MiNT is Developing a Brand-New Premium Compact 35mm Film Camera
-
A
- Thread starter JParker
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Sold Arca Swiss P0 hybrid classic head - full CLA'd
- Started by Guivd
-
For Sale FS: Ilex Acme #3 Shutter Face Plate, NO Aperture Scale!
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
For Sale FS: Floating Lid for Kodak 4x5 Hard Rubber Tank.
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
For Sale FS: Alphax #4 Shutter
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
For Sale FS: New, NOS Deardorff 4"x4" Lens Board, Undrilled.
- Started by AnselMortensen
Forum statistics
What market research is your assessment based on?
The alleged 'millions' of cameras you mention on the second hand market (I'll not pressure you to come up with a list of at least 10.000 second hand cameras of this description on sale, although I bet the real numbers would be appallingly far removed from what you believe they are), to what extent are they competitive on functionality, usability, image quality and price with this new offering of MiNT?
There is a problem with second hand cameras, even the most recent of the decent point and shoot cameras is now 20 years old. The very best such as the Olympus Mju line are mostly 30 years old....plenty of time for electronic or mechanical faults. In my experience as an owner of cameras, the older mostly mechanical cameras are more likely to function after years in a drawer or attic. And many will work adequately but have some kind of minor issues which an experienced photographer can work around. But as I and others keep repeating......this....is...not....aimed....at....us....
Sure, I love me a 1960s rangefinder camera with full manual control of the shutter speed and aperture....with the option of a coupled light meter to guide me to settings. But the young photographers who are the main market for these new cameras want something with a bit of manual control but that are essentially P&S and automatic. GIven that some of the better regarded 1990s P&S cameras are fetching £400, now is the time to launch something new.
Part of the attraction of the MiNT/Rollei and of the Pentax 17 is that they are new, with a guarantee and with spare parts availability.
Clearly the initial sales of the Pentax 17, which apparently was so successful they had to manufacture a second run immediately, shows that such an enterprise it not "doomed to failure".
Yes, a new camera from either Mint or Pentax is fairly costly, though when one accounts for inflation and average wage changes in the last 30-40 years it's not really expensive. How many people regularly carry in their pockets a device which costs two or three times the price of the Mint/Rollei? How many of us own a laptop which cost a similar amount to these cameras? And how will that laptop be in five years? Obsolete? The phone will be practically worthless. But the Mint/Rollei and Pentax 17 ought to still be functioning and not left behind by the tech changes which affect phones and laptops. Your film camera is upgraded every time a film manufacturer introduces a new or improved film. Your phone or computer eventually ceases to receive updates and cannot run a new OS.
Sure, I love me a 1960s rangefinder camera with full manual control of the shutter speed and aperture....with the option of a coupled light meter to guide me to settings. But the young photographers who are the main market for these new cameras want something with a bit of manual control but that are essentially P&S and automatic. GIven that some of the better regarded 1990s P&S cameras are fetching £400, now is the time to launch something new.
Part of the attraction of the MiNT/Rollei and of the Pentax 17 is that they are new, with a guarantee and with spare parts availability.
Clearly the initial sales of the Pentax 17, which apparently was so successful they had to manufacture a second run immediately, shows that such an enterprise it not "doomed to failure".
Yes, a new camera from either Mint or Pentax is fairly costly, though when one accounts for inflation and average wage changes in the last 30-40 years it's not really expensive. How many people regularly carry in their pockets a device which costs two or three times the price of the Mint/Rollei? How many of us own a laptop which cost a similar amount to these cameras? And how will that laptop be in five years? Obsolete? The phone will be practically worthless. But the Mint/Rollei and Pentax 17 ought to still be functioning and not left behind by the tech changes which affect phones and laptops. Your film camera is upgraded every time a film manufacturer introduces a new or improved film. Your phone or computer eventually ceases to receive updates and cannot run a new OS.
Exactly!
And not to forget: Lots of photographers - including lots of the younger ones which are the main target market for these new cameras - pay more than 1,000 bucks every 2 years for their new phone.
