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

[Arthurwg]

And was reflected in the price when they were new.
This is not what Pentax should be aiming at.
The speed of the lenses in those two systems requires a photographer who really knows what they are doing and who is not tripod shy.
Otherwise, you’re pissing most of the resolution away in motion blur.

I don't think this is your experience, because you are incorrect. The Mamiya 7 (and the 6) probably have the least "motion blur". of any hand-held camera. Indeed, one can shoot at 1/15 sec, with a little concentration.

As for 645, the only good thing about it it hat you get four more shots on 120 film.

 

[Film-Niko]

Gimmicky in what way(s)? I haven't kept up with their 21st century offerings.

There have not been any "gimmicky" cameras by Pentax in the last years. Just the opposite, very well designed and well-thought photographer oriented cameras, focussed on the important things.
And what they have done in the long-past is irrelevant for this project.

 

[Film-Niko]

I don't think this is your experience, because you are incorrect. The Mamiya 7 (and the 6) probably have the least "motion blur". of any hand-held camera. Indeed, one can shoot at 1/15 sec, with a little concentration.

As for 645, the only good thing about it it hat you get four more shots on 120 film.

Oh please at all in the "6x7 vs 4.5x6 camp":
That is a very stupid and completely childish discussion!!!
Some prefer one format for good reasons, some prefer the other format for good resons.

Please do not destroy this thread by this completely childish and superfluous discussion!!!
It is also completey irrelevant at this time for this Pentax project, as they have clearly said that their first steps will be 35mm cameras.
And that is enough of a challenge for the short and mid term, so the next years.

 

[flavio81]

Pentax has a history of releasing gimmicky cameras.

Like... which ones?

The Pentax 6x7. world's first 6x7 SLR with electronic shutter and TTL metering plus (at the time) the most extensive lens system for a 6x7 SLR?

The Electro-Spotmatic, first SLR with electronic auto exposure?

The Pentax ME-F,, first autofocus SLR?

The first series of fully multicoated lenses?

...

the 645 negative isn't big enough to justify the downsides.

The quality jump from 35mm to 645 is more dramatic than from 645 to 67.

They should invent an invisible camera and force people to buy special film for it.

If this does happen, i bet that Lomography will be behind this idea.

And then there's the TLS 401...

Ugliest SLR ever!

1. The various auction and shopping sites are awash with good film cameras, many of them undervalued. Who needs a new camera when there are a bazillion P&S’s, Rangefinders, and SLR’s available for a song?

2. We need parts and techs to fix the old cameras more than we need new cameras. I’m tired of reading ads for, and buying, cameras with nonfunctional light meters.

3. We can’t even get film for the cameras we have. Don’t we need to resolve that issue before making more cameras? And what about being able to get our film developed and prints made at the local drug or grocery store?

4. How about making 1.35v silver oxide or lithium batteries in at least 625 and 675 sizes?

(1) Because of lack of good camera techs

(2) True, but this is going to take a long time. It's not that easy to become a professional camera technician and I say this from firsthand account.

(4) Silver oxide or lithium batteries can't be 1.35V for electrochemical reasons. Lithium batteries can't be good replacements for mercury batteries because their discharge curve is not flat. For PX625 replacement, it has been always extremely easy: Fit a 675 zinc-air cell using a makeshift spacer (or buy a brass adapter). Problem solved. You're welcome!!

(3) "We can’t even get film for the cameras we have": Are you sure of this? Currently you can readily buy film in the following formats:
110
135
120
220 (shanghai GP3)
127 (some custom manufacturers)
620 (same)
Minox 8x10 film is sold bulk (roll form) for you to fit into cassetes.

The only important format that is conspicuously absent is 126. Then there's Disc film which is a generally hated format...

 

[flavio81]

As for 645, the only good thing about it it hat you get four more shots on 120 film.

You mean 33% more shots per roll, right?

 

[Arthurwg]

Oh please at all in the "6x7 vs 4.5x6 camp":
That is a very stupid and completely childish discussion!!!
Some prefer one format for good reasons, some prefer the other format for good resons.

Please do not destroy this thread by this completely childish and superfluous discussion!!!
It is also completey irrelevant at this time for this Pentax project, as they have clearly said that their first steps will be 35mm cameras.
And that is enough of a challenge for the short and mid term, so the next years.

