Official Pentax store in EU says "In stock". I could find at least two other online stores in EU with stock. On official Ricoh US site you can "Buy now", although that might not necessarily mean that it is in stock?
Pentax: Two new compact film cameras planned - Pentax 17 announced June 2024
-
A
- Thread starter Henning Serger
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Nikon s2 with 50mm 1.4
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
Sold Fujifilm 4x5 Fujichrome Veliva 100 and Fujifilm 4x5 Fujichrome 64T. EXPIRED
- Started by Renato Tonelli
-
Sold Fujifilm Neopan 100 Acros 120 and 4x5
- Started by Renato Tonelli
-
For Sale Nikkor 5cm f2 ltm
- Started by Gram Nylén
Forum statistics
Official Pentax store in EU says "In stock". I could find at least two other online stores in EU with stock. On official Ricoh US site you can "Buy now", although that might not necessarily mean that it is in stock?
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,743
- Format
- 35mm
People seem to be getting emails that it's on back order.
I've been seeing lots of photos taken with the 17's that were given to "influencers" and selected dealers before the launch, and now a few post-launch photos on Insta and Facebook. And it does seem that once the user gets to know the camera, it is capable of fine photographs. Analogue Wonderland, who I am not really fans of, posted a lovely set yesterday demonstrating the Bokeh mode used on close ups. Try that with a Kodak H35.
I'm still not convinced enough to put down my £500 or go halvsies with another human....but it does look like it's a moderately serious camera. I keenly await the experiences of Photrio members when they get their hands on it.
I'm still not convinced enough to put down my £500 or go halvsies with another human....but it does look like it's a moderately serious camera. I keenly await the experiences of Photrio members when they get their hands on it.
Do the film strips fit existing Epson V850 and V600 scanner film holders? Wil the Epsonscan program select each photo automatically or do you have to "draw" the half-frame format on each shot?
MSC -- perhaps the best description I seen so far.
I've never had any problems with scanning half-frame negatives in a full-frame scan. I've had the same problems I always have with scanners, but the half-frame images just come out as two images that need to be cropped. The few mini-labs I've used did the same thing.
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,743
- Format
- 35mm
I scan with a DSLR and it can get pretty good resolution for a half frame. There's a long thread on this site that deep dives into half-frame. I've posted many photos there.
That's what I do with my old Minolta scanner: scan as 35mm "full frame", crop or leave as diptych, depending on the images and how I feel.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2015
- Messages
- 1,983
- Format
- Plastic Cameras
Yes, no and yes.
Pentax is the weirdo uncle
The K3-iii came with a printed manual
An Epson flatbed resolves around 6 megapixels from a full 35mm frame, being generous. Half-frame is one spot where using a DSLR to scan and a high-resolving film could improve your images exponentially. With an Epson, you'll get enough detail to print postcard sized images. Of course, the half-frame camera needs to have a good-enough lens or you start running into a limit there as well: still haven't seen a decent test of this.
I already throw away the majority of the pixels in any scan to post anything here, or on other forums, no matter what I use to scan. I really wouldn't worry much about scans if I were going to buy this camera. I am hoping someone will actually throw a negative from this camera on an enlarger to see what it can do.
I can think of two comments.
1) Several folks seem to think that 126 was NOT a blow out sucess, it most certainly was, having a decade run and only started to fade when the even more convenient 110 format came out. even then film for 126 was still popular for the next 5 years at least. Yes 126 was NOT intended for the same market as Minolta,Pentax and Nikon were aiming for. ALthough it might have led the way for units like the Canon AE-1 and The Canon AE-1 PROGRAM. Like the Pentax 17, cameras like the AE-1 Program dothe complicated part for the user, and allow the user to concentrate on what part of the world they see, that they would like ot Capture.
I will Grant that 110 was NOT as good as 126, (although the curved film plane worked with the the curvature of the image produced by a simple lens to create images that were sharper than folks might think. ) BUT it was still popular until the disc came out.
the DISASTER in my book was the Kodak DISC, the only part that it left as a legacy is the form factor which is simaalr to many compact Digital Cameras. the one on the desk near me at the moment is a Olympus VG-160 https://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/compacts/oly_vg160 I also have a Nikon in about the same fom factor. the lenes do extend on the little digitals where they did not on the Kodak DISC.
2) the other thing is I have several Minolta X series cameras. X300, X370, X500, X570 and X-700. (the models with 70 in the name were for the north American market) Those cameras can be used with a Minolta Auto winder. up to 3.5 frames a second. the winder can be set for continuous shooting. If you have your calculator handy that means that you can drive a roll of film through the Camera in under 11 seconds. (assuming the day is bright enough that the winder does not have to wait for the shutter.) the film drive in all those uses NYLON gears. Click Click Click Click.
