Pentax: Two new compact film cameras planned - Pentax 17 announced June 2024

[bfilm]

And of course, while I don't think smartphones should be taken into account at all (make a traditional camera!), if we consider the orientation of the camera or smartphone itself in recording a vertical format scene, the traditional 35mm format camera (and not the half-frame camera with vertical format on horizontal film winding) is what would be more like the smartphone, with the long dimension oriented vertically.

 

[Dwight Anderson]

I'm going to stick with my Ansco Memo half frame, it's manual wind, zone focus with a glass triplet lens and a horizontal format.

But if I show my wife the new Pentax, we'll be adding it to my SV and her ZX5n.

 

[Dwight Anderson]

And of course, while I don't think smartphones should be taken into account at all (make a traditional camera!), if we consider the orientation of the camera or smartphone itself in recording the scene, the traditional 35mm format camera (and not the half-frame camera) is what would be more like the smartphone, with the long dimension oriented vertically.

I'm not sure this makes sense, kids take pictures with a phone vertically and view them vertically.

They'll hold the Pentax horizontally like a traditional camera, but get vertical pictures that they are used to.

I guess we'll find out soon.

 

[bfilm]

I'm not sure this makes sense, kids take pictures with a phone vertically and view them vertically.

They'll hold the Pentax horizontally like a traditional camera, but get vertical pictures that they are used to.

I guess we'll find out soon.

Right, I just mean how you hold the physical tool itself to record the scene.

Any combination of use and viewing can be adapted to, which is part of the reason I think it is unnecessary to take into account smartphones at all. And as I have explained, I think the catering to smartphones actually takes away a lot of the reasons why people turn to analog pursuits.

 

[xkaes]

I guess we'll find out soon.

And apparently pretty soon -- but when they will actually be available is another matter.

 

[bfilm]

And apparently pretty soon -- but when they will actually be available is another matter.

Hopefully we will also learn that on 17-18 June.

What I want to know is when the second model will be available. It has been suggested that they intend to release two compact film cameras this year. I wonder if the second depends on the success of the first or if they are planning to give them both an opportunity regardless. Of course, if the second model is just more features on the same half-frame format camera, then I won't really care about that. I am hoping the second model is a more traditional 35mm format compact camera.

 

[Dwight Anderson]

I'll have to take a poll of my local camera meet up group, 90% of them are under 40. They also own a lot of Hasselblads and Nikon's so the Pentax will be well within their budget.

 

[bfilm]

They also own a lot of Hasselblads and Nikon's

You see, I think you have the answer right there to the kind of cameras that a lot of people would like to see made again. They might play around for fun with something like this first new Pentax film camera, but I don't think it is what they would suggest they have been hoping for.

I guess the question as far as the potential success of the first new Pentax film camera is how much of the recent growth in film use is people who want traditional film cameras and use a fair amount of film versus people who are new to film and might only use the occasional roll and want this (I think) quirky first new Pentax film camera. Of course, some of the first group might also buy it, but they don't seem to be who Pentax are gearing it toward.

 

[bfilm]

While I know a lot of people would like to see new Hasselblad and Pentax medium format film cameras, I don't think this will happen. Unfortunately, I doubt there is a large enough group of users that would commit to what the expense of these systems would be new today.

But when the only option for a new serious film camera is a USD 5,700 Leica 35mm rangefinder, I think if Pentax (or someone else) could come up with a real quality 35mm SLR for maybe USD 1,000-1,500, that there could be real potential for that camera system.

 

[Agulliver]

We would all like to see Hasselblads made again, or 67's and so on. But as I keep saying. We are not the target audience. People who are already members of a camera club are not the target audience. I think it was Matt King upthread who said that it's quite difficult to get into the right mindset here.

This also isn't aimed at kids who are "obsessed" with smartphone photography. But it *is* aimed at a demographic which has *only* ever taken photos with a phone, who have likely never used a camera (analogue or digital) that wasn't contained within a smartphone. Perhaps that's the most difficult thing for us to grasp. These people have never used a camera other than a phone. They shoot vertically/portrait because that's what they've seen and done all their lives.

FWIW I showed the leaked photo of the Pentax 17 to a 23 year old friend who is just beginning to get into film photography and she practically drooled over it. That's just one person, and someone who has already experimented a bit with 110 film. But I get where Pentax are going with this.

And if the Pentax 17 is any kind of success, those kids will begin to find places like Photrio. I hope we welcome them and their ways that are different to our own rather than being snobbish because they are doing photography "wrong". Sure, there's lots we can teach them. But maybe they can teach us a thing or two as well. And maybe we can all encourage Pentax to release that second camera, which is rumoured to be more conventional 35mm P&S.....and to continue towards their goal of eventually making a mechanical SLR. Over on that social media thingy last week they were not discounting the possibility of getting back in the medium format game years down the line. But that all relies on the existing roadmap being successfully completed.

 

[abruzzi]

And if the Pentax 17 is any kind of success, those kids will begin to find places like Photrio. I hope we welcome them and their ways that are different to our own rather than being snobbish because they are doing photography "wrong". Sure, there's lots we can teach them. But maybe they can teach us a thing or two as well.

 

[BradS]

... Pentax have made it abundantly clear that having the blueprints was of little help because the current engineering staff couldn't even understand them. Hence they engaged the services of long retired Pentax engineers to help them.

The "current engineering staff" is either non-existent, hopelessly incompetent or the marketing people are just making shit up.

 

[Agulliver]

The "current engineering staff" is either non-existent, hopelessly incompetent or the marketing people are just making shit up.

Nope. They're just not used to reading physical 2-D blueprints or to working with small, complex mechanical devices. I fully believe that in making the first 3D computer models, they left out a vital component because they misread the old blueprint and thought it was redundant....and that it took the oldtimers to explain why it was needed.

Same reason Sankyo decided against making a super 8 camera in the early 2000s when they still had their blueprints and even a stash of spare parts. same reason none of the former cassette deck manufacturers can currently make a cassette deck despite that knowledge being only 20 or so years ago.....same reason none of the other former film camera manufacturers has suddenly resurrected an old model. Same reason Technics had to completely reverse engineer and redesign the SL1200 turntable to resume production just a few years after stopping. And the entire SL1200 is probably a lot simpler than a ratchet wind for a film camera. Ever taken one apart?

The skills of an engineer in 2024 are vastly different to the skills of an engineer in 1974. And it will also be true that their engineering staff is much smaller than in 1974.

I think it is very easy to fall into the trap of assuming that making a new, intricate mechanism is quite easy because it's all been done before.....if it were so easy, others would have stepped in years ago.

 

[bfilm]

They're just not used to reading physical 2-D blueprints or to working with small, complex mechanical devices.

Equals:

hopelessly incompetent

Maybe "hopelessly incompetent" is a bit strong, but as I said earlier, it certainly doesn't inspire much confidence in said engineers.

Physical drawings are perennial and as old as time, and if engineers can't read and understand those, we are in trouble. Especially when they even have the actual camera that goes with the drawings.

I have my doubts that the current Pentax engineers have the taste, knowledge, and wisdom to give us any new classic cameras.

But on the other hand, for an electronic SLR, the K-1 digital models are pretty nice looking -- so while a mechanical 35mm SLR has more potential to be classic, if they could do something like a 35mm film version of the K-1, it could be a nice and useful film camera. It would be nice if it could take standard AA alkaline batteries (like the Nikon F5 and F100 and various other SLRs with their add-on grips).

 

[brbo]

You see, I think you have the answer right there to the kind of cameras that a lot of people would like to see made again.

Contax T2s and Hasselblads both sell for about 1000 EUR. If people are prepared to pay for Hasselblads as little as they do for compact cameras, they obviously don't rate them as high as some people would like to think.

I would love to buy a new FM2 for 300 EUR. Nikon and Pentax know that I won't buy it for 1.300 EUR. So, it's just not going to happen.

But Pentax obviously thinks that they can come up with something that enough people will buy. Great. If I personally like it, that will be awesome. If not, there is a sea of still working old cameras out there.

Anyway, calling people that are the only ones that can mass produce cameras today incompetent will probably not help... And if Pentax really reached out to the retired engineers and "17" is what the old geezers came up with, what do you want to call them?

 

[xkaes]

And if the Pentax 17 is any kind of success, those kids will begin to find places like Photrio. I hope we welcome them and their ways that are different to our own rather than being snobbish because they are doing photography "wrong".

I don't think you have to worry about that. You might have missed it, but there have been several threads and lots of discussion about the Kodak H35 over the previous months -- and with lots of highly-praised photos.

 

[Dwight Anderson]

But on the other hand, for an electronic SLR, the K-1 digital models are pretty nice looking -- so while a mechanical 35mm SLR has more potential to be classic, if they could do something like a 35mm film version of the K-1, it could be a nice and useful film camera. It would be nice if it could take standard AA alkaline batteries (like the Nikon F5 and F100 and various other SLRs with their add-on grips).

That would be a Pentax ZX5n, I've opened one of those up to replace the mirror drive gear and the level of difficulty to reproduce that would be 10 times what they're doing with the 17.

 

[xkaes]

If not, there is a sea of still working old cameras out there.

Make that "ocean" -- which is one factor that Pentax has to swim against. Large format lenses are no longer being made, simply because the existing supply is enough to meet demand.

 

[BradS]

Nope. They're just not used to reading physical 2-D blueprints or to working with small, complex mechanical devices. I fully believe that in making the first 3D computer models, they left out a vital component because they misread the old blueprint and thought it was redundant....and that it took the oldtimers to explain why it was needed.

Same reason Sankyo decided against making a super 8 camera in the early 2000s when they still had their blueprints and even a stash of spare parts. same reason none of the former cassette deck manufacturers can currently make a cassette deck despite that knowledge being only 20 or so years ago.....same reason none of the other former film camera manufacturers has suddenly resurrected an old model. Same reason Technics had to completely reverse engineer and redesign the SL1200 turntable to resume production just a few years after stopping. And the entire SL1200 is probably a lot simpler than a ratchet wind for a film camera. Ever taken one apart?

The skills of an engineer in 2024 are vastly different to the skills of an engineer in 1974. And it will also be true that their engineering staff is much smaller than in 1974.

I think it is very easy to fall into the trap of assuming that making a new, intricate mechanism is quite easy because it's all been done before.....if it were so easy, others would have stepped in years ago.

I did not say it is easy but I certainly do not believe for a moment the implication that no mechanical engineer under the age of 70 could possibly understand the inner workings of say, the 1978 Pentax K-1000. I've worked with many engineers, many of them "young" some straight out of university. I have first hand evidence that competent (young and old) engineers DO in fact exist.

It all makes for a nice marketing story but I simply do not buy it...unless, perhaps, the "current engineering staff" at Ricoh/Pentax does not include any mechanical engineers?
No, I think this is just marketing fluff (aka bullshit) meant to create some sort of story...stir up nostalgia...make customers feel special...whatever. This whole "project" reeeks of marketing bullshit.

 

[bfilm]

And if Pentax really reached out to the retired engineers and "17" is what the old geezers came up with, what do you want to call them?

The old engineers did not design the new camera. From the stories Pentax has told, the old engineers just helped the current engineers and designers to understand some concepts.

 

[bfilm]

That would be a Pentax ZX5n, I've opened one of those up to replace the mirror drive gear and the level of difficulty to reproduce that would be 10 times what they're doing with the 17.

The K-1 is quite different from the ZX5n. As far as the level of difficulty, that should not be a problem because they are currently making the K-1. It is not old or lost knowledge and experience.

 

[BradS]

...
Maybe "hopelessly incompetent" is a bit strong, but as I said earlier, it certainly doesn't inspire much confidence in said engineers.

Physical drawings are perennial and as old as time, and if engineers can't read and understand those, we are in trouble. Especially when they even have the actual camera that goes with the drawings.

....

I agree. Anybody who believes that "young" engineers cannot understand a 2-d drawing has not been around any engineers. Today's engineers still do amazing things on the back of a napkin or standing at a white board.

 

[Dwight Anderson]

The K-1 is quite different from the ZX5n. As far as the level of difficulty, that should not be a problem because they are currently making the K-1. It is not old or lost knowledge and experience.

I mentioned the ZX5n because it has the most features comparable to a K-1. Developing a film camera from a K-1 would only require a new body, new electronics, and a motorized film transport. Easy peasy.

 

[bfilm]

I mentioned the ZX5n because it has the most features comparable to a K-1. Developing a film camera from a K-1 would only require a new body, new electronics, and a motorized film transport. Easy peasy.

I would think that the viewfinder and pentaprism, the mirror assembly, and the shutter unit would be among the most complex tasks, and they already have this done.

Pentax have said that it would have been much easier to create a motorized film transport than the hand-wound film transport they have developed for the new film camera.

I think a new film SLR should be fairly easy for Pentax to make. A fully mechanical film SLR might be more difficult, which is probably why it is the furthest away in their potential plan. But an electronic film SLR wouldn't be too difficult for them. My guess is that they have questions about how many people would be willing to purchase it at the price it would probably have to be.

 

[bfilm]

This whole "project" reeeks of marketing bullshit.

My concern is that it is not just marketing, but that what they are putting forth in the marketing has been a genuine factor in the design of the new camera.

As I have mentioned many times, I think the idea of aligning this camera with smartphones is a big mistake and completely stupid. People who choose to use film want a unique analog experience. The classic cameras are of particular interest to many people.

The whole idea of a camera geared toward vertical format pictures because that is what smartphone people are used to makes no sense at all. With a smartphone, you record (as much as computational imaging can be called recording) a scene and view the image on the same device. With a film camera, the camera has absolutely nothing to do with how you view the picture later on. The film scans they have in mind are totally independent of the camera and the scan files will be used and viewed however people want. It makes no sense to equate the smartphone process with how you use a film camera.

And while I understand that they think the compact camera will be a good introduction for new film users, I still believe the SLR is a better introduction and more fitting for a company whose guiding principle is "Pentax believes in the future of SLR photography."