Very insulting and uncalled for. I have no interest in 4x5 and have not mentioned that format. Only discussing what sort of cameras I would like to see in the future, And I do think other manufacturers will jump on board with new cameras. As for Pentax, I think they should revise/ reintroduce the 67II.

 

[redbandit]

ricoh techinically still OWNS the blue prints for every camera they ever made... and they shold still have them in file cabinets

 

[Film-Niko]

Very insulting and uncalled for. I have no interest in 4x5 and have not mentioned that format.

???
Please read again what you have posted.
And then read again what I have posted.

You have talked about 4.5x6cm (645) medium format, and I have talked about that format. I have not talked at all about 4x5 sheet film!

You have written "As for 645, the only good thing about it it that you get four more shots on 120 film."
Many, if not all, 4.5x6cm users would consider such a general (and in that generalization wrong) statement (as there are much more advantages for that format) insulting.

But that is not my point:
My point is that you , Helge and others with arguing about medium formats are going completely out of topic. And how many good threads are destroyed here exactly because of that.
It is also completey irrelevant at this time for this Pentax project, as they have clearly said that their first steps will be 35mm cameras.
And that is enough of a challenge for the short and mid term, so the next years.

 

[jtk]

Risking upsetting my friends here, I'll simply point out that Pentax (i.e. Ricoh) can easily afford to enter whatever market niche they find entertaining. They've never chased "ratings".

Neither Pentax nor Ricoh have ever been amused by the alleged charms of 120 film (save for 645), they've been focused on images.

 

[Helge]

I think it is part of their new marketing strategy, which is focussed on getting in closer direct contact to their target audience and their (potential) customers. Their digital customers have so far reacted positive to that.
In Japan they are also regularly doing events (physical and online) for interested photographers.
In the video and press release they are also saying that they are very interested in the assessment of potential customers and potentially participating other companies (potential suppliers and commercial customers).
Or to say it shortly: They are looking for additional feedback.
I think it is a very good strategy.
And of course it is creating generally more brand awareness: All photo media is reporting about it, it is the hot-topic in many photo forums, on youtube, instagram and so on.
All are talking about Pentax now. And I think for quite a few so far non-Pentax digital+film shooters a digital Pentax could be interesting when Pentax is also offering a new film SLR again.
Pentax could broaden its customer base significantly.

That is a spiel you hear from a lot of companies of over the last decade. It’s getting a bit long in the tooth. And it seldom results in some actual interaction and fruitful negotiation with the “fan base”.
It’s more like a box they feel they have to tick. “Let’s get us some of that”.

 

[DREW WILEY]

On topic, what I can't figure out is hoping for the resurrection of something resembling the K1000, which was actually a letdown from the superior quality of their earlier all-mechanical 35mm cameras. Why not revive something like those instead?

 

[Helge]

I don't think this is your experience, because you are incorrect. The Mamiya 7 (and the 6) probably have the least "motion blur". of any hand-held camera. Indeed, one can shoot at 1/15 sec, with a little concentration.

As for 645, the only good thing about it it hat you get four more shots on 120 film.

Slower lenses will result in worse low light performance. No two ways about that. Larger formats make I harder to make fast lenses. That is also a fact.

645 has
Flatter film
Faster lenses overall
No need to crop too much if you want rectangular.
More shots
Smaller cameras
SLR mirror smaller

 

[Film-Niko]

That is a spiel you hear from a lot of companies of over the last decade.

But in this case it is different, as Pentax has already established a better direct contact to its custumer base via their events. Have a look over at pentaxforums.com, there are users who have participated in such events.
Pentax is really actively doing this. They are not like Sony, Canon, Nikon in that regard. Fortunately!

 

[Pieter12]

For "Pentax" read "Ricoh using the Pentax brand name." The Japanese Pentax factory has been closed since 2008. I am unsure if any of the qualities from previous Pentax cameras would be carried over to the Ricoh Pentax camera, I doubt any of the original Pentax staff or manufacturing equipment is still around.

 

[Cholentpot]

Like... which ones?

The Pentax 6x7. world's first 6x7 SLR with electronic shutter and TTL metering plus (at the time) the most extensive lens system for a 6x7 SLR?

The Electro-Spotmatic, first SLR with electronic auto exposure?

The Pentax ME-F,, first autofocus SLR?

The first series of fully multicoated lenses?

...



The quality jump from 35mm to 645 is more dramatic than from 645 to 67.




