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

[bfilm]

I expect the need for consultation with retired engineers relates to understanding of how the manufacturing challenges were solved in the past.
If plans were initially designed with those legacy manufacturing techniques and tools and equipment and skilled technicians in mind, then there may very well be a need to have the retired engineers explain those contextual assumptions to the newer engineers.
I expect that there may have been a lot of "why did they do this this way?" conversations.
The older plans may also have referenced sub-assemblies that were then available from third parties, but are no longer made.
Sort of like modern automotive engineers having to have carburetors and manual chokes explained for them .

The story from Pentax is that the current engineers studied the drawings of a manual film winding mechanism and couldn't understand what certain parts were for, thought them unnecessary, and planned to remove them. The old engineers laughed at them and explained that those were among the most essential parts. And that once everything was explained to them, the current engineers then understood.

Of course, I am sure there were additional discussions and lessons that we have not heard about from Pentax.

 

[ant!]

I am wondering if the people complaining about the format ever used a half-frame? I really like how my Canon Demi EE17 works, and with modern film, without crazy enlarged, I find the results really nice. Sure, you see grain, but that depends heavily on the film choice. Also, many 645 are in "phone orientation". And while I own and use a bunch of 35mm cameras of different age/size/form, I actually prefer the 645 format, not as long as 35mm. And I think half frame has actually the same ratio as 645 with 18x24mm, isn't it?

My only problem with half frame: It takes way too long for me to finish a film, and I only use 24exp films in it...

 

[xkaes]

I am wondering if the people complaining about the format ever used a half-frame?

Plenty of full-frame 35mm shooters down-play half-frame as inferior -- but the magnification is only a factor of 2X, and with the right film, BIG prints are high quality.

The same is true for some medium format users who look down on 35mm users -- and large format users...... You get the idea.

There's no perfect format, but lots of people get great results out of Minox cameras:

http://www.subclub.org/gallery/gallery.htm

 

[bfilm]

Also, many 645 are in "phone orientation".

Are they? All of the dedicated 645 cameras that I know from Pentax, Contax, Hasselblad, and Mamiya are horizontal orientation.

Maybe the 6x4.5cm backs for 6x6cm, 6x7cm, or 6x9cm cameras are in vertical orientation.

 

[bfilm]

I am sure many people will enjoy the half-frame camera. And that is fine.

It just doesn't seem like the right choice for the return to film cameras by Pentax, who are most known for their 35mm and medium format SLR cameras.

I just hope it doesn't end up being their only new film camera and that they will continue to cameras more appropriate to the Pentax heritage.

I enjoy 35mm and medium format, but I think 35mm is perhaps the most balanced and appealing format for combination of aesthetics, quality, and cost of use.

 

[ant!]

Are they? All of the dedicated 645 cameras that I know from Pentax, Contax, Hasselblad, and Mamiya are horizontal orientation.

Maybe the 6x4.5cm backs for 6x6cm, 6x7cm, or 6x9cm cameras are in vertical orientation.

Generally, the old 645 folders (Ikonta, Nettar and all what cames after, e.g. Konica Pearl) are vertical. Fuji 645 as far as I know, that's 80s-90s. Buy yes, the SLR systems are horizontal.

 

[xkaes]

It just doesn't seem like the right choice for the return to film cameras by Pentax, who are most known for their 35mm and medium format SLR cameras.

I've always thought it interesting that Pentax never got into any of the "alternative-to-35mm" formats, such as half-frame, APS, Disc, 110, 16mm, etc. Nearly everybody else did (including their current owner, Ricoh) -- of course some were big, costly flops! But NOW, they see an opening. Maybe it's Ricoh that's leading the way -- which has a rich history in half-frame:

http://www.subclub.org/shop/ricoh.htm

 

[bfilm]

I've always thought it interesting that Pentax never got into any of the "alternative-to-35mm" formats, such as half-frame, APS, Disc, 110, 16mm, etc. Nearly everybody else did (including their current owner, Ricoh) -- of course some were big, costly flops! But NOW, they see an opening. Maybe it's Ricoh that's leading the way -- which has a rich history in half-frame:

I think Pentax should stick with this.

 

[xkaes]

It took Kodak over a hundred years to finally market a half-frame 35mm camera. Why should Pentax be any different???

 

[bfilm]

It took Kodak over a hundred years to finally market a half-frame 35mm camera. Why should Pentax be any different???

