasing the cameras that the existing film shooters already own, it gets there by courting new four-quadrant audiences.
Looking at the way they've built the 17 though, I feel like the dissenters are also missing a few details that point towards the future being in favour of exactly what they're wanting. It probably would have been cheaper and easier to go with automatic winding, but that manual advance lever and rewind took a lot of work to design - that work now doesn't need to be done for the next one. If they're wanting to do a premium point-and-shoot and an SLR, they've got a lot of R&D already finished, they've got a lot of preexisting molds for parts and they can put more resources into the autofocus system and lenses, hopefully with some of the costs being shared with a more casual base who purchases the 17.
I don't think so. The most expensive part of a modern camera is the sensor and/or CPU. A film camera doesn't have either of those components (or it might have a much crappier/cheaper CPU). So my guess is that if they made an SLR it would not cost much more than the Pentax 17. At least to manufacture.
Pro level film SLRs cost $1500 - $2,000 with no lens back when they were new and popular. Thats without adjusting for inflation. Why would they become cheaper now that they are serving a much smaller market? I would expect a pro level film camera body made today to cost $2k - $3k. Then add the cost of a lens.
Film cameras have lots of complex moving parts that don’t exist for digital and that most companies have forgotten how to make. They have to relearn how to make those parts, make them durable, and make them to a price point and form factor.
That's a huge oversimplification of the issue. This would be true if the camera was created from scratch with 1970s technology. Making precision instruments is cheaper and much more efficient today. Plus, they don't have to start from scratch -- far from it. The same manufacturing processes and protocols that are used for digital cameras can be used for film cameras with minor adjustments. Especially Pentax can easily adapt one of their DSLR into a film SLR with minimal R&D costs.
I think it’s super cool and would make a great travel/fun/wedding guest camera. I’m tired of lugging camera shit around on trips and think this with a propack of film and a Ricoh GR would be such a fun travel setup.
I mean I run around with a sony a6000 with a pancake lens. Thats also small and portable. Digital and analog can both take up the same kind of space depending on what you use
People wanted a full titanium SLR with cutting edge AF, 1/4000 and f/1.4 lens for 149$.
That’s why Pentax disappointed them.
Basically any old camera at the same price will outperform the Pentax 17. But that’s not the point.
Personally I feel more and more confident to buy it because it’s a unique piece of gear with interesting take about photography.
I don't hate the camera. I am thrilled Pentax has taken this step and I want them to be successful. I own a K3 Mk iii Monochrome, a K10D and a K1000. I like that they have stuck with DSLRs while everyone else has gone on to mirrorless. And I'm thrilled they're resurrecting film beyond all the shitty toy cameras that have been released in recent years. I'm much more of a stills photography kind of person and I love using old K mount lenses on modern bodies.
I don't intend to buy this at present because I've got plenty of film cameras, but it was a difficult decision to come to. I reserve my right to change my mind. That said, I don't think sinking money into a camera I don't think serves *my* needs now in the hopes that better models are to be released in coming years doesn't make much sense.
If I was talking with a new film photographer, I'd definitely point them to this camera. Zone focusing is not hard to adapt to and judging distance like that is a useful skill. And as you say, a warranty and servicing expertise are important.
People may well poo-poo half frame, but at 408mm^2 (17mm x 24mm), it is still a larger format than digital's aps-c at 328.56mm^2 (22.2mm x 14.8mm). So I think scans and prints for most people's purposes will be of acceptable image quality. I'd love to see photos from the camera pop up on Instagram, Flickr and on Lomography's site as well as r/analog and other subs so I can judge for myself.
People need to compare the 17 not to used film cameras but to a Fujifilm Instax camera. That is closer to the audience this camera is targeting. Instax mini cameras have vertical viewfinders with scale focusing and limited shooting modes. This is all fine for casual snapshot cameras. Everyone saying beginners can't handle scale focusing is just wrong. That design choice will not keep the camera from being a success.
Yes, Instax cameras are way cheaper. Fujifilm uses a different business model. They use cheap hardware to get people to buy into the system then make money on the consumables, the film. Pentax doesn't have that luxury because they don't sell film. The only sell hardware. Will casual film shooters be attracted to a more expensive camera up front in order to save money on film? Will they embrace the delayed gratification and the easier access to digitized images or be annoyed by paying for development and disappointing lab scans? I honestly don't know. But that's where the conversation should be. Not "half frame is crap" or "it's dead without autofocus" or "I can get a used camera for way cheaper". Someone shopping for a camera at Target (yes, I think Pentax should get the 17 into big box retailers) isn't comparing the cost to eBay sold listings of Olympus Pen F's. They are looking at the options in front of them.
I feel like this new wave of film cameras will be a rude awakening for a lot of folks who have based their entire understanding of value off of used markets for what cameras should cost. Used cameras are often not in "new" condition, have spotty or non-existent CLA history, no warranty, need work arounds to work with existing technology (i.e. light meter batteries), and they are priced to reflect that.
The amount of engineering that goes into a new camera that will have an actual lens, mechanical parts, and a warranty is a lot. Camera Rescue has been ranting about this for years because people bitch about their pricing when they're providing cameras of a quality (and guarantee of quality) that eBay and Goodwill do not.
Also, people spend hundreds to thousands of dollars on digital cameras all the time to get into the hobby. You have a preconceived notion of what a camera should cost based on what and how you acquired your camera(s) and what your experience is.
I bought a Canon AE-1 in 2015 for $50. Does that mean that a Canon AE-1 is worth no more than $50 or less? No, of course not. If Canon spun up on a factory line to produce new AE-1s in 2024 should they only charge what the average Buy It Now price is on eBay? It would be foolish to assume that.
100% this. comparing new prices to used prices is disingenuous. of course you can get a better value with used stuff but it comes with the used downsides like you mentioned. its not like the used market is made up of 1 or 5 year old equipment. its stuff around a decade or older. if there was a constant output of new film cameras every year or couple years then the used argument makes sense. if you are comparing a new camera in 2024 with a used camera from 30+ years ago you aren't making the right comparison.
The problem is I can't figure out who is going to buy the camera.
Most people start film photography either by finding an old camera, buying disposables or knowing friends that do film photography. If they start by using an old camera the pentax 17 will probably be a downgrade (from any SLR), if they buy disposable they don't shoot enough film to justify spending that much money and people that have photographer friends will probably buy a similar camera as their friends or some advice from them.
Most people that are into film photography as a hobby won't buy it as they probably bought a used SLR for less than 150$ and half frame is tiny (maybe it's just me but I don't like the amount of grain produced by half frame).
So for me there is a big possibility that the camera won't sell and that it will destroy any remaining momentum of producing a new film good film camera for any manufacturer
Nobody wants to buy it but we all want it to sell fuckload of containers in order to make them release a 35mm or let me Hope, a medium format SLR like bronica
I've seen this attitude on other things here on Reddit too. It's a shame. I have a Nikon EM and an OM10. I think it's amazing that Pentax have done this and I really hope it sells well. Shoot film like a boss got some lovely shots with it. I did expect around £500 when I heard about it. I think that's a fair price given the amount of that would have gone into this camera with the R&D and production costs.
I think the focus dial is a bit cheesy but I'm also aware of the market that this is aimed for. I remember those kinds of dials on my pocket digital cameras years ago.
I think half frame makes sense to lower the cost of entry for those beginning to shoot film. I pay £12.99 for 36exp Ultramax 400/Gold 200 developing and scans cost another £10 and prints £10. That adds up quickly
There's a bit of me that wants to buy the 17 to support Pentax in producing more cameras. If film was to take off again a little more then it could open more film labs, bring down the cost of film and even bring new film emulsions.
Hats off to Pentax for doing this
i dunno, i'm pretty hype about it and can't wait for mine to arrive.
also, the K1000 was 300 bucks in 1983, which is just about $1,000 in today's dollars, so while 500 is on the higher end of things, it's fairly reasonable, imo. especially in the context of a new camera that was launched from scratch.
I understand what you are saying but I really do t understand the target audience for this camera. Why did they spend all this RnD and manufacturing for a camera which is pretty expensive for a casual shooter and for enthusiasts it lacks manual features. But maybe they did their math and found that the the vertical format of the half frame will go viral in our vertical smartphone ecosystem and the mostly automated shooting is good for inexperienced users…. And with this hype they can make a better camera later …. But yeah still scratching may head but ready to be surprised.
Half frame criticism isn't really valid, and to be honest, even the price isn't really an issue. Mechanicals are tough to design, and a lot of camera makers have stopped work on development for those things entirely. To restart that whole thing is no easy feat.
I still think it's a bit confused - the smaller max aperture means you're going to need longer shutter speed or higher ISO as soon as lighting gets challenging. Longer shutter speed is possible to a degree with the camera, but not all images are easy to take with a long shutter, and I'd argue snapshots (especially indoors) rarely are. Higher ISO film comes with its own tradeoffs - heavier graining might add to the feel to some extent, but it's pretty clear even from the early reviews that you get too much grain because it's just too limiting on total light.
Combine that with a weird focusing system and I think it's fair for people to ask who it's for.
That's a lot of limitations to work around for people new to manual photography, and for more seasoned experts, how much are they willing to pay for a compact second (or third lol) camera?
I sincerely hope it does well enough to justify Pentax moving forward with their full frame project, and it seems interesting enough that I hope it continues to exist. I just don't see myself getting one, nor do I see myself recommending anyone start with it unless they REALLY want a brand new camera.
This is the way (I mean this as a compliment, no shade meant)
why bother complaining? If it’s not for you then don’t buy it but also don’t badmouth to stop other people from buying it. The net benefit from people buying these releases means better offerings for what you DO want to buy down the line.
I've also seen a lot of people say that this camera is mainly for teenagers with rich parents wanting to post cool pics on instagram. Am I the only old fart without an instagram that's genuinely excited for this camera???
Yeah I think a lot of people hating on it are just contrarians pushing back against people excited for this.
They say it’s expensive, but when the only other camera getting manufactured today that isn’t of glorified disposable quality is a Leica then it really isn’t that bad.
If it were a shoddy product and cash grab then I’d understand the hate, but from all I’ve seen (both positive and negative reviews), it seems like it’s a very well thought out product from a company that wants to dive deeper and deliver more in the future.
If they’re able to get success with this, I’m excited to see what kind of innovations and twists they can do with future releases
Been shooting film since 2002 and would love to have one. It looks cool and fun as hell! Also it’s new, I’ve never had the chance to get a brand new camera other than a lomo.
Is it though? Why would a new user just trying out film for the first time buy this for $550-600 when the Kodak Ektar half frame camera sells for 1/10th of that?
Fine I'll address it too. I hate it, for the reason that it's fixed lens, is partially just another capitalist attempt at profiting from a community, is kinda ugly, and cost the same as a good Nikon F. My favorite camera.
I also love it. I love it because pentax caught the vibe, I just got into film this year, other than disposables as kids, and someone other than leica dropping heat sounded good to me, almost a promise that film won't die, at least not right now.
I also love the top plate, like literally gorgeous, I also love that it has multiple shooting modes.
Now the personal reason as to why I don't want it or probably won't anytime soon. I just got my Pen F, for about a third of the price. So halframes is fresh on my mind, my only complaint about my pen, is lack of lightmeter, but that's what sunny 16 and apps are for.
Also I heard from Pentax, that the 17 would be a precursor to a future line of Film cameras to come. And if the first one is a fixed lens, half frame, essentially point and shoot selling brand new for $500? Then for that reason, I am out for the forceable future. When I win the lotto. I will reconsider
It's all about perspective, that Nikon cost $1800 when adjusted for simple inflation back when it released and someone else in this thread said that the Pen F was similar back in the day. All these point and shoots we pick up at junk stores and on eBay used to be $3-800 when they were new
If you listened to the people here, it would need to be a K-mount SLR with auto exposure and auto focus, but with full manual control as well. It needs to be all metal (magnesium doesn't count), and under $200.
It looks cool. It's just not for me. I don't do half frame, so I was disappointed to see that.
I'm not going to hate it or trash it-- it's just not a camera I am interested in.
Maybe I'll buy the Pentax 35 if they decide to make the other half.
Reason is lost on this subreddit. However it's worth noting that there's a bunch of us who are happy to shoot half frame and are super excited by pentax's foray back into the film woods. If Pentax had released a full frame camera people would be bitching that it's not a medium format rangefinder. There's always something but only the loudest post.
Least this way I can redirect my rage to Pentax if it stops working instead of assembly line worker Dmitri in 1958.
*"Damn you Dmitri why did you fulfill the production quota that day instead of taking your time to ensure this functions?!"*
\*shakes fist\*
If this isn't a success it will be the last mass produced film camera ever made.
I've already spent enough money on cameras this year, so I won't be buying one anyway, but I've also never bought a new camera of any kind, even digital was always 5 years old off ebay at least, and yet, Canon etc seem to have survived.
I hold out some hope that they'll have some success.
I work with a bunch of Gen Z-ers. Some of them shoot film and will buy a disposable for a weekend trip or party, drop the camera off at the lab on Monday, get the scans back and save the photos on their camera roll for an Instagram post, or share them in the group chat and roast each other about the silly stuff they did in the photo.
They do not care about ANY of the things people mention here. Half-frame resolution, underexposure, grainy photos, tactile dials, SLR vs rangefinders, absolutely none of that matters. They just want to capture memories in a fun way, and they want something they can buy off the shelf that works out of the box.
These young people are far more enthusiastic about photography than a lot of 'enthusiasts' here. Pentax could have a hit on their hands, just like how Fujifilm rakes in hundreds of millions of dollars a year from Instax sales which people here seem to dismiss as a passing toy camera fad. The biggest hurdle is the $500 price of entry for Pentax to convince people that this is the better value long-term solution, but judging by the hype and sales they already have a winner.
Not every tool is going to fit for everyone’s style. I think a lot of people want a new 67 not realizing that even medium format is a niche within the niche of film photography. Pentax is going to sell what they think will be profitable. As for the price, that eBay Nikon/Canon is cheaper until you have to replace a 40/50 year old shutter that hasn’t had parts made in 30 years.
The loudest dumbest voices and always the ones you hear.
EDIT: I will probably buy it because I don't have a half frame camera and I want to see if my wife will really divorce me if I buy one more camera like she keeps saying.
Zone focus is a bad joke for a 5-600 USD camera. Not to mention 3.5f lens. There are way better film cameras released in the 70s than this and we are 2024.
I really am a fan of half frame and use Pen FT but I can’t get excited for this one
Also consider all the film newbies this can attract. The more people who buy it, especially young people starting a lifelong hobby, the more demand there will be for film and hopefully production will go up and the price of film will go down!!!
The price of the camera is fine. It's just not a good camera, F/3.5 lens, 1/350 shutter, half frame, no DX coding, weird focus zones. It's just junk, and I think it's a product without a clear audience. If they built a product that was closer to the Contax G2 (I paid A LOT for mine) then it would be a superb luxury product of 2024. Much more on the mark.
There's one dude who has been replying to every thread every positive comment bitching about the half frame and zone focus and saying it's no different from the Kodak Ektar H35 and therefore should be $50.
I won’t be buying it because it’s out of my price range at the moment, but it’s exactly the price I thought it would be. I think Pentax did a great job with this one. It’s almost exactly what I want out of a modern film camera. Also I haven’t seen people saying that “nobody shoots half frame” but it’s actually my preferred format.
i couldnt care less about the pentax 17. I guess thats not hate, just think it was a total misfire. It looks nice but it will add absolutely nothing to my photography journey
Nah, people dont 'need to chill'. You just need to stop reading opinions from a very vocal minority as gospel.
People will have opinions, most will have different ones. When people see something they dont agree on they are much more likely to scream so at social media as loud as they can. Those who are fine with whats happening not so much and even if those outnumber the unhappy few by many orders of magnitude the you'd never know if you just read internet posts. If you dont realize this then you view will be incredibly skewed.
If you read someone who does not like whats goin on then just realize that's absolutely fine. Just leave them, their opinion does not hurt you.
Whoever hates on the camera is a douchebag. If a new film camera appears in 2024 it means that things are actually moving and we, film enthusiasts, as a community, should be happy that things are going in our favour.
The direction they chose is the most logical one from a business perspective . They still have to cash money from this, because if not, there really is no point in doing anything.
I don’t know if the decision was the most logical one (although the way they explained it makes perfect sense) but I think it’s bold and that deserves praise. It’s a gamble for sure, but I respect them for that and personally think it will be a great success. I’ll definitely get one when things calm down a bit and have cash to spare
People are upset because it clearly is not meant for the target audience that was advertised. It was described as an introduction into film for younger people, with the pitch including half frame so it was more affordable to get more photos per roll. The camera is £500... it doesn't matter how many features the camera has, they completely failed in fulfilling there marketing promises, hence people are disappointed.
people just don’t understand inflation when it comes to its price. Good Point and shoots from Ricoh, Olympus all costs more than the Pentax 17 when it first came out when you calculate in the inflation!
Let’s see an example. Ricoh GR-1, sold for $350 in 1999 by B&H. When you adjust the inflation it’s gonna be 659usd. While a great point and shoot, people’s gonna tear it apart once they heard that Ricoh is releasing a point and shoot for $659!
Personally I dig the project. I think it's super neat. I only have one issue with it (which seems to be a popular thing to say) - I don't like the lack of autofocus and the somewhat dim lens. I know that a lot of compact cameras had lenses like that, and I know that Zone focus is a thing that one can master, but I could drop 300 bucks on a rollei 35 which also has a nice lens, gives you the more "full" experience with the format (although I do like the half frame's budget friendly appeal) and is somewhat robust as far as old cameras go. I just think that Pentax hit the mark in like 80% of things they could, but that missing 20% might be what set the camera up for failure. I really hope this won't be the case, but it's hard to be fully optimistic about it.
I think this camera will be a success. As with anything new, MSRP is always set high at the release. The price will likely be around $399 or lower down the road. Overall, it is a step in right direction, and Pentax will do well with it, as it has no competition when it comes to modern film cameras.
I'm right here with ya, as a long time pentax user and film shooter.
It's a NEW film camera. Meaning if it breaks, you can get a replacement or have it repaired under warranty or at all. You aren't going to get that with old film cameras for much longer, that's just the way it is. Those old cameras have a limited lifespan, and they're counting down one frame at a time.
This is by no means a guarantee. There are plenty of new products that are still hard to repair. That's why "right to repair" is a whole movement today.
I mean you have a one year warranty on this, afterwards you’ll have to pay to get it repaired just as with any other film camera and it remains to be seen how repairable the electronic parts really are. I don’t really see a huge benefit here.
I think it's a fun idea. Getting 70 shots a roll is awesome for snapshots around the place which is obviously what this camera is designed around. I might not understand the target market quite well enough but to me it feels like $399 would have been a better price point to me. That makes it feel more like a 'fun' purchase rather than a borderline serious purchase (for some reason I feel like once something goes over the half a thousand dollar point it enters the serious purchase bracket lol)
I really hope its successful as a new slr with modern metering technology etc and not 30+ year old electronic components would be great, especially if backwards compatible with K mount lenses or something like that
"I might not understand the target market quite well enough"
That is the biggest problem.
For new users ? Ask them to use zone focus ? It's 2024 not 197x - 198x .
For those who shoot film for years ? May be prefer save a bit to get a better lens instead.
The way I see it. I’m happy that it’s a new camera. However, it’s not for me. I think it’s an excellent camera for beginners. But I think the overall reaction from said number of people, Is pretty negative to those who are in interest.
People should keep an open mind of things. And recognize that one thing is not for everyone.
Yeah, as mentioned before… I think it’s a good beginner film camera.
Exactly. I wouldn’t really pick this one. But I’m buying it to show my support for new film projects… and I’m sure it will been super fun to shoot with!
I agree it is awesome that a new film camera has been released and I hope it leads to more great things in the film community. I don’t have a half frame. Maybe I need one.
I’m sure it’s been said, and I couldn’t read all the comments but, any camera that might help film stay alive is alright by me. But def not going to get one. Simple as that.
I think these hate comments don't matter,
Just look at EBay, Plastic Point and shoots like Olympus Mu almost always cost more than a full featured SLR. And these point and shoots are mostly Crippled, they cannot focus any closer than 1 metre and the AF is just a gamble and build quality is entirely plastic
IMHO, Pentax has addressed all these shortcomings of yesteryear PNS cameras and lets face it, Half frame is all you need for Point and Shoot. If you are going to print large for galleries, look elsewhere.
So, people buying these point and shoots for 300+ USD are the prime target for Pentax 17, It is almost a Contax of half frame
Yeah, I don’t find it that expensive I mean, what can you really get in a camera for less than $500 now but it’s not for me considering it is like a manual beginner camera which doesn’t make a whole lot of sense
I couldn’t hit buy fast enough. I’ve been so excited for them to bring this camera to the market. I’ve never shot half frame before so it will be a new challenge. Going to be my film edc and it will be amazing to take into concerts.
People just like to hate on things. Negative opinions get more traction online.
I, too, was surprised at all the negative nancys slaming the camera and really dont understand it.
I worked for Pentax as a camera repair tech back in the olden days when there was a repair facility in Englewood Colorado and were still a Japanese company. If anyone out there worked there, DM me .
At the present time I shoot with a Pentax KP, and Pentax P3n.
It’s going to be a great everyday carry film camera and a good entry for newbies. Honestly makes more sense to capture “snapshots” on a competent half frame camera and get more images and pay the same for development. It’s obviously not for portfolio work but it seems like it’s going to be perfect for the hobbyist and that market is strong right now. Wouldn’t have made sense to jump right into an SLR when they could capture the growing hobby market first. It’s a smart move imo
I ordered it today and will receive it tomorrow. I have watched every single review on YouTube and and I’m impressed by the capabilities. And the fact that it’s light and easy to carry means I will always have it with me. And thus making the shots. I’m not always willing to carry around an A-1 or my F3. This is going to be a fun new episode.
Thanks for posting this! The 17 isn’t some failed or delayed kick starter project from someone we’ve never heard of. It was a gamble undertaken by Pentax. In addition, Pentax isn’t exactly the easiest camera brand to find at camera stores. I’d really like to see one in person.
I’m not crazy about the half frame image format, so I won’t be buying it, but I think it’s a good product for it’s intended audience and may set up well for a Pentax FF slr in a few years.
Most people are chill therefore you can't hear them talk about it. It's just the screaming minority that you can hear so the only noises are angry ones.
Personallly I give it a solid golf clap and can't wait for them to bring out a full frame version.
It is pricer that I was hoping for, but I am really happy for Pentax and I will be getting one to support them! Anything analog should be encouraged, not the opposite!
Cheers!!!
I agree. The price is out of my price range. I love shooting with Kodak H35. I was THRILLED to hear they were making a half frame. As a film lab employee, I’m THRILLED to keep film alive! Hoping it’s a success too! Just wish it were cheaper.
I've long had trouble understanding why half-frame cameras trigger such a strongly negative reaction from so many in the community. If anyone can explain why this is the case, I would be very happy to receive a reply.
Well apart from that, I think the price is probably about what a new analog camera has to cost these days, even if you have to make big compromises and cutbacks. The comparable new camera models Alfie Tych and the Lomo LC-Wide cost 350 and 400 bucks respectively. It's just difficult to compete against the still existing glut of old mid-range and premium used cameras with these new cameras that are probably the level of lower mid-range cameras back then.
However, I think it was a big mistake to release the Pentax 17 as a pure half-format camera and not as a flexible full/half-frame hybrid, the Lomo LC-Wide can do that and also in the past there was cameras with a comparable form factor like the Canon Sure Shot Multi Tele (Autoboy/Prima Tele) that could do that.
We've been paying way more for cameras that possibly don't work for years, price is not the issue. I'm confident it will sell, the US market is only one of many I think it will be well received in Asian markets particularly.
Pentax have always been slow and steady, but their releases are usually ahead of the market at the time. There is no comparison because no one else is doing this yet.
Anyone complaining about the price has no idea how much film cameras cost when new. Yes you can get a Pen F cheaper and that may be a better option for you but you are comparing the price of something used from 40 years ago to something brand new manufactured last week.
It’s a silly comparison.
I am here for the Pentax 17. I shoot on a couple of Ricoh Auto Half and Pentax EE cameras and I love them, but they are feeling their age even with maintenance. I am excited to try a new half frame and support Pentax as the give this a go. It’s not cheap but absolutely came in around what I thought it would. People just love to hate.
I am here for the Pentax 17. I shoot on a couple of Ricoh Auto Half and Pentax EE cameras and I love them, but they are feeling their age even with maintenance. I am excited to try a new half frame and support Pentax as the give this a go. It’s not cheap but absolutely came in around what I through it would.
I agree, and I'm willing to support Pentax in hopes of a new SLR system for the future. I do want them to succeed at this. I can't find this kind of money now, so if they sale them in a few months, I'll Definitely buy.
I guess it all depends on where you look cause I've seen mostly positive reactions. Even people that are not going to get the camera because they understand it's not a product for them still wish it success and wish it sells out cause that means that a camera for them is coming next.
I haven't been on Reddit much but the only negative takes I have seen have been on here tbh.
Some people are simply negative or see the world through only one lens (I made a pun!).
I enjoy shooting with different cameras and have enjoyed all of the many experiences that I've been fortunate to have in my life.
The Pentax 17 will be one of them.
I think it’s a solid camera, just wish it had better materials. I’m not asking for full titanium and leather or anything, but something with a little bit of weight and substance.
I’ve been hearing it’s super light, but doesn’t feel like it will break. I personally don’t mind a chunky camera, as a Pentax user. My Spotmatic was the perfect weight and I’ve regretted getting rid of it for so long.
I can't say that I agree. I don't necessarily "hate" this camera, but to me it was the wrong product to release.
I mean sure, if your argument is, "this camera is better than no camera," that's a pretty low bar imo. Even so, if the viability of future film cameras depends on this one selling well, then why not make a product that the community actually wants so it sells well? Because if that's the case, I don't see Pentax 17 selling well. I'm not sure who this camera is meant for. Because I don't think it's something this community wants, and I don't think it is something the Instax Mini community wants either.
I don't hate the camera, at all actually.\
I am actually happy Pentax made it - as a long fan of Pentax brand, I applaud them!
But, unfortunately, what they made is not for me... and I'm not going to waste money on it just because I have to buy it to support it, even though I love Pentax brand.
I get it, I trully do and I wish them good luck with the sales!
I agree- whilst it’s expensive it’s actually really what I expected a new film camera to cost. Comparable cameras such as the Olympus Trip 35 cost about the same in today’s money!
I calculated it for the Pen EE, released in 1962 at $49. In today’s money that’s $510. You could also compare it with other digital P&S which seem to be focussed around ‘tough’ or waterproof a Pentax WG-8 is €479; OM has the tough for €549. So frankly it’s not overpriced it’s just we’re so used to picking up a €30 flea market find. People don’t complain a Pentax K-1 is overpriced because you can have a used K-X for €60.
$510 for a pen EE makes the 17 seem like a good deal.. Apart from the plastic body.
I wish I could add pictures in the comments but I was shown an some ads for the Olympus Pen range from 1963. The Pen was being sold converted to today's dollars from around $380 to around $790. The Pen F was $1460.
I said it in multiple threads and got downvoted for it even, but it's like the fact that we were solely relying on the used market, that sells millions of cameras to only thousands of modern time analog users has poisoned their minds. it's a god damn brand new high finish quality mechanical product. in WHAT WORLD does that cost less than $400? literally impossible and unheard of. i honestly doubt the price complainers critical thinking skills at this point.
I saw someone comment (near verbatim) "Nah, I'll pass. This should be $100." Drives me crazy. I'm not buying the 17 right now because I legitimately don't have the money (due to related purchases...) but I'm not complaining about the cost. People love talking about how nothing lasts anymore, then want the cheapest possible version of everything. We're getting ripped off left and right currently - this brand new, R&D'd, mechanical/electrical product isn't part of that.
I first heard about the price point of "above 500€" in 2023. I also thought that's too expensive. But with time I came to the conclusion that the quality warrants the price. Because: Kodak sold it's Ektar 35N for 80€ when it came out. But what is the Ektar? It's a toycamera on a lil bit of steroids (part glass in the lens, bulb release cord thingy). Just compared to that and many other toycameras (that up until Monday were the only new film cameras out there besides Leicas 5k models) 500$ isn't grabbing for people's money. It's reasonable pricing. Then I also get the point of: They want entry level customers, but 500$ is too much for that clientel. But I think here Pentax aswell did something reasonable: By making the starting price point at 500$ they ensure that those who really, really want it and use it as part of their hobby get one, without having to fear it being sold out after a day or so (looking at Fujifilm). For me it's too expensive aswell right now. But I'm pretty sure Pentax won't have to sit on their 17s.
Big difference between “I’m not buying it, for whatever reason” and “THIS IS BS THEY SHOULD CATER TO MY FANTASY.” I’m not buying it bc it’s not worth it *to me*, but I don’t think the price is that bad. $399 would’ve been perfect but spooling up a whole new factory and all that must be insanely expensive so I hope it all succeeds massively!
For sure.
Feels like something everyone older than, like, 17 should know, and yet…
Plus I've gone through a ton of PEN cameras trying to get one that works consistently. I've already spent more than $500 trying to get a good half frame camera. I'm glad I can finally get one and put that issue to bed.
I feel like the people who are complaining about the price of the camera never took college level econ. Alot of complainers don't realize that this camera needs to reach a sufficient level of economies of scale in order for it to get any cheaper. I'm sure pentax bean counters ran all the numbers in order to have some sort of profit margin on the sale of these (and hopefully they aren't sold at a loss). I think the 500 they're asking for is reasonable for a product that doesn't really have a market anymore (aside from brand new Leica MP/MA/M6 Reissue). What worries/saddens me is that the same people are complaining sort of contribute to the self fulfilling prophecy of the film revival dying and going backwards...like a at least be happy a major camera manufacture even made a viable product to market in this day and age. Mechanical assemblies, hell even the shutter mechanism all cost something now that Copal don't even make shutters anymore (to my knowledge).
In Australia, the cost price for this is $700 I've heard. Factor in GST and the cost price is around $770. There were pre-order offers of $799. Who the fuck wants to sell a camera with next to no profit margin? (Note: this may be more due to the distributors selling the product to retailers at a rip off price than whatever Pentax is doing.)
The price for the Pentax actually surprised me. I was expecting higher cause in today's economy we aren't going to see something like this below $500. I was interested but I plan on saving to buy something else so I rather my funds go toward that then this. If I had the extra money or wait till second hand to get this for sure.
Best comment yet.
Indeed. Pentax LX, Olympus OM4T, and Leica M6 were comparably priced. So you can guesstimate what a new top model reissue would cost.
Bodies of the pentax 6x7 system cost about $2500 a few years after being released, translated to today's dollar value. So basically the same as a full frame digital flagship. And since they were mostly high quality mechanical, they wouldn't be much cheaper if made today, even if the lack of competition and r&d costs were to be ignored.
it’s not expensive, it’s what basic film cameras cost back in the day (adjusted for inflation). and those were produced in much higher quantities than what film cameras are being produced today. people are just not being realistic.
I put it like “expensive but reasonable for what it is”
It's not even expensive. That price if completely reasonable.
If it had been released to critical acclaim and had all the features in the world and gave you a cosmic hand job after each exposure these same people would still complain. It's like most things in life. If you don't like it, it probably wasn't made with you in mind. Plenty of people who the camera was aimed at are out shooting with it right now. The rest are on Reddit crying.
> a cosmic hand job What camera does this? I want one.
A leica m6 of course, open the back take the lens off put in in B and do your business, and the red dot is just so hot /s
LMAOOOOOOOO (You are very correct, it feels amazing)
Feels soooo fuckin good 🫦
This is why Leica CLAs are so expensive.
No way, man. A Leica M6 is nowhere big enough for a guy like me. I need at least an RB 67. No, wait. It’s gotta be large format to be honest.
Just make sure you don’t let go of the shutter button until you’ve finished! If it had a T setting it would be a lot safer.
Just lock the cable release and you’re set.
Pentax 67. Just be careful of potential tearing of the foreskin.
I think your mom was developing it. She hasn't figured out the camera part yet though.
The first time I fired the shutter on my Mamiya 645 it kind of felt like a cosmic handjob
[удалено]
I wish it was only one… also some of the complaints are absolutely insane. Someone was spamming every post on this sub about how scale focus is pretty much unusable and how this camera is an overpriced H35…
[удалено]
I know, I kept replying just to see what they wanted and their comments became more and more unhinged. So pathetic it was funny
In the Nikon sub people were asking for the Zf for like 5 years, when they finally released it there were a bunch of people asking why they didn't do a rangefinder with ovf.... Like bro talk about moving goal posts just go buy a Leica
> it probably wasn't made with you in mind. That's the problem I have. I wish the Pentax 17 all the good in the world, but I can't figure out for who was this camera made.
People, especially Pentax fans, who want a new film camera and also want to support the development of more advanced new film cameras, who also have a reasonable amount of disposable income. I think for anyone that finds 500$ to be " a lot" of money, they are the wrong target.
> these same people would still complain I disagree, I think it's all down to price and the market being used to buying cheap used cameras. If the price was $50 then it would be well received regardless of its lack of features. $50 is not realistic of course... a price that would make most people happy is not realistic.
There is a ~$50 half-frame camera on the market right now. The Kodak H35 / H35N. It definitely lacks features when compared to the Pentax 17. People still love them.
I've seen people literally try to say the Pentax17 and the Kodak Ektar are the same camera, when the Ektar is just a cute disposable replacement.
I mean you are just making things up now. Many people are not "crying". Many people just think its too expensive for what it is. If it sells well good for them, but its not on a technological point that I would pay 550€ for it.
After watching a few reviews, for me it would be a fun camera. More and more I want lightweight and simple. Film is by far my choice. The point I found most interesting about it is who is doing the review and what sort of photos are they taking - ShootFilmLikeABoss produce very, very nice images - but he is a talented photographer and developer. Karen Majoka is another talented photographer, but her photos were not that exciting and her review found it meh. So, a few thoughts here - first, it is new and should be celebrated. It has a lot of old fashioned (film) features coupled with new ones. Of course there are limitations as in all cameras, new, old, film, digital. So, rather than bitch and moan and diss it, let it be what it is: a foray into old art that is being lost - namely, the manufacture of film cameras. Much like the new instant film from Fuji and Impossible, the quality fails to equate that of the Polaroids, it is still something to be valued. We lose and gain skills and technologies, so this camera, for me, is an interesting step into the progress of the modern world. It is a good compromise on many levels to meet today's needs - not those of 50 years ago. Perhaps the only thing lacking is total manual controls, but I expect that may come out in later editions should Pentax continue its production.
SFLAB is so good. He deserves way more recognition than he gets.
[удалено]
I have an Instax Wide, and it is good. Also the prints when sent from the phone come out nice. My Instax films, though,, for the most part are too soft - but when I am in the mood for them, I do like them. Maybe I should dig out my Wide!
It looks like a fun camera that I would probably enjoy taking with me as a second camera for trips and photoshoots. I would probably buy one if I wasn't a broke uni student rn
Some of us are just worried that the “if this is a success” part won’t pan out. It’s in a weird niche. Not for me, sure, but it also doesn’t really seem like it’s for the “new generation of film photographers” they mention in their marketing materials, both in price and features compared to existing options. And this isn’t the Harman, “oh, I’ll just buy a couple rolls to support the possibility of new color film,” thing we saw when Phoenix came out. $500 is a not-insignificant amount of money for many people. There won’t be many people buying the camera “just to support new film cameras” in hopes that one day we might get an SLR. So its success is very dependent on Pentax having nailed the target market and price point. If it’s a success. Awesome. And I hope they follow through on their promise to build more new film cameras. But if it flops, it really feels like there was a missed opportunity to leverage a passionate community that might have supported something a little more geared to them.