If this does happen, i bet that Lomography will be behind this idea.



Ugliest SLR ever!



(1) Because of lack of good camera techs

(2) True, but this is going to take a long time. It's not that easy to become a professional camera technician and I say this from firsthand account.

(4) Silver oxide or lithium batteries can't be 1.35V for electrochemical reasons. Lithium batteries can't be good replacements for mercury batteries because their discharge curve is not flat. For PX625 replacement, it has been always extremely easy: Fit a 675 zinc-air cell using a makeshift spacer (or buy a brass adapter). Problem solved. You're welcome!!

(3) "We can’t even get film for the cameras we have": Are you sure of this? Currently you can readily buy film in the following formats:
110
135
120
220 (shanghai GP3)
127 (some custom manufacturers)
620 (same)
Minox 8x10 film is sold bulk (roll form) for you to fit into cassetes.

The only important format that is conspicuously absent is 126. Then there's Disc film which is a generally hated format...

Ugliest SLR ever!

Minolta would like a word.

 

[Film-Niko]

I am unsure if any of the qualities from previous Pentax cameras would be carried over to the Ricoh Pentax camera, I doubt any of the original Pentax staff or manufacturing equipment is still around.

That's not true. When Ricoh bought Pentax, the engineers, documentation, know-how etc. was all transferred. The Pentax know-how and engineering just continued under a different "roof". They are often publishing interviews with their engineers, and that are often engineers from the "before Ricoh" Pentax time.
And you have also not looked at the recent video, in which they say that all former technical documention has been preserved / archived in-house.

 

[KerrKid]

Like... which ones?

The Pentax 6x7. world's first 6x7 SLR with electronic shutter and TTL metering plus (at the time) the most extensive lens system for a 6x7 SLR?

The Electro-Spotmatic, first SLR with electronic auto exposure?

The Pentax ME-F,, first autofocus SLR?

The first series of fully multicoated lenses?

...



The quality jump from 35mm to 645 is more dramatic than from 645 to 67.




If this does happen, i bet that Lomography will be behind this idea.



Ugliest SLR ever!



(1) Because of lack of good camera techs

(2) True, but this is going to take a long time. It's not that easy to become a professional camera technician and I say this from firsthand account.

(4) Silver oxide or lithium batteries can't be 1.35V for electrochemical reasons. Lithium batteries can't be good replacements for mercury batteries because their discharge curve is not flat. For PX625 replacement, it has been always extremely easy: Fit a 675 zinc-air cell using a makeshift spacer (or buy a brass adapter). Problem solved. You're welcome!!

(3) "We can’t even get film for the cameras we have": Are you sure of this? Currently you can readily buy film in the following formats:
110
135
120
220 (shanghai GP3)
127 (some custom manufacturers)
620 (same)
Minox 8x10 film is sold bulk (roll form) for you to fit into cassetes.

The only important format that is conspicuously absent is 126. Then there's Disc film which is a generally hated format...

1 & 2 - Yes, it will take a long time but most worthwhile things take a lot of time and effort. I could go on my vocational school rant now, but I won't. The biggest problem is that we live in a disposable society and companies build products with short lifespans and no user serviceable parts. I'm betting Pentax follows this business model.
4 - A decent 1.35v battery can be made, it's just that no one wants to do it because it's not profitable for them. Yeh, I personally stick a metal ring around a hearing aid battery for the cameras that need that voltage. Not a big deal, but its a kludge.
3 - Yes, you can readily buy film, but good luck finding something like Kodak Gold 200 in 135. For consumer-grade color neg film in 135 format, we have a very real supply problem. Not to mention rising costs.

I am willing to be wrong about all the above.

My Pentax KM, 928M, and Zoom 90WR's are good cameras. I don't regret buying them, but they don't engage me. If Pentax produced a solid beautiful RF with interchangeable lenses and a full manual option, I'd pay attention, but I personally don't have an interest in anything else.

 

[flavio81]

4 - A decent 1.35v battery can be made, it's just that no one wants to do it because it's not profitable for them. Yeh, I personally stick a metal ring around a hearing aid battery for the cameras that need that voltage. Not a big deal, but its a kludge.

You asked for 1.35v "silver oxide" or "lithium" batteries. They can't be done because it would be going against chemistry...

The voltage of the cells is a consequence of the kind of cell itself, that is, the substance used for electrolyte, and electrodes.
See: "Cell potential"

Silver cell reaction:

This gives 1.56V. (aprox). This is part of the chemistry of the cell itself. You can create a 1.35v cell using other materials (and thus, other reactions), but if you want a "silver oxide" cell you'll get 1.56V.

The chemistry of regular lithium batteries give approx. 3.0V.

Yes, you can readily buy film, but good luck finding something like Kodak Gold 200 in 135. For consumer-grade color neg film in 135 format, we have a very real supply problem. Not to mention rising costs.

I am willing to be wrong about all the above.

Well... There's a photo store, a 10 minutes drive from where I live, and they do have Kodak Gold 200 in 135. About $9.8 per roll. There's plenty in stock . Or you can order it from an online store.

Maybe we have it easier on this part of the planet earth...

 

[flavio81]

For "Pentax" read "Ricoh using the Pentax brand name." The Japanese Pentax factory has been closed since 2008. I am unsure if any of the qualities from previous Pentax cameras would be carried over to the Ricoh Pentax camera, I doubt any of the original Pentax staff or manufacturing equipment is still around.

There was Ricoh/Pentax collaboration in the early 80s, or maybe even before. Some Ricoh (Rikenon) lenses were manufactured by Pentax, for example.

 

[koraks]

but if you want a "silver oxide" cell you'll get 1.56V.

Put a Schottky diode in series with it and you're pretty close to the desired 1.35V.

The chemistry of regular lithium batteries give approx. 3.0V.

True enough, although it depends on what kind of lithium. E.g. LiFeS2 is a common way to make a non-rechargeable 1.5V battery using lithium. I'm not familiar enough with battery chemistry to say something about the possibilities of alternative combinations involving silver to make a nominal voltage of 1.35V, but I wouldn't be surprised that it's possible and even feasible.

 

[flavio81]

Put a Schottky diode in series with it and you're pretty close to the desired 1.35V.

This arrangement is temperature sensitive and load sensitive(*). Thus, i prefer using a zinc-air cell, which is really stable.

(*) This was already researched exemplarily on a PDF that is around the 'net.

 

[koraks]

This arrangement is temperature sensitive and load sensitive(*).

Depending on the application, this can indeed be an issue, but often isn't. However, light meters in particular fall in the tricky category, I grant you that.
I'm not too fond of the zinc-air cells given their limited service life. They're otherwise really nice of course.

 

[mtnbkr]

Depending on the application, this can indeed be an issue, but often isn't. However, light meters in particular fall in the tricky category, I grant you that.
I'm not too fond of the zinc-air cells given their limited service life. They're otherwise really nice of course.

What is the typical life of a zinc-air cell? I've had one in my Canon FT for a couple months and 3 rolls of film and counting. The battery check on the camera says it's still good and my multimeter as of a few days ago says the voltage is 1.33v (started at 1.45v when fresh).

My only other use of this style of battery is in a set of powered ear plugs for shooting that I use when shooting clays. But those only get used a couple times a year so the batteries are always dead when I pull them out (I keep spares packed with the plugs for this reason).

I've heard, but not yet tested, that closing off one of the little air holes with some crazy glue makes them last longer.

Chris

 

[flavio81]

I'm not too fond of the zinc-air cells given their limited service life. They're otherwise really nice of course.

What is the typical life of a zinc-air cell? I've had one in my Canon FT for a couple months and 3 rolls of film and counting. The battery check on the camera says it's still good and my multimeter as of a few days ago says the voltage is 1.33v (started at 1.45v when fresh)

It depends on the brand of the cell. Some of them have enough long life ("enough" for me is 1 to 3 months, sometimes even more.)

They are really cheap (here, cheaper than silver cells), easy to find, and come in packages of 6, 8, 12 cells.

Thus, for me they're a great solution.

 

[koraks]

I've heard, but not yet tested, that closing off one of the little air holes with some crazy glue makes them last longer.

Yeah, I did that. I got a couple of months of life from the ones I tried. For some reason they always ended up in cameras I'd use occasionally, I would forget to take out the battery and reseal it and I'd come back to a dead battery. The one camera that actually needed one of those (AFAIK) and that I used with some frequency was a Konica Auto S2. I ditched it some time ago for various reasons, this being one of them.

Thus, for me they're a great solution.

I can see that, and that's really nice. For me, it didn't pan out that well, but I never lost any sleep over it since I don't have any applications (left) where they're necessary.