Or pay 2,000 to 6,000 bucks every 2-3 years for the completely overpriced EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder Interchageable Lens - mirrorless) cameras, which are complete technical overkill for 99% of the photographers (because overloaded with features like 20fps or 8k video which are irrelevant for 99% of the customers).
A Rollei 35 AF or Pentax 17 will certainly serve you well for at least 20 years, probably even longer if you handle it with care.
800 or 500 bucks for 20 years: That is next to nothing, only 25 to 40 bucks per year. I pay 25-40 already for one single dinner in a restaurant.
@Angarian Good point about a meal out. I enjoyed a nice meal at a waffle house on Saturday. It was nice but nothing truly special. It's not a high end restaurant, of course. And it cost me £30 including one cider. If I were to do that once a month it would be at least £360 which isn't far off the ballpark for the Pentax 17 at least. Add in a dessert every other visit and you're there.
Part of the argument some seek to make against these new film cameras from Pentax and Mint/Rollei is that they're too expensive....when they forget that when we take inflation and average wage inflation into account, they really aren't that expensive. And the main target audience already walks around with something that costs 3-4x as much in their pocket, and which is typically replaced every two years.
As the old saying goes....you pays your money, and takes your choice. I don't need either of these new cameras so I eat out once or twice a month while enjoying my existing cameras and having sufficient funds to buy film and associated products. But 500-800 dollarpounds really isn't outrageous. We don't yet have full details of the Rollei 35AF but someone has stripped down the Pentax 17 and found it to be *very* well made. I would assume that Mint are trying to achieve something similar with their Rollei branded camera and I hope both are successful....and lead to more film being sold, more chemicals, more paper, more dev/scan/print services being sold and more developments in the world of film. Because that benefits all of us, including those who don't have any particular use for the new cameras.
Part of the argument some seek to make against these new film cameras from Pentax and Mint/Rollei is that they're too expensive....when they forget that when we take inflation and average wage inflation into account, they really aren't that expensive. And the main target audience already walks around with something that costs 3-4x as much in their pocket, and which is typically replaced every two years.
As the old saying goes....you pays your money, and takes your choice. I don't need either of these new cameras so I eat out once or twice a month while enjoying my existing cameras and having sufficient funds to buy film and associated products. But 500-800 dollarpounds really isn't outrageous. We don't yet have full details of the Rollei 35AF but someone has stripped down the Pentax 17 and found it to be *very* well made. I would assume that Mint are trying to achieve something similar with their Rollei branded camera and I hope both are successful....and lead to more film being sold, more chemicals, more paper, more dev/scan/print services being sold and more developments in the world of film. Because that benefits all of us, including those who don't have any particular use for the new cameras.
This "one meal a month/year" argument comes up pretty often. People are really stupid not to follow that advice. All they need to do is cook one meal per year at home (ceteris paribus) and they will have a nice Rollei 35AF... twenty years from now. Trouble is that there might be more things you want in your life than a Rollei 35AF and so you find yourself cooking at home all the time and that Rollei 35AF is still years away...
I think that limiting factors for new film cameras are quite obvious and we don't need to invent them. Small market (nobody really needs to shoot film) and still enough working cameras on the used market. There will be very few people buying new film cameras because they need a new film camera. They will buy it because it's "cool" or because it has something that existing cameras don't have (yes, warranty might also be one of those things).
Both, Pentax 17 and Rollei 35AF, are somewhat cool and I hope both are successful and pave the way to more new cameras that will eventually be better as used cameras that you can still buy. But a no-brainer for a person with limited funds, they are not.
I think that limiting factors for new film cameras are quite obvious and we don't need to invent them. Small market (nobody really needs to shoot film) and still enough working cameras on the used market. There will be very few people buying new film cameras because they need a new film camera. They will buy it because it's "cool" or because it has something that existing cameras don't have (yes, warranty might also be one of those things).
Both, Pentax 17 and Rollei 35AF, are somewhat cool and I hope both are successful and pave the way to more new cameras that will eventually be better as used cameras that you can still buy. But a no-brainer for a person with limited funds, they are not.
Fixed it for you. Why are you singling out film photography? Nobody needs to enjoy any hobby.
In general, people like to buy and own things, even things they don't need, and sometimes new, unused things are a) more appealing and/or a safer buy and b) have advantages over used things for some of us. New things come with a price premium of course. On the other hand, used things can be risky. Pick your poison.
And there are lively markets for both used and new things in all hobbies. Why shouldn't film photography have both, too? Is it especially dying or especially dead? More than other hobbies? It seems more alive to me than many other leisurely activities. Film photography is nothing especially niche. Consumer electronics, videogames, cars, boats, phones, telescopes, hifi speakers, videogame consoles, motorbikes, bicycles, music records, sports equipment, baby equipment etc. You can buy this stuff brand new or used. Nobody bats an eyelid. Which hobby amongst these is popular enough? How much popularity is enough popularity to justify brand new tools for that hobby, alongside the used options?
At this point, I actually wonder if some people (not you, @brbo) are livid at the fact that a hobby they considered dead or dying, a specialty, 'niche' hobby populated by bargain-hunting types who mostly get a kick out of the bargain basement find AND NOT the photography, is not that dead yet, somehow.
With all respect, but that isn't the point at all.
The point is that if you use such of the mentioned cameras for about twenty years and enjoying them, the average annual cost (call it allowance for depreciation / writing off if you look at it in economical terms) is only 25 - 40 bucks. And these 25-40 bucks are equivalent in value to just one single restaurant dinner.
It was just used to make the extremely low / negligible dimension of the sum more clear.
I don't *need* to eat out 2/3 times a month. I don't *need* a television service subscription or Amazon Prime. I don't *need* my record collection or my DVDs. I don't *need* my cameras and film. I don't *need* my nice comfy bed. I don't *need* a Systemdek turntable and Revox tape deck....but both adorn my living room. Arguably I don't *need* my wife, partners, friends.
It would be a pretty horrible life without those things. Boring. Depressing, even. But I could exist without them. Now it happens that in my case I don't really have sufficient desire for a Pentax 17 or Rollei 35AF to buy either because I have probably 60 film cameras to choose from. But that isn't the case for someone in their young adulthood getting into film and wanting/needing a different experience to that which I grew up with.
I was fortunate enough to get some bargains when film was considered dead...and missed out on a lot too. C'est la vie.
It would be a pretty horrible life without those things. Boring. Depressing, even. But I could exist without them. Now it happens that in my case I don't really have sufficient desire for a Pentax 17 or Rollei 35AF to buy either because I have probably 60 film cameras to choose from. But that isn't the case for someone in their young adulthood getting into film and wanting/needing a different experience to that which I grew up with.
I was fortunate enough to get some bargains when film was considered dead...and missed out on a lot too. C'est la vie.
I don't particularly want a Rollei 35AF, or a Pentax 17. I would quite like a nice battered old Tachihara 4x5, or something similar. I already eat at home almost all the time. 
Maybe if I stop eating for a week or two... but that would be the weeks they run the promo where you can send six cornflake packet tops and claim your 4x5 inch field camera.
Maybe if I stop eating for a week or two... but that would be the weeks they run the promo where you can send six cornflake packet tops and claim your 4x5 inch field camera.Because we are on Photrio and every hobby IS specific. For example, there is a billion of hobby photographers and only a million uses traditional film whereas there is a billion of amateur runners and 999 million of them wear running shoes. So, I chose to be specific and on topic (film photography) here on Photrio since I couldn't care less about motorbikes.
We spend a lot of money on film, paper, chemicals in film photography hobby. It might be just me, but if I want to spend additional non-trivial amount of money on a film camera it better be awesome or at least somewhat special (like the new WideluxX, for example). Not just new. I never heard people saying that Pentax or MiNT are pocketing crazy margins and that their greed prevents more people from buying their cameras, but disregarding the facts that this market IS specific would be silly.
Anyway, if anyone, we (the Photrio) should all be helping Pentax and MiNT with buying BOTH cameras (it only costs like... nothing really), yet there were only 2 (two!) users who bought Pentax 17 in this thread. What is wrong with us?!