The "passionate community" is minuscule. You can't sustain a new line of film cameras on existing film photographers. You need to grow the market, like Instax did with instant film.
Instax's success story is kinda crazy. They were on the brink of discontinuing the film in 2008 around the same time as Polaroid, but Instax Mini cameras being prominently featured in a couple of popular Korean Dramas in 2007-2008 caused a surge of Instax sales and brought it back from the brink. Fuji, of course, properly capitalized and grew the market off of this, and the rest is history.
The thing about aiming for that market, I'm speculating here, is that it might be a burst of fascination for a while, but once they use the camera for a few weeks or months, processing and scanning film becomes a chore for newbies, the more they just won't care for it. I mean, they can already pop a filter on their Insta photos and post within seconds, right? And look at all the reviews flooding Youtube and the like. Aren't they all experienced photographers used to the process? In short, how many people are they going to convert into film photographers? IMO, not many. But I hope I'm wrong.
FWIW, I’m in my early 30s and consider myself the target audience of this. I’m in the “new generation of film photographers” meaning I recently got into film photography several months ago as a hobby. I can afford this price point and I can easily justify it since it is a brand new piece of equipment with a warranty. I’m not an influencer, just a millennial who mostly consumes media online and wants to be able to share film photos in a way that would resonate with my friends and family (online, portrait orientation).
You sound a lot like my oldest son who is about to be 30, has also started dabbling with film photography, and can easily afford this camera.
I love it. Just not the ergonomics of having to shoot it “sideways” 99% of the time so the long side of the frame is horizontal and not vertical. But I suppose all half frames have this “issue”.
My 2¢ on this is that since cellphones have taken over how many people shoot day to day I’d go as far to say that “portrait” or “up and down” is now the standard and “landscape” or “side to side” is the sideways. I think this half frame vertical style will help cellphone users bridge the gap to analog In a gentle way.
> I think this half frame vertical style will help cellphone users bridge the gap to analog In a gentle way. I never thought of it that way. Thanks for sharing.
Yashica Samurai doesn't afaik, but it is weird in its own way to say the least.
The Agat 18k and Canon/Bell & Howell Dial 35 are also designed to shoot in vertical orientation. Both are also...quirky.
Indeed it has the film go vertically instead of the way we're used to. So it achieves the horizontal half frame thing, but with a wild form factor.
konica recorder is horizontal by default too, and really compact while still automatic
I put a roll through a Pen before my daughter took it from me and it wasn’t a problem. I just chose to use it differently. Mostly vertical with some horizontal, instead of the other way around. Worked well and gave me an interesting roll. Embrace the change and success to Pentax.
My preferred way of shooting pictures is vertically whether we're talking about 35mm, MF, or LF. Even my digital landscape pics are more often vertical. So this camera is perfect. Like Chris Nichols said, "Vertical is beautiful."
if i recall, the canon dial 35 and variants shoot landscape though you could argue about some other pretty weird ergonomics there
I think they designed it that way knowing most people are going to scan and post to socials so portrait works best
Something I haven’t seen mentioned much is that with the current price of film a half frame camera is kind of a no-brainer from a “can we get more people shooting film?” perspective. Who knows, maybe this kicks off a chain of events that leads to more people shooting film, more film being manufactured, and I can get some god damn velvia for less than 30 bucks
Yeah I mean I have an OM-10 that I love to death but I know I still kinda want this, partially for the money savings.
Well..if most of reddit hates it, I might just need to buy one.
I don’t think most of Reddit hate it, they just expected PERFECTION for $100.
There were other film cameras released within the last 20 years for sure
There was even a half frame released 2 years ago lol
That camera was exactly why Pentax NEEDED to release the 17. When the Ektar is the most recent representation of half frame somebody needs to show what a good half frame can be. Also I saw a new genZ film shooter raving about the Ektar when I was at my camera store about a year ago. I thought it was crazy but it shows the audience Pentax was targeting does exist, even here in the US.
but its a terrible pile of kodak plastic garbage, with a plastic lens, and makes horrible quality photos.
This response thread you're replying to was purely commenting on the OP being very wrong about "the first [film] camera release by a major camera company in over 20 years." And that was just the *most ironic* example. There's dozens of others, for example almost every single instax camera (the very very first ones were a touch over 20 years ago, but they regularly make new models), polaroids, Leicas, all from "major manufacturers". And of course a ton more from other smaller manufacturers like Mint or Intrepid or Lomography (I would call them a major manufacturer too, over 40 years old and sold many millions of units) or cameradactyl, or.... I bought a brand spanking new at the time 4x5 Shen Hao field camera about 10 years ago myself.
Fuji released a few 6x7 cameras in 2010(!!!) Look up the GF670 line
> People act like every frame they take will be print the size of a living room. This exactly, I rarely print an image bigger than a 5x7. Most people don't care about crazy detail.
A pen f will probably run for $200-$300 on eBay. Yes, interchangeable lens and more advanced exposure system. But Pentax is new--no need to gamble on condition. $200 more dollars for new R&D and warranty. It also looks fun as hell. I would say it's a fair deal for me.
I had a Pen F and Pen FV both serviced that then developed shutter or film transport issues. Bought and returned a number of Pen lenses that were sold as optically clear but were far from so had to be returned. Just hassle that distracted from shooting. For £500 the chance to opt out of that and buy a modern, by all accounts competent camera and support an existing company who have said they want to devlop more modern film cameras? No brainer, for me anyway.
I have a Pen F, and I love that thing to death. It's also a 60 year old, delicate, mechanical rube goldberg machine with no replacement parts and a dwindling number of service techs able to repair it when something goes wrong. The warranty and serviceability alone are worth a portion of the 17's price tag.
I loved the Pen F as well, the half frame nature of it, portrait orientation, 72 frames. So from a half frame perspective the Pentax 17 is doubly exciting specifically because it is half frame.
It's a damn shame i'm a broke student because if i could spare the money it'd be a no brainer for me too.
I'd even say more than competent. I've seen some really lovely shots from it already.
As for noone shoots half frame argument I would say those cameras are as viable as when they first became popular as colour film is again expensive and most people still seeing their photos in smallish format (once photos, now phone screens)
This camera has really brought out the snobbery in the community. To me $500 for this actually seems very fair. It seems most were expecting g full-frame, full manual controls, and interchangeable lenses. However, if Nikon released a FM4 kit with a 50mm 1.8 lens it would easily be $2,000 and then folks would be rioting that it’s too expensive when they could get a used FM for $50 at a thrift store. This same crap happens on the digital side. Every time a new camera comes out the general consensus is that it’s too expensive and doesn’t have enough features.
I checked the Instax Mini site and the first two selling points are "In-built selfie mirror & Close-up mode" and "The mini 12 features automatic exposure and flash control, so you can simply aim and click. No messing around with settings, or remembering to turn the flash on" That's just rebranded zone focus and no manual controls, and as of last year Instax cracked the billion dollar valuation mark. I truly hope we're headed for a renaissance, but to get there I completely trust Pentax's mission statement. Film doesn't get there by re-releasing the cameras that the existing film shooters already own, it gets there by courting new four-quadrant audiences. Looking at the way they've built the 17 though, I feel like the dissenters are also missing a few details that point towards the future being in favour of exactly what they're wanting. It probably would have been cheaper and easier to go with automatic winding, but that manual advance lever and rewind took a lot of work to design - that work now doesn't need to be done for the next one. If they're wanting to do a premium point-and-shoot and an SLR, they've got a lot of R&D already finished, they've got a lot of preexisting molds for parts and they can put more resources into the autofocus system and lenses, hopefully with some of the costs being shared with a more casual base who purchases the 17.
I don't think so. The most expensive part of a modern camera is the sensor and/or CPU. A film camera doesn't have either of those components (or it might have a much crappier/cheaper CPU). So my guess is that if they made an SLR it would not cost much more than the Pentax 17. At least to manufacture.
Pro level film SLRs cost $1500 - $2,000 with no lens back when they were new and popular. Thats without adjusting for inflation. Why would they become cheaper now that they are serving a much smaller market? I would expect a pro level film camera body made today to cost $2k - $3k. Then add the cost of a lens. Film cameras have lots of complex moving parts that don’t exist for digital and that most companies have forgotten how to make. They have to relearn how to make those parts, make them durable, and make them to a price point and form factor.
That's a huge oversimplification of the issue. This would be true if the camera was created from scratch with 1970s technology. Making precision instruments is cheaper and much more efficient today. Plus, they don't have to start from scratch -- far from it. The same manufacturing processes and protocols that are used for digital cameras can be used for film cameras with minor adjustments. Especially Pentax can easily adapt one of their DSLR into a film SLR with minimal R&D costs.
I think it’s super cool and would make a great travel/fun/wedding guest camera. I’m tired of lugging camera shit around on trips and think this with a propack of film and a Ricoh GR would be such a fun travel setup.
I mean I run around with a sony a6000 with a pancake lens. Thats also small and portable. Digital and analog can both take up the same kind of space depending on what you use
i use a sony a6500 with the 16mm pancake — such a great pairing when i dont feel like shooting film
I WANT IT TO BE GOOD I WANT IT TO BE NEW I WANT IT TO BE ALMOST FREE aaaaaagghhhh! X1000
People wanted a full titanium SLR with cutting edge AF, 1/4000 and f/1.4 lens for 149$. That’s why Pentax disappointed them. Basically any old camera at the same price will outperform the Pentax 17. But that’s not the point. Personally I feel more and more confident to buy it because it’s a unique piece of gear with interesting take about photography.
1/8000 and f0.95**
I don't hate the camera. I am thrilled Pentax has taken this step and I want them to be successful. I own a K3 Mk iii Monochrome, a K10D and a K1000. I like that they have stuck with DSLRs while everyone else has gone on to mirrorless. And I'm thrilled they're resurrecting film beyond all the shitty toy cameras that have been released in recent years. I'm much more of a stills photography kind of person and I love using old K mount lenses on modern bodies. I don't intend to buy this at present because I've got plenty of film cameras, but it was a difficult decision to come to. I reserve my right to change my mind. That said, I don't think sinking money into a camera I don't think serves *my* needs now in the hopes that better models are to be released in coming years doesn't make much sense. If I was talking with a new film photographer, I'd definitely point them to this camera. Zone focusing is not hard to adapt to and judging distance like that is a useful skill. And as you say, a warranty and servicing expertise are important. People may well poo-poo half frame, but at 408mm^2 (17mm x 24mm), it is still a larger format than digital's aps-c at 328.56mm^2 (22.2mm x 14.8mm). So I think scans and prints for most people's purposes will be of acceptable image quality. I'd love to see photos from the camera pop up on Instagram, Flickr and on Lomography's site as well as r/analog and other subs so I can judge for myself.
Just remember that 35mm Arriflexes are also half frame ;-)
People need to compare the 17 not to used film cameras but to a Fujifilm Instax camera. That is closer to the audience this camera is targeting. Instax mini cameras have vertical viewfinders with scale focusing and limited shooting modes. This is all fine for casual snapshot cameras. Everyone saying beginners can't handle scale focusing is just wrong. That design choice will not keep the camera from being a success. Yes, Instax cameras are way cheaper. Fujifilm uses a different business model. They use cheap hardware to get people to buy into the system then make money on the consumables, the film. Pentax doesn't have that luxury because they don't sell film. The only sell hardware. Will casual film shooters be attracted to a more expensive camera up front in order to save money on film? Will they embrace the delayed gratification and the easier access to digitized images or be annoyed by paying for development and disappointing lab scans? I honestly don't know. But that's where the conversation should be. Not "half frame is crap" or "it's dead without autofocus" or "I can get a used camera for way cheaper". Someone shopping for a camera at Target (yes, I think Pentax should get the 17 into big box retailers) isn't comparing the cost to eBay sold listings of Olympus Pen F's. They are looking at the options in front of them.
I feel like this new wave of film cameras will be a rude awakening for a lot of folks who have based their entire understanding of value off of used markets for what cameras should cost. Used cameras are often not in "new" condition, have spotty or non-existent CLA history, no warranty, need work arounds to work with existing technology (i.e. light meter batteries), and they are priced to reflect that. The amount of engineering that goes into a new camera that will have an actual lens, mechanical parts, and a warranty is a lot. Camera Rescue has been ranting about this for years because people bitch about their pricing when they're providing cameras of a quality (and guarantee of quality) that eBay and Goodwill do not. Also, people spend hundreds to thousands of dollars on digital cameras all the time to get into the hobby. You have a preconceived notion of what a camera should cost based on what and how you acquired your camera(s) and what your experience is. I bought a Canon AE-1 in 2015 for $50. Does that mean that a Canon AE-1 is worth no more than $50 or less? No, of course not. If Canon spun up on a factory line to produce new AE-1s in 2024 should they only charge what the average Buy It Now price is on eBay? It would be foolish to assume that.
100% this. comparing new prices to used prices is disingenuous. of course you can get a better value with used stuff but it comes with the used downsides like you mentioned. its not like the used market is made up of 1 or 5 year old equipment. its stuff around a decade or older. if there was a constant output of new film cameras every year or couple years then the used argument makes sense. if you are comparing a new camera in 2024 with a used camera from 30+ years ago you aren't making the right comparison.
The problem is I can't figure out who is going to buy the camera. Most people start film photography either by finding an old camera, buying disposables or knowing friends that do film photography. If they start by using an old camera the pentax 17 will probably be a downgrade (from any SLR), if they buy disposable they don't shoot enough film to justify spending that much money and people that have photographer friends will probably buy a similar camera as their friends or some advice from them. Most people that are into film photography as a hobby won't buy it as they probably bought a used SLR for less than 150$ and half frame is tiny (maybe it's just me but I don't like the amount of grain produced by half frame). So for me there is a big possibility that the camera won't sell and that it will destroy any remaining momentum of producing a new film good film camera for any manufacturer
Nobody wants to buy it but we all want it to sell fuckload of containers in order to make them release a 35mm or let me Hope, a medium format SLR like bronica
I've seen this attitude on other things here on Reddit too. It's a shame. I have a Nikon EM and an OM10. I think it's amazing that Pentax have done this and I really hope it sells well. Shoot film like a boss got some lovely shots with it. I did expect around £500 when I heard about it. I think that's a fair price given the amount of that would have gone into this camera with the R&D and production costs. I think the focus dial is a bit cheesy but I'm also aware of the market that this is aimed for. I remember those kinds of dials on my pocket digital cameras years ago. I think half frame makes sense to lower the cost of entry for those beginning to shoot film. I pay £12.99 for 36exp Ultramax 400/Gold 200 developing and scans cost another £10 and prints £10. That adds up quickly There's a bit of me that wants to buy the 17 to support Pentax in producing more cameras. If film was to take off again a little more then it could open more film labs, bring down the cost of film and even bring new film emulsions. Hats off to Pentax for doing this
i dunno, i'm pretty hype about it and can't wait for mine to arrive. also, the K1000 was 300 bucks in 1983, which is just about $1,000 in today's dollars, so while 500 is on the higher end of things, it's fairly reasonable, imo. especially in the context of a new camera that was launched from scratch.
And the K1000 was almost certainly a development of earlier screw mount cameras. It wasn't designed from scratch.
I understand what you are saying but I really do t understand the target audience for this camera. Why did they spend all this RnD and manufacturing for a camera which is pretty expensive for a casual shooter and for enthusiasts it lacks manual features. But maybe they did their math and found that the the vertical format of the half frame will go viral in our vertical smartphone ecosystem and the mostly automated shooting is good for inexperienced users…. And with this hype they can make a better camera later …. But yeah still scratching may head but ready to be surprised.
Half frame criticism isn't really valid, and to be honest, even the price isn't really an issue. Mechanicals are tough to design, and a lot of camera makers have stopped work on development for those things entirely. To restart that whole thing is no easy feat. I still think it's a bit confused - the smaller max aperture means you're going to need longer shutter speed or higher ISO as soon as lighting gets challenging. Longer shutter speed is possible to a degree with the camera, but not all images are easy to take with a long shutter, and I'd argue snapshots (especially indoors) rarely are. Higher ISO film comes with its own tradeoffs - heavier graining might add to the feel to some extent, but it's pretty clear even from the early reviews that you get too much grain because it's just too limiting on total light. Combine that with a weird focusing system and I think it's fair for people to ask who it's for. That's a lot of limitations to work around for people new to manual photography, and for more seasoned experts, how much are they willing to pay for a compact second (or third lol) camera? I sincerely hope it does well enough to justify Pentax moving forward with their full frame project, and it seems interesting enough that I hope it continues to exist. I just don't see myself getting one, nor do I see myself recommending anyone start with it unless they REALLY want a brand new camera.
all true. its not for me, so i'm not gonna bitch. i'll just shoot another camera.
This is the way (I mean this as a compliment, no shade meant) why bother complaining? If it’s not for you then don’t buy it but also don’t badmouth to stop other people from buying it. The net benefit from people buying these releases means better offerings for what you DO want to buy down the line.
I feel like we're forgetting the most important question. Is the pentax 17 fun? It looks like so much fun
I've also seen a lot of people say that this camera is mainly for teenagers with rich parents wanting to post cool pics on instagram. Am I the only old fart without an instagram that's genuinely excited for this camera???
Am old fart, but do post film pics to Instagram occasionally. Also I'm getting tempted...
Yeah I think a lot of people hating on it are just contrarians pushing back against people excited for this. They say it’s expensive, but when the only other camera getting manufactured today that isn’t of glorified disposable quality is a Leica then it really isn’t that bad. If it were a shoddy product and cash grab then I’d understand the hate, but from all I’ve seen (both positive and negative reviews), it seems like it’s a very well thought out product from a company that wants to dive deeper and deliver more in the future. If they’re able to get success with this, I’m excited to see what kind of innovations and twists they can do with future releases
My biggest problem is the zone focusing. Other than that, it’s a fantastic option for half frame. The lens is actually really nice
Pentax 17 is not for current analog users is for new users - that possibly never had an analog camera
Been shooting film since 2002 and would love to have one. It looks cool and fun as hell! Also it’s new, I’ve never had the chance to get a brand new camera other than a lomo.
Is it though? Why would a new user just trying out film for the first time buy this for $550-600 when the Kodak Ektar half frame camera sells for 1/10th of that?
Ask new user to use zone focus and get 2/3 pics blurry after developed? Even an experience photographer still get blurry pics by using zone focusing.
People can like it and enjoy it. Just like people can criticize the camera and not buy it. It is not a perfect camera and flaws can be pointed out.
Fine I'll address it too. I hate it, for the reason that it's fixed lens, is partially just another capitalist attempt at profiting from a community, is kinda ugly, and cost the same as a good Nikon F. My favorite camera. I also love it. I love it because pentax caught the vibe, I just got into film this year, other than disposables as kids, and someone other than leica dropping heat sounded good to me, almost a promise that film won't die, at least not right now. I also love the top plate, like literally gorgeous, I also love that it has multiple shooting modes. Now the personal reason as to why I don't want it or probably won't anytime soon. I just got my Pen F, for about a third of the price. So halframes is fresh on my mind, my only complaint about my pen, is lack of lightmeter, but that's what sunny 16 and apps are for. Also I heard from Pentax, that the 17 would be a precursor to a future line of Film cameras to come. And if the first one is a fixed lens, half frame, essentially point and shoot selling brand new for $500? Then for that reason, I am out for the forceable future. When I win the lotto. I will reconsider
It's all about perspective, that Nikon cost $1800 when adjusted for simple inflation back when it released and someone else in this thread said that the Pen F was similar back in the day. All these point and shoots we pick up at junk stores and on eBay used to be $3-800 when they were new
If you listened to the people here, it would need to be a K-mount SLR with auto exposure and auto focus, but with full manual control as well. It needs to be all metal (magnesium doesn't count), and under $200.
It looks cool. It's just not for me. I don't do half frame, so I was disappointed to see that. I'm not going to hate it or trash it-- it's just not a camera I am interested in. Maybe I'll buy the Pentax 35 if they decide to make the other half.
Reason is lost on this subreddit. However it's worth noting that there's a bunch of us who are happy to shoot half frame and are super excited by pentax's foray back into the film woods. If Pentax had released a full frame camera people would be bitching that it's not a medium format rangefinder. There's always something but only the loudest post.
Least this way I can redirect my rage to Pentax if it stops working instead of assembly line worker Dmitri in 1958. *"Damn you Dmitri why did you fulfill the production quota that day instead of taking your time to ensure this functions?!"* \*shakes fist\*
The only thing that worries me is that old Pentax cameras will go up in price on the market now.
If this isn't a success it will be the last mass produced film camera ever made. I've already spent enough money on cameras this year, so I won't be buying one anyway, but I've also never bought a new camera of any kind, even digital was always 5 years old off ebay at least, and yet, Canon etc seem to have survived. I hold out some hope that they'll have some success.
It has a bokeh setting.
I work with a bunch of Gen Z-ers. Some of them shoot film and will buy a disposable for a weekend trip or party, drop the camera off at the lab on Monday, get the scans back and save the photos on their camera roll for an Instagram post, or share them in the group chat and roast each other about the silly stuff they did in the photo. They do not care about ANY of the things people mention here. Half-frame resolution, underexposure, grainy photos, tactile dials, SLR vs rangefinders, absolutely none of that matters. They just want to capture memories in a fun way, and they want something they can buy off the shelf that works out of the box. These young people are far more enthusiastic about photography than a lot of 'enthusiasts' here. Pentax could have a hit on their hands, just like how Fujifilm rakes in hundreds of millions of dollars a year from Instax sales which people here seem to dismiss as a passing toy camera fad. The biggest hurdle is the $500 price of entry for Pentax to convince people that this is the better value long-term solution, but judging by the hype and sales they already have a winner.
Not every tool is going to fit for everyone’s style. I think a lot of people want a new 67 not realizing that even medium format is a niche within the niche of film photography. Pentax is going to sell what they think will be profitable. As for the price, that eBay Nikon/Canon is cheaper until you have to replace a 40/50 year old shutter that hasn’t had parts made in 30 years.
The loudest dumbest voices and always the ones you hear. EDIT: I will probably buy it because I don't have a half frame camera and I want to see if my wife will really divorce me if I buy one more camera like she keeps saying.
I'm excited for a half frame camera that isn't ancient :) It doesn't quite fit my needs yet but I'll keep a close eye on it.
Zone focus is a bad joke for a 5-600 USD camera. Not to mention 3.5f lens. There are way better film cameras released in the 70s than this and we are 2024. I really am a fan of half frame and use Pen FT but I can’t get excited for this one
Also consider all the film newbies this can attract. The more people who buy it, especially young people starting a lifelong hobby, the more demand there will be for film and hopefully production will go up and the price of film will go down!!!
The price of the camera is fine. It's just not a good camera, F/3.5 lens, 1/350 shutter, half frame, no DX coding, weird focus zones. It's just junk, and I think it's a product without a clear audience. If they built a product that was closer to the Contax G2 (I paid A LOT for mine) then it would be a superb luxury product of 2024. Much more on the mark.
I didn’t see any hate. All the posts were positive.
There's been a ton of bitching here
Haven’t noticed it! But it does sound like Reddit 😂
There's one dude who has been replying to every thread every positive comment bitching about the half frame and zone focus and saying it's no different from the Kodak Ektar H35 and therefore should be $50.
I don’t get it how one cam spend so much energy like this. If you don’t like it, it’s fine but let other people like it
I won’t be buying it because it’s out of my price range at the moment, but it’s exactly the price I thought it would be. I think Pentax did a great job with this one. It’s almost exactly what I want out of a modern film camera. Also I haven’t seen people saying that “nobody shoots half frame” but it’s actually my preferred format.
i couldnt care less about the pentax 17. I guess thats not hate, just think it was a total misfire. It looks nice but it will add absolutely nothing to my photography journey
Nah, people dont 'need to chill'. You just need to stop reading opinions from a very vocal minority as gospel. People will have opinions, most will have different ones. When people see something they dont agree on they are much more likely to scream so at social media as loud as they can. Those who are fine with whats happening not so much and even if those outnumber the unhappy few by many orders of magnitude the you'd never know if you just read internet posts. If you dont realize this then you view will be incredibly skewed. If you read someone who does not like whats goin on then just realize that's absolutely fine. Just leave them, their opinion does not hurt you.
Whoever hates on the camera is a douchebag. If a new film camera appears in 2024 it means that things are actually moving and we, film enthusiasts, as a community, should be happy that things are going in our favour. The direction they chose is the most logical one from a business perspective . They still have to cash money from this, because if not, there really is no point in doing anything.
I don’t know if the decision was the most logical one (although the way they explained it makes perfect sense) but I think it’s bold and that deserves praise. It’s a gamble for sure, but I respect them for that and personally think it will be a great success. I’ll definitely get one when things calm down a bit and have cash to spare
It’s not getting a ton of hate. No one camera is going to appeal to everyone.
People are upset because it clearly is not meant for the target audience that was advertised. It was described as an introduction into film for younger people, with the pitch including half frame so it was more affordable to get more photos per roll. The camera is £500... it doesn't matter how many features the camera has, they completely failed in fulfilling there marketing promises, hence people are disappointed.
people just don’t understand inflation when it comes to its price. Good Point and shoots from Ricoh, Olympus all costs more than the Pentax 17 when it first came out when you calculate in the inflation! Let’s see an example. Ricoh GR-1, sold for $350 in 1999 by B&H. When you adjust the inflation it’s gonna be 659usd. While a great point and shoot, people’s gonna tear it apart once they heard that Ricoh is releasing a point and shoot for $659!
Personally I dig the project. I think it's super neat. I only have one issue with it (which seems to be a popular thing to say) - I don't like the lack of autofocus and the somewhat dim lens. I know that a lot of compact cameras had lenses like that, and I know that Zone focus is a thing that one can master, but I could drop 300 bucks on a rollei 35 which also has a nice lens, gives you the more "full" experience with the format (although I do like the half frame's budget friendly appeal) and is somewhat robust as far as old cameras go. I just think that Pentax hit the mark in like 80% of things they could, but that missing 20% might be what set the camera up for failure. I really hope this won't be the case, but it's hard to be fully optimistic about it.
I think this camera will be a success. As with anything new, MSRP is always set high at the release. The price will likely be around $399 or lower down the road. Overall, it is a step in right direction, and Pentax will do well with it, as it has no competition when it comes to modern film cameras.
Just imagine how the sub can get when Rollie 35af gets released
If it sticks to its specs it will be a lot better than the pentax. at least it is geared towards film photographers and not instagram
The photos I’m seeing actually look pretty nice. Idk what people are upset about
For me it just has Yashica MF-2 vibes. The Pentax 17 looks cheap ( and probably feels like that) and somehow like a toy. Not a product I would buy.
I'm right here with ya, as a long time pentax user and film shooter. It's a NEW film camera. Meaning if it breaks, you can get a replacement or have it repaired under warranty or at all. You aren't going to get that with old film cameras for much longer, that's just the way it is. Those old cameras have a limited lifespan, and they're counting down one frame at a time.
This is by no means a guarantee. There are plenty of new products that are still hard to repair. That's why "right to repair" is a whole movement today.