Because

 

[bfilm]

One aspect of hope is that Pentax have said that they designed the new manual winding mechanism based upon an SLR camera. Assuming the recently unofficially revealed image of the half-frame compact camera is authentic, I suspect this is one reason for what some consider the "large" size of the camera. They have probably put gearing on the manual winding mechanism appropriate for the half-frame format, but the overall mechanism itself is sized for a 35mm SLR. Hopefully, they are able to proceed in using it in a new 35mm film SLR camera with its original gearing.

 

[armadsen]

Everything I know about Japanese business culture could probably be printed on a postage stamp but with that limited understanding, I suspect that the message Ricoh/Pentax are trying to make has little to do with the skills of the current engineering staff. When they say, "...our current staff couldn't understand so, we invited some retired/older engineers in to collaborate with our current staff", etc... I suspect they are trying to make a statement regarding honoring the past, honoring the wise men who came before us, approaching this with humility, not being so arrogant as to start from scratch, etc...

Honor and a connection to the past ... It may be as simple as that.

Mine might fit on index card. I lived in Japan and speak passable Japanese, but never worked there. Anyway, I think you’re exactly right. If you look at the story of the Nikon S3 2000 and SP 2005, you hear something very similar. Old engineers brought out of retirement, parts redesigned, new technicians trained, etc. I think they actually did that stuff, but it also makes for a great story tying the new product to a historic tradition.

I’m an (electrical) engineer myself, and have designed products for (smallish) mass production. Completely outside of design and engineering, manufacturing is a major undertaking. Going from good, solid, working prototype to a cost effective, high yield, mass produced device is much harder than most people who haven’t done it would think, and I imagine that’s doubly true for things with mechanical complexity due to the large number of precise custom parts. I’m comparatively lucky because the parts I design with are off the shelf electronic components for the most part.

 

[brbo]

Because

Consider what sticking to that strategy got Pentax into. Pentax was sold to Ricoh for (slight exaggeration there) what Leica now charges for their new M6.

I'm glad that they are finally thinking at least a little bit differently (K-3 Monochrome, 17).

They should've taken this even further, make a 24 camera (24x24) which very few labs will want to scan and just push their K-3 Monochrome (which is about as perfect for scanning as it gets (the only thing they still need to do is remove IR filter)) and complimentary scanning kit (hw&sw) as a perfect home solution for film scanning. I already own several 24x24 cameras and a number of very good scanners, but I would still be tempted. Ok, I'd be about 3.000 EUR short, but still VERY tempted...

 

[Agulliver]

Sort of like modern automotive engineers having to have carburetors and manual chokes explained for them .

Bang on. There are excellent auto engineers of 20+ years experience who don't know how carburetors, distributors and manual chokes work.....because they've never worked with them. Just like there are fantastic electronic engineers who don't know valves (tubes) or even discrete transistors. When I studied electronics we had the resistor colour code drummed into us from age 14. These days schools don't even teach it. I imagine colleges/unis do but actually I am unsure.

There's likely nothing wrong with the quality of engineers at Pentax/Ricoh. But they won't be used to working with 2D physical blueprints or complex, tiny mechanical machines. In the same way not a single one of the old cassette deck manufacturers can make one now. In the same way Sankyo abandoned making a new super 8 camera in the early 00's despite having a stash of spare parts and the blueprints for their 60s and 70s models. The knowledge has been lost, and even where blueprints exist and a physical example exists to be reverse engineered....it's too complex to bother with. There are lots of things humans could do in the past that we cannot feasibly do now.....Egyptian pyramids, Rapa Nue Moai, Stonehenge. We think we've finally figured out how the Moai were transported after hundreds of years thinking about it.

Unused engineering knowledge that has been superseded becomes lost very quickly.

 

[foc]

Unused engineering knowledge that has been superseded becomes lost very quickly.

Not to go off track too much, but I often fear this concerning film emulsion manufacturing, coating, and colour lab equipment and scanning.

Back on track, I wish Pentax all the best with a new camera. Who would have thought, 5-10 years ago, we could say that.

 

[bfilm]

Not to go off track too much, but I often fear this concerning film emulsion manufacturing, coating, and colour lab equipment and scanning.

Yes, the photomultiplier tube drum scanners come to mind. There is still nothing better in quality and character than this oldest of scanning technologies. The high quality lenses, variation on a vacuum tube (photomultiplier tubes), and incandescent lamps create the most beautiful and film-like of all scans.

 

[bfilm]

Consider what sticking to that strategy got Pentax into. Pentax was sold to Ricoh for (slight exaggeration there) what Leica now charges for their new M6.

Pentax have even further strengthened their commitment to SLR cameras since that time. And I think it is the right plan for them.

They can explore other camera types, like they are doing with this first one or two new compact film cameras, but I think the greater focus on SLR cameras is good. Pentax is right in thinking the SLR is a great way to take photographs.

While I have no interest in digital cameras, I can envision Pentax doing something similar to what Leica has done. Leica has a range of film and digital options in the M rangefinder. Pentax could have a range of film and digital options in the SLR. Pentax have already started down this potential route, with the new film camera project and their monochrome digital SLR model.

It seems very foolish to me if Canon and Nikon completely abandon the SLR -- the optical viewfinder has too many advantages -- but they are certainly lessening their current focus on them. This gives Pentax potential here, as there will always be people who prefer the SLR. And again, gives Pentax an opportunity, like Leica is the rangefinder company, Pentax could be the SLR company.

 

[ant!]

like Leica is the rangefinder company, Pentax could be the SLR company.

Leica has also non-rangefinders, e.g. a few compacts. So a half-frame or 35mm compact would not mean Pentax/Ricoh is not an SLR-centered company...

 

[bfilm]

Leica has also non-rangefinders, e.g. a few compacts. So a half-frame or 35mm compact would not mean Pentax/Ricoh is not an SLR-centered company...

Right, I also mentioned that. And was just emphasizing the heritage and what they are most known for being rangefinder cameras for Leica and SLR cameras for Pentax. And that those are still viable and good paths.

 

[4season]

I don't think that Leica's business model would be a good fit for Pentax, unless Pentax can thrive on sales of ~5000 film cameras per year.

Am guessing that the new Mint / Rollei 35 will cost more $$ than I wish to pay, but Pentax 17 might seriously tempt me. Looks like we'll get the full scoop on the "17" on the 18th of this month.

 

[bfilm]

I don't think that Leica's business model would be a good fit for Pentax, unless Pentax can thrive on sales of ~5000 film cameras per year.

Well, the point wasn't about a direct comparison on price and quantity.

I don't think the Pentax film cameras will cost USD 5,700.

 

[bfilm]

There's likely nothing wrong with the quality of engineers at Pentax/Ricoh. But they won't be used to working with 2D physical blueprints or complex, tiny mechanical machines. In the same way not a single one of the old cassette deck manufacturers can make one now. In the same way Sankyo abandoned making a new super 8 camera in the early 00's despite having a stash of spare parts and the blueprints for their 60s and 70s models. The knowledge has been lost, and even where blueprints exist and a physical example exists to be reverse engineered....it's too complex to bother with. There are lots of things humans could do in the past that we cannot feasibly do now.....Egyptian pyramids, Rapa Nue Moai, Stonehenge. We think we've finally figured out how the Moai were transported after hundreds of years thinking about it.

Unused engineering knowledge that has been superseded becomes lost very quickly.

But there is a big difference between a mystery 4,000 years ago and something 40 years ago with drawings.

I don't understand the comparison with cassette decks -- these are still made. Teac manufacture cassette decks, probably as nice as they think necessary today. But I don't doubt that they could make a higher-grade model if they wanted -- they do, after all, also manufacture USD 38,000 CD players with drives that look like this. I am sure other of the old makers could make cassette decks, if there was an interest.

I imagine the abandonment of a new super 8 camera was more that it was going to be more expensive than they wanted rather than that they couldn't do it, but I don't have direct knowledge of the specific example you mention.

I think cost is the issue a lot of the time. Surely capabilities could be brought back or rediscovered if people thought it worthwhile. I think there is just a different mentality today, not usually for the better, about what products are valued and what people expect.

I saw a good quote once from someone about photomultiplier tube drum scanners: "Drum scanning is one of those old gems built in the days where engineers where given free reign to solve problems to the best of their abilities - that's why it's still unbeatable (quality wise) today." And it is true. The last drum scanners are from an era in publishing that has not been surpassed and represented a high point (for books and magazines that include photography) -- when publications were photography with transparency film, scanning with PMT drum scanners, and printing with offset lithography or gravure. People don't value that character and quality in the same way anymore.

 

[bfilm]

Mechanical watchmaking is one of the rare examples of rebirth in a complex pursuit that is a unique combination of art, craft, and engineering. Even fully handmade mechanical watches. Many of these are very expensive, but people want them.

Wouldn't it be nice if there could be a rebirth in making mechanical cameras and lenses, to add some other options along with the Leica rangefinder 35mm film cameras.

 

[AnselMortensen]

When this camera comes out, there should be a ticker-tape parade!

 

[MattKing]

When this camera comes out, there should be a ticker-tape parade!

If there is, you will have to bring out a whole bunch of seniors to explain what ticker-tape is .......
They might very well be retired engineers!