<sarcasm/>
I'm holding out for the new Widelux X.
I have the Pentax. I've shared photos here with it too. I really like it! I'm really happy to have a brand new film camera. I'm not personally interested in the Rollei Mint camera but I hope it does well. No one ever complained that there were too many camera brands before digital took over, so not sure why we'd be concerned about that now.
I only learned about the Widelux this week; I'm probably not going to buy one, but I will follow along and hope them well, just as I am with the SmartFlex people putting out a new large format camera.
All of the investment into the film industry is amazing in my opinion.
I don't understand what this means, sorry.
Yes we are on a film photography forum, where I would expect people to be perhaps interested in how it performs/curious at the prospect of something new being released, etc.
Instead this mantra 'who needs this? We have gazillions of used cameras already, people who buy it must be [idiots|newbies|hipsters|wannabe cool]' is really really odd, and IME really specific to film photography communities. Puzzling.
I'm not personally interested in the Rollei Mint camera but I hope it does well. No one ever complained that there were too many camera brands before digital took over, so not sure why we'd be concerned about that now.
I only learned about the Widelux this week; I'm probably not going to buy one, but I will follow along and hope them well, just as I am with the SmartFlex people putting out a new large format camera.
All of the investment into the film industry is amazing in my opinion.
+100.
I cannot agree more, you are absolutely spot on.
Thanks!
I simply explained why I was talking specifically about film photography hobby and not about hobbies in general. The fact that digital happened and had a massive influence on the market can't be denied. If there was no Robot Royal 24 with three lenses available for about the same what Pentax 17 costs, Ricoh would probably get my money. What I'm saying is, It's not their fault that so many very interesting/cheap old cameras are still available today, but they have to operate in that market.
Funny, I don't see it that way. Personally, I never said anything like that. I mostly comment about the things I don't like or would like in new film cameras. I don't know how helpful it is if nobody ever says what they do/don't like and just simply don't buy new cameras because people making cameras don't know how to read people's minds*.
* Not that I imagine that my thoughts or wishes would warrant a commercial success.
FYI:
Side-by-side comparison of the Rollei 35 AF and the Pentax 17 by Lucy Lumen, Australia:
Side-by-side comparison of the Rollei 35 AF and the Pentax 17 by Lucy Lumen, Australia:
I'm experiencing a minor 35mm personal renaissance after taking my Olympus XA on holidays recently and being very happy with the results. So I've ordered a Black Rollei 35AF to match my old Rollei 35 S, and I hope it's as fun and useful as it looks. If it isn't, well at least I'm putting my money where my mouth is supporting film camera development, for a relatively affordable interesting thing. (I'd like a Wideluxx too, but I expect that to be priced to match it's inflationary and 'made by the German aeronautical industry' credentials - ie justifiably over $4k, and the Pentax 17... well 72 is just too many frames for an LF snapper like me!!)
Marc!
Marc!
Last edited:
Awesome! Is your camera in the first batch (October 2024 delivery)?
Great!
Please let us know when you have the camera, and when you have first experiences with it.
Here just FYI more photos, including RA-4 darkroom prints, from the Rollei 35 AF:
FYI:
Quite well balanced review by Willem Verbeek:
Quite well balanced review by Willem Verbeek:
I own the original Rollei 35, and am really impressed by the quality of lens and the overall compactness. But I never really liked the ergonomics: the sharp edges of the film winding lever, and the difficulty in shooting with one hand stably. Even though I really like the Rollei 35, way often I go out shoot with Lomo LC-A.
Now Mint took all the classic designs of Rollei 35, and all the quirks. I can understand the nostalgic value, as well as the potential marketing appeal. But I think the best way to pay tribute to classic greats is to build upon and further improve it.
In comparison, the Pentax 17 is a joy to use with one hand (despite half frame) for fast snapshots.
Now Mint took all the classic designs of Rollei 35, and all the quirks. I can understand the nostalgic value, as well as the potential marketing appeal. But I think the best way to pay tribute to classic greats is to build upon and further improve it.
In comparison, the Pentax 17 is a joy to use with one hand (despite half frame) for fast snapshots.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |