Pentax announces that they're working on new film cameras!

[pentaxuser]

It is said at the beginning of the video. He is one of the senior engineers and responsible for product programmes and planning.
As this is published globally, and not only with these two official videos, but also with a detailed global PR statement by Ricoh/Pentax, this project will probably has a substantial support.
But as Ricoh/Pentax is a small(er) manufacturer, there definitely won't be a "limitless funding".

Thanks, I saw the Product Planning bit but not what position TKO, as I think he was called, held. I was just trying to find out what info exists as to the commitments very senior management might have made about this plan for 4 types of analogue cameras

pentaxuser

 

[Helge]

I do not understand the fascination with super fast lenses for this proposed compact P&S camera. That's not what the folk who might buy this camera are looking for. They're falling over themselves to bid hundreds of (choose your dollar, euro or pound) for Olympus, Canon, Pentax and Ricoh models from the 90s with f3.5 lenses. And they're not saying that they want smaller apertures in new cameras.

Cause and causation.
They buy it because they want small.
They have the (largely erroneous) idea that they will stumble upon great photos in their everyday doings or in the nightlife.

A lot of that life happens indoors and often in the evening.
And they and their friends hate flash. Many people don’t even know what it is, and get offended by having a blinding light fired straight into their eyes.
They would love a faster lens!

But allmost all compacts were for the “mom market” where the main thing was documenting life. Art and composition could go to hell and they tried their damndest to squeeze a year into 36 frames.
Once in a blue moon someone would try to do something nice with a compact or design a compact with a bit more ambition. But the vast majority of PnS cameras was never meant for anything else than what phones does mostly now.

@EV 5 and 400 film with an f2 lens means being able to hold the camera still and not get (too much) motion blur. Versus a 2.8 where it would be impossible.

 

[Cholentpot]

I'd "kill" to have a new Stylus Epic type camera. Kill my budget, if needed.

I think most of us agree with this.

 

[faberryman]

Regardless of what compact camera Pentax introduces, they are going to need a cool holster so guys can carry around their cool compact camera. The holster is what is going to make or break the success of the camera, and the survival or downfall of the film renaissance itself. To paraphrase Richard III, my kingdom for a holster.

 

[George Mann]

we have now a better situation with improved lens designs available in low light situations (wide aperture lenses and lenses with image stabilisation).
And that we can therefore be a bit more relaxed concerning high-speed films.
Nothing more, nothing less.

That's neat for those that have a need for such a thing. I have rarely, if ever found the need for such a lens in the 50 years I have been shooting. I prefer slow, fine grain film on a tripod.

I am going to join the ranks of those who don't like the way that modern lenses render.

 

[takilmaboxer]

I think most of us agree with this.

After all, I bought and wore out 3 of them (plastic construction)and then wore out 2 second hand units. They are functionally very much like a modern phone camera without any menu BS or automated internal image processing. Perhaps it would be a money maker for Pentax. I hope so.

 

[Huss]

Pentax's version of the Mju Epic was the Espio Mini. Very cool camera, and v expensive now.
They should bring that back.

 

[Huss]

If anyone wants a Mju type camera, but is scared off by the goofy prices, the Nikon AF600/Lite Touch 600 is an excellent alternative.
It has a fixed 28mm 3.5 lens which is wikked sharp.
I've owned both the Mju (original 3.5 version) and the AF600, and much prefer the AF600. I just get better pics out of it.
About $100 for a very nice one, just be patient and ignore the Japanese ebay sellers. The AF600 often appears on the US ebay site.

 

[George Mann]

It has a fixed 28mm 3.5 lens which is wikked sharp.

Too wide. Some of use prefer no wider than 35mm. Nikon made a few good ones.

My Pentax is a 38-120mm with world class optics ($10).

 

[Huss]

Too wide. Some of use prefer no wider than 35mm. Nikon made a few good ones.

My Pentax is a 38-120mm with world class optics ($10).

The 28mm view is what billions of people are used to nowadays thanks to the iphone.
I think today’s audience would be cool with it on a p&s

 

[KerrKid]

In 2007 Fuji released the Klasse S which had a 38mm 2.8 lens.
It cost $680 in 2007.

It’s selling for nearly twice that now. What a beautiful camera.

 

[George Mann]

The 28mm view is what billions of people are used to nowadays thanks to the iphone.
I think today’s audience would be cool with it on a p&s

Count me out.

 

[Agulliver]

Count me out.

That's fine, because it isn't aimed at you or I.

It's aimed at people relatively new to film photography...mostly people in their teens and early twenties, who do seem to want a fairly wide lens. But I see no market research that suggests they want a super fast lens. Or that they are averse to flashes. Gods, the number of bloody smart phone flashes that go off at pubs, clubs, restaurants and gigs suggests that rather than not knowing what a flash is.....they may not know how to turn it off.

 

[Helge]

That's fine, because it isn't aimed at you or I.

It's aimed at people relatively new to film photography...mostly people in their teens and early twenties, who do seem to want a fairly wide lens. But I see no market research that suggests they want a super fast lens. Or that they are averse to flashes. Gods, the number of bloody smart phone flashes that go off at pubs, clubs, restaurants and gigs suggests that rather than not knowing what a flash is.....they may not know how to turn it off.

Most people retake the photo treating it as a mistake. It looks like arse. And it doesn’t appear in the slightest like flash. It has a long pre-light, appearing more like a flashlight.
People “seriously” using the “flash” on the phone, is not people hanging out in the trendy night life and posting proud images to Instagram.

 

[Film-Niko]

That's neat for those that have a need for such a thing. I have rarely, if ever found the need for such a lens in the 50 years I have been shooting. I prefer slow, fine grain film on a tripod.

I also love slower higher quality films very much. And these new improved lens designs are making it for me much easier to fully use, to fully exploit the complete potential of these outstanding films.
And I can also use the slower films more often, because the improved lenses offer much better quality already at wider and open aperture.

I am going to join the ranks of those who don't like the way that modern lenses render.

That implies that all modern lenses would have the exact same rendering, which is fortunately not true. There are lots of differences in rendering. And lots of options to choose. Each photographer could probably find an improved, modern lens which will fit his personal taste.

And I have also made one important observation over the years: As a film photographer you should not judge lenses by viewing photos made with them on digital cameras and presented on monitors.
As you have the different rendering of the digital sensor (compared to film), you don't know what kind of post-processing has been done, and you have the quality limitations of the monitors.
Therefore it is very important as a film photographer to judge these lenses by using them with film, and making optical prints or projection.

We had done that e.g. in a film photographer friend group, in which also some very sceptical photographers were. But after seeing the results on final film images their skepticism vanished, and they were very positively surprised.

 

[Film-Niko]

It’s selling for nearly twice that now. What a beautiful camera.

Yeah, and not only that is selling at prices higher than the former new price, but most other high-end compact film cameras have meanwhile also reached similar price ranges.
And that fact makes it principally economically viable for Pentax / Ricoh to re-enter that market again. Probably with a camera based on the former Ricoh GR1v.
I am convinced that is also the reason why a high-end compact is on second postion on their 'road-map'.

 

[Radost]

Never owned a 35, I jump between the 40 and the 28

 

[Cholentpot]

Count me out.

In.

You know it's gonna be, All right.

 

[faberryman]

Count me out.

I don't think you are the target demographic.

 

[albireo]

Therefore it is very important as a film photographer to judge these lenses by using them with film, and making optical prints or projection.

Horses for courses. Personally, I would never judge the performance of a lens from a wet print. Sounds like a bad idea to me:

-Firstly, because I do not wet print, nor I have the slightest interest in darkroom printing. So evaluating a lens via a print, given I scan my film, would be like buying a Maserati Quattroporte for the sole purpose of driving it around the Amalfi coast, but then trying to decide whether it was a good buy by testing its performance on some Alpine trail I never really drive to.
-Secondly, because I don't really trust the amount of distortion and non linearities introduced by wet lab printing setups. What is the compound effect of darkroom printing on the final product of the print chain? Eg enlarger lens variables (flare? dirt, MTF of the lens, aperture etc), misalignments in the enlarger setup, not to mention the huge non linearities introduced by the technically obsolete (though of course creatively interesting) medium of the photographic paper? Too many variables - no thanks.

Personally, I prefer to judge my lenses in my own final setup, which is based on scanning and digitalising by deactivating all software automatic adjustment and CONTROLLING exactly the post-processing of the linear positive 16bit/channel scanner raw output. No magic involved at all.

 

[faberryman]

Personally, I prefer to judge my lenses in my own final setup, which is based on scanning and digitalising by deactivating all software automatic adjustment and CONTROLLING exactly the post-processing of the linear positive 16bit/channel scanner raw output. No magic involved at all.

What scanner and scanning software do you use.

 

[original2view]

hope Pentax is working on a medium format film camera

 

[Film-Niko]

Personally, I prefer to judge my lenses in my own final setup, which is based on scanning and digitalising by deactivating all software automatic adjustment and CONTROLLING exactly the post-processing of the linear positive 16bit/channel scanner raw output. No magic involved at all.

Fine, as that is your preferred workflow, do it.

I prefer optical printing and slide projection because of the superior quality. By that I can almost completely exploit all the detail which is on film. That is not possible with scanning: I tested the 4000ppi scanner class (Nikon Coolscan etc.) years ago. And even with best scanning results the max. resolution of the scans was only about 50% of the values I get with optical printing and projection. Checked my results with the results of other experienced photographers, and they had the same results.
Film has so much to offer. And I don't want to be limited by the used imaging chain.

 

[Film-Niko]

hope Pentax is working on a medium format film camera

No, at least not in the short and mid-term. In the video the plan for the next years was explained, and their focus is on 35mm cameras.
And that focus makes sense as in that market segment there is by far the highest demand.

 

[miha]

hope Pentax is working on a medium format film camera

That would be my priority.