Me too. And I already have the Robot Royal 24 with a couple of lenses that I paid about the same money for (in addition to Minolta Rapid 24 that I basically got for shipping costs).
At the same time, I understand that square would be a nightmare for most people that rely on minilabs to get their film developed and scaned.
Unless its an Olympus stylus zoom, somehow those things sell for 50-100 dollars even with light leaks...but a compact dual lens type zoom I'd do, but a 38-140, no thanks.
Maybe. But they've never done it before (in a compact camera size form) and neither has any other manufacturer, afaik. Obviously, not a trivial task. Can Pentax afford R&D to make such a lens that will sell in quantities several magnitudes less than in the past?
well, it seems the Pentax 17 has achieved enough pre-orders to take Pentax by surprise. That is certainly good news.
Some minilabs already request an upcharge for half-frame anyway.
Pentax is capable of producing an extremely high quality constant f/2.8 28-50mm
And it's not like the Samurai was a great success. There must have been reasons for that.
Yes I agree Most of these users are "portrait" orientated ie it is social photos often groups in close proximity to the taker where wide angle is ideal. Few I imagine will buy this camera for either landscapes or action shotsRemember the 17 is aimed at people who will have used a wide angle phone lens 90% of the time. Many phones now have some sort of telephoto lens at 2x or 3x but few (one I can think of) have optical zoom. For the most part, this Pentax 17 offers what the indended audience want.
Yes I agree Most of these users are "portrait" orientated ie it is social photos often groups in close proximity to the taker where wide angle is ideal. Few I imagine will buy this camera for either landscapes or action shots
there are many, many very creative young people out there
Cafe Lemhitz shots were done in the ´60, way before the Contax T2 camera was released.
I'll agree with that -- but most of the ones I know are trying to figure out how to pay their rent, in part because of the smart phone bills.
The book was published in 1978. If not a Contax, I'd like to know which camera that he used.
Exactly! So it's a good idea for them to buy a camera, unwrap it, use it. Great to have a warranty too. Thus avoiding expensive mistakes. No hidden surprises, no CLA, no repairs. No mould. No rusty bits.
Buy it. Read the manual. Enjoy it. The way photography should always be.
500$ is the price of an entry level Android phone after all. 500$ is the price of a few Playstation games. A Ryanair flight from Sweden to Spain? 200 euro. Make it 400 return.
Hobbies are pleasant, but there's a cost. And time saved on waiting for CLAs is also money
I really hope that Pentax is able to extract $500 from lots of people (young or old) who already have a "camera" in their pocket. Stranger things have happened. I still remember Pet Rocks. They sold like hot-cakes -- mostly to people who couldn't afford to put gas in their tanks!
View attachment 372528
I DON'T hope that many of them discover that they could have gotten a like-new Maxxum 5 (or similar) "do-absolutely-anything", small, light-weight, SLR with TWO zoom lenses for under $25 -- and used the change to pay for film & processing. I know, I know. the people interested in the Pentax 17 are not interested in a "system" camera, just something small & portable & using "this strange stuff called film". Maybe some will discover that two cameras are better than one. Which will they leave at home? The cellphone or the Pentax?
I really hope that Pentax is able to extract $500 from lots of people (young or old) who already have a "camera" in their pocket. Stranger things have happened. I still remember Pet Rocks. They sold like hot-cakes -- mostly to people who couldn't afford to put gas in their tanks!
View attachment 372528
I DON'T hope that many of them discover that they could have gotten a like-new Maxxum 5 (or similar) "do-absolutely-anything", small, light-weight, SLR with TWO zoom lenses for under $25 -- and used the change to pay for film & processing. I know, I know. the people interested in the Pentax 17 are not interested in a "system" camera, just something small & portable & using "this strange stuff called film". Maybe some will discover that two cameras are better than one. Which will they leave at home? The cellphone or the Pentax?
Maybe getting a 17 will lead them to get other cameras in the future or maybe ask someone like Pentax to make something better after the 17.
I dont know why this new Pentax bothers you so much.
Buy it. Read the manual. Enjoy it. The way photography should always be.
Let us hope some camera makers do start making fine cameras again. What we need are some good photographic "instruments" or "tools" available new again. The old ones are serving us well, but they will need to be replenished eventually. Every camera available new today, except the Leica rangefinder film cameras, encourage the young generations to view film as a joke instead of the true way to do photography.
Erwin Puts:
"Most people assume that digital photography (a huge misnomer) is simply photography by other means than the use of film and chemicals. ... This attitude is not only widespread it is the conventional wisdom worldwide. Being universally accepted does not make it true."
"The essence of film-based photography is not only the fact that the mechanism of capturing an image and fixing it in a silver halide grain structure creates a final picture that can hardly be altered. The fundamental issue here is the fact that the laws of physics create the image, in particular by the characteristics of light rays and the interaction between photons and silver halide grains. Photography is writing with light, and fixing the shadows."
"Photography is not only intimately linked to the use of film, but in fact depends for its very existence on film."
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?