except the 17 uses easy components and solutions, it's a box with almost no moving parts and (i suppose) a simple electronic logic.
a fully fledged slr, instead, needs decent processors and a nice set of functions. nobody would pay 3-zeroes kind of money for an electronic slr without various metering modes, a more than decent AF, and all the bells and whistles.
I don't think the argument that some people give that the youth of today need something totally different than past cameras is valid. Once again, the good cameras have perennial appeal. Plenty of today's youth have no problem learning traditional cameras.
haven't read this.
today's youths can learn everything they want. if i learned how to use a camera, everybody can.
fact is that probably the big numbers are (and always has been) in the casual shooters, people that just wants a picture but couldn't care less how it's made.
just like every sector: there's the Yaris GR, but the money is made with standard Yaris. Or bikes, or...
leica has a brand and they are the only one that can sell a camera at that price.Well, I think that is debatable. Sometimes paying more for less (features) is exactly what people want. This is a big part of the success of the Leica rangefinder film cameras.
But even so, I don't think it would have to cost any more than the K-1 to achieve all of those features in a 35mm film SLR from Pentax, and could even probably be a little bit less expensive.
leica has a brand and they are the only one that can sell a camera at that price.
a 1000-1500 slr needs way more development than an easy point and shoot (it's not a k-1, it's an entirely new camera apart from some parts) and has a higher price. Everybody is complaining because they'd want this or that feature in the 17, just imagine at 3x the price all these people going like "i'd only use a mechanical slr" "my eos-1 has a faster AF" "wait, no custom functions?" "only two timer modes???".
the slr is, however, pentax' goal for this project. we'll see.
But first I think they're going to put out a high end AF compact.
And I was just becoming half-frame curious for diptych slide reasons
If I have a complaint about the Pentax 17 it is that at £400 I think I'd have gone halvesies with a partner....and who knows....maybe it'll be a success and they'll drop the price.
On another video I have seen today a couple of the comments were to the effect that it was almost £500 at Analogue Wonderland ( £499.99) and ín a store in Germany it was about 550 euros, Of course these sources might be wrong. Can I ask where is it on sale at £400
Even though it's not exactly what I wanted it seems better than what I expected.
I still think that a Contax T2/T3 knockoff would sell like crazy, but understand that Pentax still has some way to go before they are able to produce a camera like that. 17 is cool though. Low tech and the "no designer was involved" approach might actually appeal to users they are aiming for. I have a lot of < 50 EUR HF cameras that do more than 17 so I'm almost certain I'll be able to resist the temptation, but I'm not saying "never" to Pentax 17...
Thanks
pentaxuser
OK, so the Pentax 17 is $500. The Kodak H35 is $50. What do I get for $450? I can buy a Kodak H35, Olympus Pen D3, a Konica AA-35, and a Yashica Samurai for that that price -- and have enough left over for film!
OK, so the Pentax 17 is $500. The Kodak H35 is $50. What do I get for $450? I can buy a Kodak H35, Olympus Pen D3, a Konica AA-35, and a Yashica Samurai for that that price -- and have enough left over for film!
leica has a brand and they are the only one that can sell a camera at that price.
OK, so the Pentax 17 is $500. The Kodak H35 is $50. What do I get for $450? ....
the $450 is for a camera that won't break after 5 rolls.
OK, so the Pentax 17 is $500. The Kodak H35 is $50. What do I get for $450?
I was kinda thinking the same. The Kodak H35 is currently available on Amazon for $40 , the Ilford Sprite is available for $25...yeah, these are not really comparable to the Pentax 17 but, maybe they are. I mean, they all just fun toy cameras for film-curious folks who grew up with a smart phone...no? I wonder how many "kids" in Pentax's target market will follow the same line of thought and come to the conclusion that, the $500 price for a "fun toy camera" is absurd...
Do you take pictures with your cameras? Do you own plastic lenses as well as multicoated glass lenses? If so, try taking a picture of the same subject with both types of lenses. See if you appreciate the differences in your scans or prints.
You'd be surprised what Optical Grade Acrylic Lenses can produce. But beyond that argument, I can get a full-frame Minolta Hi-Matic G2 with a 38mm f2.8 four-element glass lens for $10 in mint condition. The camera is smaller and lighter and lacks a flash -- but has auto-exposure and manual f-stop control.
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?