1) Several folks seem to think that 126 was NOT a blow out sucess, it most certainly was, having a decade run and only started to fade when the even more convenient 110 format came out. even then film for 126 was still popular for the next 5 years at least. Yes 126 was NOT intended for the same market as Minolta,Pentax and Nikon were aiming for. ALthough it might have led the way for units like the Canon AE-1 and The Canon AE-1 PROGRAM. Like the Pentax 17, cameras like the AE-1 Program dothe complicated part for the user, and allow the user to concentrate on what part of the world they see, that they would like ot Capture.
I will Grant that 110 was NOT as good as 126, (although the curved film plane worked with the the curvature of the image produced by a simple lens to create images that were sharper than folks might think. ) BUT it was still popular until the disc came out.
the DISASTER in my book was the Kodak DISC, the only part that it left as a legacy is the form factor which is simaalr to many compact Digital Cameras. the one on the desk near me at the moment is a Olympus VG-160 https://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/compacts/oly_vg160 I also have a Nikon in about the same fom factor. the lenes do extend on the little digitals where they did not on the Kodak DISC.
2) the other thing is I have several Minolta X series cameras. X300, X370, X500, X570 and X-700. (the models with 70 in the name were for the north American market) Those cameras can be used with a Minolta Auto winder. up to 3.5 frames a second. the winder can be set for continuous shooting. If you have your calculator handy that means that you can drive a roll of film through the Camera in under 11 seconds. (assuming the day is bright enough that the winder does not have to wait for the shutter.) the film drive in all those uses NYLON gears. Click Click Click Click.
And yes, Minolta did make Point and shoot 126 Cameras that resembled their 135 cameras, (and they Made a line of RAPID fomat units also.)
Both Minolta and Pentax even made 110 SLR cameras.
Both Minolta and Pentax even made 110 SLR cameras.
Excellent summary. Thanks for trying to set the record straight. Why is that even needed here on Photrio?
MattKing
Moderator
There are a lot of people here on Photrio who have a lot of knowledge about how the still photography film world evolved over the years.
But not everyone here has that knowledge. In fact, there are likely a fair number of people who were around and using film back then who really had no great understanding of the particulars of that evolution.
I know people who never used anything except 35mm slide film. And I know a few who never used anything other than 126 print film - and not very much of that.
Some people never went into a store to buy anything - it was mail order for everything.
There is a whole variety of past experiences out there, and not everyone shares the same common understanding.
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,743
- Format
- 35mm
Disposable camera generation.
My mother had an SLR, bridge cameras and decent point and shoots. My entire exposure to taking photos back in the pre digital days was 35mm disposables or maybe cheap point and shoots. I had a 110 camera that camera with a radio in the shape of 110 film.
MattKing
Moderator
Thank you for providing an appropriate example.
But even the enthusiasts back in the day - the ones that used higher end 35mm cameras - sometimes had no real exposure to the rest of the marketplace.
There were lots of people whose only photography was on 35mm Kodachrome.
Taking myself as an example, I learned at a very young age in the 1970s on a 1930s 6x6 fully manual folder. I went on to the Minolta 110 SLR (Mk1 space ship) and thence to 35mm SLRs by the age of nine. For a long time I was quite contemptuous of 126 and the term "Instamatic", of the pocket 110 cameras, of box cameras, of anything that was fully auto and especially of auto focus. I couldn't really fathom why people found any of the manual controls difficult or why they needed cartridge loading film. But then I was also that kid who could thread the 16mm projector at school, who could even program the video timer.
But I later came to realise a few things. Firstly, I am an outlier....learning so early helped things sink in fast but also I was that annoying gifted polymath kid. It's just that nobody actually told me until after I'd burned out in early adulthood. But looking back, yes I was the outlier. Nobody else was taking a Zeiss-Ikon 6x6 to school aged 6 and being asked to shoot the class portrait alongside the professional photographer, and certainly nobody else was discussing focal lengths with him.
Secondly, as @MattKing says above, there were myriad experiences with photography. Mine was not typical and it took me until adulthood to realise that. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with the way the majority did it....simple P&S cameras that were easy to use, fitted in a pocket or bag, loaded with a cartridge or later had some sort of electronically assisted loading. I was incredibly snobbish about photography until my 30s if I am honest. Which allowed me to ease up and discover the simple fun of shooting with a box camera or a P&S 35mm.
Point being that we here are are mostly not typical. Most people experienced photography with mass produced cameras who's number 1 selling point was ease of use. Hence the undeniable popularity of 126 until 110 came out, and of 110 until manufacturers started making cameras that could help with loading 35mm film. Really Disc didn't kill 110 as a popular format, it was the advent of mass produced electronic 35mm cameras that had assisted loading and motorised rewind.
