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.
I guess we'll find out soon.
And apparently pretty soon -- but when they will actually be available is another matter.
They also own a lot of Hasselblads and Nikon's
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.
... 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.
They're just not used to reading physical 2-D blueprints or to working with small, complex mechanical devices.
hopelessly incompetent
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.
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".
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).
If not, there is a sea of still working old cameras out there.
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.
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?
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.
...
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.
....
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.
This whole "project" reeeks of marketing bullshit.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?