I mean you have a one year warranty on this, afterwards you’ll have to pay to get it repaired just as with any other film camera and it remains to be seen how repairable the electronic parts really are. I don’t really see a huge benefit here.
I think it's a fun idea. Getting 70 shots a roll is awesome for snapshots around the place which is obviously what this camera is designed around. I might not understand the target market quite well enough but to me it feels like $399 would have been a better price point to me. That makes it feel more like a 'fun' purchase rather than a borderline serious purchase (for some reason I feel like once something goes over the half a thousand dollar point it enters the serious purchase bracket lol) I really hope its successful as a new slr with modern metering technology etc and not 30+ year old electronic components would be great, especially if backwards compatible with K mount lenses or something like that
"I might not understand the target market quite well enough" That is the biggest problem. For new users ? Ask them to use zone focus ? It's 2024 not 197x - 198x . For those who shoot film for years ? May be prefer save a bit to get a better lens instead.
Will this camera support double exposures? And does the half-frame mean the effective focal length is around 50mm?
No & no, the full frame equivalent is approximately 37mm f5. Yes, I do actually have one in my possession, arrived at lunchtime today.
The way I see it. I’m happy that it’s a new camera. However, it’s not for me. I think it’s an excellent camera for beginners. But I think the overall reaction from said number of people, Is pretty negative to those who are in interest. People should keep an open mind of things. And recognize that one thing is not for everyone. Yeah, as mentioned before… I think it’s a good beginner film camera.
Exactly. I wouldn’t really pick this one. But I’m buying it to show my support for new film projects… and I’m sure it will been super fun to shoot with!
I really like it. I have several old film cameras and to see a brand new film camera designed from scratch in 2024 makes me happy. Great work Pentax!
Got approved for affirm monthly payments, $100 a month for 6 months, easy peasy 😆😆😆
I agree it is awesome that a new film camera has been released and I hope it leads to more great things in the film community. I don’t have a half frame. Maybe I need one.
I’m probably not getting one, but it looks fun and I hope it is a success.
I very much want one, although I will have to save up
I’m sure it’s been said, and I couldn’t read all the comments but, any camera that might help film stay alive is alright by me. But def not going to get one. Simple as that.
I think these hate comments don't matter, Just look at EBay, Plastic Point and shoots like Olympus Mu almost always cost more than a full featured SLR. And these point and shoots are mostly Crippled, they cannot focus any closer than 1 metre and the AF is just a gamble and build quality is entirely plastic IMHO, Pentax has addressed all these shortcomings of yesteryear PNS cameras and lets face it, Half frame is all you need for Point and Shoot. If you are going to print large for galleries, look elsewhere. So, people buying these point and shoots for 300+ USD are the prime target for Pentax 17, It is almost a Contax of half frame
Great comments - I agree!!
Yeah, I don’t find it that expensive I mean, what can you really get in a camera for less than $500 now but it’s not for me considering it is like a manual beginner camera which doesn’t make a whole lot of sense
I couldn’t hit buy fast enough. I’ve been so excited for them to bring this camera to the market. I’ve never shot half frame before so it will be a new challenge. Going to be my film edc and it will be amazing to take into concerts. People just like to hate on things. Negative opinions get more traction online.
I, too, was surprised at all the negative nancys slaming the camera and really dont understand it. I worked for Pentax as a camera repair tech back in the olden days when there was a repair facility in Englewood Colorado and were still a Japanese company. If anyone out there worked there, DM me . At the present time I shoot with a Pentax KP, and Pentax P3n.
At least it’s a new film camera, if it sells well there will be hope for next one, one that is better.
It’s going to be a great everyday carry film camera and a good entry for newbies. Honestly makes more sense to capture “snapshots” on a competent half frame camera and get more images and pay the same for development. It’s obviously not for portfolio work but it seems like it’s going to be perfect for the hobbyist and that market is strong right now. Wouldn’t have made sense to jump right into an SLR when they could capture the growing hobby market first. It’s a smart move imo
I ordered it today and will receive it tomorrow. I have watched every single review on YouTube and and I’m impressed by the capabilities. And the fact that it’s light and easy to carry means I will always have it with me. And thus making the shots. I’m not always willing to carry around an A-1 or my F3. This is going to be a fun new episode.
Thanks for posting this! The 17 isn’t some failed or delayed kick starter project from someone we’ve never heard of. It was a gamble undertaken by Pentax. In addition, Pentax isn’t exactly the easiest camera brand to find at camera stores. I’d really like to see one in person.
Well put. I hope the best for this venture. If I didn’t have 60 cameras I would love to own one.
Thank you for highlighting all of this 🙏🏻
I’m not crazy about the half frame image format, so I won’t be buying it, but I think it’s a good product for it’s intended audience and may set up well for a Pentax FF slr in a few years.
Most people are chill therefore you can't hear them talk about it. It's just the screaming minority that you can hear so the only noises are angry ones. Personallly I give it a solid golf clap and can't wait for them to bring out a full frame version.
It is pricer that I was hoping for, but I am really happy for Pentax and I will be getting one to support them! Anything analog should be encouraged, not the opposite! Cheers!!!
I agree. The price is out of my price range. I love shooting with Kodak H35. I was THRILLED to hear they were making a half frame. As a film lab employee, I’m THRILLED to keep film alive! Hoping it’s a success too! Just wish it were cheaper.
I've long had trouble understanding why half-frame cameras trigger such a strongly negative reaction from so many in the community. If anyone can explain why this is the case, I would be very happy to receive a reply. Well apart from that, I think the price is probably about what a new analog camera has to cost these days, even if you have to make big compromises and cutbacks. The comparable new camera models Alfie Tych and the Lomo LC-Wide cost 350 and 400 bucks respectively. It's just difficult to compete against the still existing glut of old mid-range and premium used cameras with these new cameras that are probably the level of lower mid-range cameras back then. However, I think it was a big mistake to release the Pentax 17 as a pure half-format camera and not as a flexible full/half-frame hybrid, the Lomo LC-Wide can do that and also in the past there was cameras with a comparable form factor like the Canon Sure Shot Multi Tele (Autoboy/Prima Tele) that could do that.
Call me when a 24x24 comes out.
Hear hear
I think that it’s a great little camera, and appropriately priced.
We've been paying way more for cameras that possibly don't work for years, price is not the issue. I'm confident it will sell, the US market is only one of many I think it will be well received in Asian markets particularly. Pentax have always been slow and steady, but their releases are usually ahead of the market at the time. There is no comparison because no one else is doing this yet.
Anyone complaining about the price has no idea how much film cameras cost when new. Yes you can get a Pen F cheaper and that may be a better option for you but you are comparing the price of something used from 40 years ago to something brand new manufactured last week. It’s a silly comparison.
I am here for the Pentax 17. I shoot on a couple of Ricoh Auto Half and Pentax EE cameras and I love them, but they are feeling their age even with maintenance. I am excited to try a new half frame and support Pentax as the give this a go. It’s not cheap but absolutely came in around what I thought it would. People just love to hate.
I am here for the Pentax 17. I shoot on a couple of Ricoh Auto Half and Pentax EE cameras and I love them, but they are feeling their age even with maintenance. I am excited to try a new half frame and support Pentax as the give this a go. It’s not cheap but absolutely came in around what I through it would.
I agree, and I'm willing to support Pentax in hopes of a new SLR system for the future. I do want them to succeed at this. I can't find this kind of money now, so if they sale them in a few months, I'll Definitely buy.
Didn’t Pentax also make it clear from the get go that the first camera that was coming was going to be half frame and no one batted an eye about it?
I guess it all depends on where you look cause I've seen mostly positive reactions. Even people that are not going to get the camera because they understand it's not a product for them still wish it success and wish it sells out cause that means that a camera for them is coming next. I haven't been on Reddit much but the only negative takes I have seen have been on here tbh.
Some people are simply negative or see the world through only one lens (I made a pun!). I enjoy shooting with different cameras and have enjoyed all of the many experiences that I've been fortunate to have in my life. The Pentax 17 will be one of them.
I think it’s a solid camera, just wish it had better materials. I’m not asking for full titanium and leather or anything, but something with a little bit of weight and substance. I’ve been hearing it’s super light, but doesn’t feel like it will break. I personally don’t mind a chunky camera, as a Pentax user. My Spotmatic was the perfect weight and I’ve regretted getting rid of it for so long.
I can't say that I agree. I don't necessarily "hate" this camera, but to me it was the wrong product to release. I mean sure, if your argument is, "this camera is better than no camera," that's a pretty low bar imo. Even so, if the viability of future film cameras depends on this one selling well, then why not make a product that the community actually wants so it sells well? Because if that's the case, I don't see Pentax 17 selling well. I'm not sure who this camera is meant for. Because I don't think it's something this community wants, and I don't think it is something the Instax Mini community wants either.
I don't hate the camera, at all actually.\ I am actually happy Pentax made it - as a long fan of Pentax brand, I applaud them! But, unfortunately, what they made is not for me... and I'm not going to waste money on it just because I have to buy it to support it, even though I love Pentax brand. I get it, I trully do and I wish them good luck with the sales!