Many people will have bought cameras from ordinary department stores or places like Argos in the UK, which are not photography specialists. A look through past Argos catalogues gives an idea of what was popular down the years. Others will have had a trusted local camera shop where they sought the advice of the staff...some of whom now populate these forums and can tell you how many Instamatics they sold because Joe Public was having to bring his 35mm camera in to be unloaded. Why did labs have stickers ready to put on prints advising people to hold the camera steady, to affix to blurred photos? Because it was a common mistake.
Now the Pentax 17 finds itself in a different world, aimed at a group of people who did not have any of this collective experience. Because the thing the vast majority of us here have in common is that we were exposed to relatives and neighbours using cameras from the earliest days of our childhoods. We had someone who, at some point, lent us a camera to take a few shots. And that's how the bug got us. The under 25's who the Pentax 17 is mostly aimed at have had a wholly different experience. They live in a world of phone photography, where even their parents using a compact digital camera might be a distant memory. They are likely to have never held a camera themselves except for a phone. Heck, when was the last time a reasonably respectable phone that a child or teen might want *didn't* have a camera? I think it's been some 19 years since I had a phone without a camera.
It still remains to be seen how long the 17 can keep up the healthy sales. But the launch has certainly created waves. Aimed, as it is, for people who had a completely different experience with photography to us....it might not be at all what we would design or buy. But it fulfils many of the desires of the younger people who want to try film. And some of them are going to move on to more sophisticated machines....much like many of us might have started with a simple box camera, Instamatic or basic P&S....and progressed to an SLR with all the bells & whistles.
But I later came to realise a few things. Firstly, I am an outlier....learning so early helped things sink in fast but also I was that annoying gifted polymath kid. It's just that nobody actually told me until after I'd burned out in early adulthood. But looking back, yes I was the outlier. Nobody else was taking a Zeiss-Ikon 6x6 to school aged 6 and being asked to shoot the class portrait alongside the professional photographer, and certainly nobody else was discussing focal lengths with him.
Secondly, as @MattKing says above, there were myriad experiences with photography. Mine was not typical and it took me until adulthood to realise that. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with the way the majority did it....simple P&S cameras that were easy to use, fitted in a pocket or bag, loaded with a cartridge or later had some sort of electronically assisted loading. I was incredibly snobbish about photography until my 30s if I am honest. Which allowed me to ease up and discover the simple fun of shooting with a box camera or a P&S 35mm.
Point being that we here are are mostly not typical. Most people experienced photography with mass produced cameras who's number 1 selling point was ease of use. Hence the undeniable popularity of 126 until 110 came out, and of 110 until manufacturers started making cameras that could help with loading 35mm film. Really Disc didn't kill 110 as a popular format, it was the advent of mass produced electronic 35mm cameras that had assisted loading and motorised rewind.
Many people will have bought cameras from ordinary department stores or places like Argos in the UK, which are not photography specialists. A look through past Argos catalogues gives an idea of what was popular down the years. Others will have had a trusted local camera shop where they sought the advice of the staff...some of whom now populate these forums and can tell you how many Instamatics they sold because Joe Public was having to bring his 35mm camera in to be unloaded. Why did labs have stickers ready to put on prints advising people to hold the camera steady, to affix to blurred photos? Because it was a common mistake.
Now the Pentax 17 finds itself in a different world, aimed at a group of people who did not have any of this collective experience. Because the thing the vast majority of us here have in common is that we were exposed to relatives and neighbours using cameras from the earliest days of our childhoods. We had someone who, at some point, lent us a camera to take a few shots. And that's how the bug got us. The under 25's who the Pentax 17 is mostly aimed at have had a wholly different experience. They live in a world of phone photography, where even their parents using a compact digital camera might be a distant memory. They are likely to have never held a camera themselves except for a phone. Heck, when was the last time a reasonably respectable phone that a child or teen might want *didn't* have a camera? I think it's been some 19 years since I had a phone without a camera.
It still remains to be seen how long the 17 can keep up the healthy sales. But the launch has certainly created waves. Aimed, as it is, for people who had a completely different experience with photography to us....it might not be at all what we would design or buy. But it fulfils many of the desires of the younger people who want to try film. And some of them are going to move on to more sophisticated machines....much like many of us might have started with a simple box camera, Instamatic or basic P&S....and progressed to an SLR with all the bells & whistles.
Cool! This Pentax 17 is made in Vietnam.
The modern web has given us too much information we really don't need. Better off just going out there and shooting.
Yep, that's where Pentax/Ricoh manufacturing has been done for a while now. The factory seems to make very good quality digital cameras and every indication is that the 17 is well made too.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |