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

[skorpiius]

At first I thought it looked pretty 'clunky' and I still do I suppose, but then I realized what it looks like is a compact simple camera made out of the parts of a mid 1980s SLR. That's probably exactly what it is, designing as many parts of possible so that they can be reused on future more advanced cameras up to an SLR.

 

[Cholentpot]

You obviously haven't used the old half-frames that I've used. My Pen D3 works like new, so do my Samurai Z (I have three). Never had a problem with Ricoh AutoHalfs, Agat 18s. I could go on all day. Besides, if one of them does give up the ghost, they are easy and inexpensive to replace.

My Pen F needed to be serviced, EE-3 works great but I have to keep the sensor covered when not shooting otherwise I'll kill it. The Mercury I was able to service myself, easy peasy. The other ones I have come and go as they please.

Keep in mind, not everyone is savvy or comfortable buying a used camera online. We're assuming everyone is like us.

 

[xkaes]

You'd have to go through about 50 used Minolta Hi-Matic G2 cameras (which have a CdS photo cell) to match the cost of the Pentax 17. I have no doubt that lots of people will jump on the Pentax 17 bandwagon. At that price, I'm sure Pentax will be doing quite well. The question becomes how many will buy it?

 

[Milpool]

I’ve always wanted to try half frame so this thing would have tempted me at a lower price or if it had a focusing mechanism of some kind. Too bad, but I don’t think I’m part of the target market so hopefully others won’t see it the way I do and Pentax does well with this thing.

 

[Dustin McAmera]

My only half frame 35mm camera is a FED Mikron, with a 30mm f/1.9 (made of real glass); now that's a 'bokeh mode' if you want one. It's a copy of a Konica camera. I paid 25 quid for it, plus postage from somewhere in central Europe. It has manual focus (with a slightly naff plastic helical), and aperture AE or manual-with-only-one-shutter-speed. It never occurred to me to shoot diptychs with it. I must look it out - now I'm afraid I'll find its selenium has died.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Not sure why people are poo-pooing this camera. I think it is interesting. Every buy an old half frame camera? I have. I end up spending a ton of time trying to get them to work right. I had to take my Canon Demi EE17 apart like 4 times. It works now but man... Same with the Oly Pen FT (mirror replacement, cleaning optics), and those aren't exactly cheap. Yeah the Pentax is a bit pricey, but the lens looks good, and it does have a flash.

Is it just me, or does it look like they built it on the Cosina frame that the Bessas were made on? Maybe that accounts for the size.

I also think this is a bridge camera. I'd expect them to release a "better" camera in the future. The fact that the lens moves when you press the shutter makes me think that. It isn't a big stretch to add autofocus to it.

 

[mshchem]

I should be getting one fairly early, if the B&H folks are to be believed. I know I will be happy with the lightness, but at the same time it feels plasticy.
My poor old neck needs something featherweight. The Cosina body is a good reference point.

 

[tykos]

But this doesn't change the point.

In fact, the Leica legend and brand exist precisely because of their excellent "featureless" camera. Leica has made essentially the same camera for 70 years and it has outlasted every other 35mm film camera.

Hasselblad is another that made essentially the same highly desirable "featureless" camera for 50 years. These are excellent cameras that do what they need to do well and nothing more.

Linhof, perhaps the oldest camera maker in the world, still make the Technika, one of the finest examples of a technical view camera ever to exist. Despite its mechanical complexity, essentially all it does is hold the film and lens in particular positions.

These are all fine mechanical tools or instruments that are excellent for their intended purpose. The lack of features is one of the benefits.

It is true that you can make good pictures with many cameras, but it is also true that the camera you use affects the way you think and make photographs. The camera very much can affect the quality of photography.

Erwin Puts:

"This mastery of craft and anticipation of the dynamics of the situation, will be more secure and, let us face it, more enjoyable when the tool is in harmony with these goals. A fully manual and mechanical camera that, fitting in your hands, translates your aims with the smooth precision of a finely tuned instrument, has added value."

"It is a pity in my view that most reviewers neglect the art of taking pictures and the subtle match of instrument and result to get fine pictures that fit the character of the instrument."

i don't understand your point.
a bunch of brands still produce mechanical cameras (hasselblad no more, linhof is beautiful but not leica-complex because it lacks shutter, lenses, all that stuff) at very, very high prices.
There's always room for high quality at high prices items.
Pentax is proposing a camera that costs 1/10 than those, maybe 1/15-20 when you factor all the other elements (leica: a decent lens, we're not buying an m6 to shoot with a mouldy russian L39, right? linhof: tripod, lens+shutter, holders, exposure meter, all the never ending stuff that large format needs).
it's like comparing my bike i just use for a quick ride to buy some groceries to a 6kg carbon-ultra-super road bike: they both got pedals and wheels, but...

 

[Agulliver]

At first I thought it looked pretty 'clunky' and I still do I suppose, but then I realized what it looks like is a compact simple camera made out of the parts of a mid 1980s SLR. That's probably exactly what it is, designing as many parts of possible so that they can be reused on future more advanced cameras up to an SLR.

Yes, I think that is exactly the intention of the folk at Pentax. They've mentioned the first two new film cameras being compact P&S so the logical assumption is that they think they can recoup R&D costs with the 17 and then for little outlay produce a more conventional compact camera, probably with autofocus and a lens somewhere between 35 and 50mm and sell it at a similar price.

It is also likely that they're looking further into the future and that some parts can be carried over to an SLR, and they've hinted that the all mechanical SLR would be the final step so possibly an electronic SLR would come before that....maybe containing some parts from their DSLR range. It all makes it quite logical stepwise, and keeps development costs reasonable.

I hope their market research is correct and that they sell the 17 in whatever numbers are necessary to keep the project moving forward. It has certainly created a stir, is still being pushed in my social media feeds...and I'm seeing posts from several people who have ordered one....even experienced photographers. Hopefully we'll see lots of photos from actual users during the summer and get an update from Pentax as to where R&D on the next model is.

But honestly, congrats to them for getting it to the market quite quickly. This could quite easily have taken another year or more.

 

[Agulliver]

i don't understand your point.
a bunch of brands still produce mechanical cameras (hasselblad no more, linhof is beautiful but not leica-complex because it lacks shutter, lenses, all that stuff) at very, very high prices.
There's always room for high quality at high prices items.
Pentax is proposing a camera that costs 1/10 than those, maybe 1/15-20 when you factor all the other elements (leica: a decent lens, we're not buying an m6 to shoot with a mouldy russian L39, right? linhof: tripod, lens+shutter, holders, exposure meter, all the never ending stuff that large format needs).
it's like comparing my bike i just use for a quick ride to buy some groceries to a 6kg carbon-ultra-super road bike: they both got pedals and wheels, but...

And this is the thing.....the Pentax 17 sits somewhere between the Kodak H35 (which sits with the Lomography/Holga toys) and the Leicas which are on offer today. I know some people seem to think the 17 is no better than the H35 and while most of us have used neither....it does seem that the 17 benefits from manual focus over the H35's fixed, a proper three element glass, coated lens, several exposure modes, better build quality and so on. It's a different beast to the H35 which is no doubt a fun toy and people have successfully used it. But the 17 is more than a toy, it's a fairly serious half frame camera.

 

[koraks]

I think it looks nice. I imagine it's quite usable despite my criticism about the focus system.

 

[baachitraka]

Yesterday I didn't quite like the design but today it felt so unique and beautiful.

 

[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!

Well that's quite a bit cheaper than £500 the video mentioned or the 550 euros in a store in Germany. The price in the U.K. is 500 GBP i.e. British pounds sterling

pentaxuser

 

[koraks]

Yesterday I didn't quite like the design but today it felt so unique and beautiful.

Sometimes things take some getting used to. It's a bit like some people.

 

[Agulliver]

I don't think it's a thing of beauty from the front, but the top plate is lovely and when they open the back and look inside it really is a proper camera body. From the front, it's styled OK. A little awkward, but then so are many people

I doubt it'll win awards for it's aesthetics but it's no ugly mug either.

 

[bfilm]

i don't understand your point.
a bunch of brands still produce mechanical cameras (hasselblad no more, linhof is beautiful but not leica-complex because it lacks shutter, lenses, all that stuff) at very, very high prices.
There's always room for high quality at high prices items.
Pentax is proposing a camera that costs 1/10 than those, maybe 1/15-20 when you factor all the other elements (leica: a decent lens, we're not buying an m6 to shoot with a mouldy russian L39, right? linhof: tripod, lens+shutter, holders, exposure meter, all the never ending stuff that large format needs).
it's like comparing my bike i just use for a quick ride to buy some groceries to a 6kg carbon-ultra-super road bike: they both got pedals and wheels, but...

The point is that you were saying if Pentax eventually make a film SLR again that it will have to have lots of features to make people happy. But I am saying that I don't think that is the case. Many of the most desired and nicest cameras have had very few features, essentially no features beyond the essentials for making a picture. I think if Pentax made a very simple well-made 35mm film SLR, that it would be very popular.

 

[pentaxuser]

Sometimes things take some getting used to. It's a bit like some people.

Yes it took me 24 hours to get used to my future wife whom I married 24 hours later

pentaxuser

 

[mattsw]

I am very excited that Pentax is releasing a film camera and has plans for more. I do have a question to the more experienced members of this group now that details of the camera are released. I see it has an auto mode, but when I shoot film I keep my camera on manual and adjust the ISO, shutter and f/stop manually. Will this new Pentax allow for that, and will it allow more powerful lens than what comes with it?

Thanks,
Matthew

 

[bfilm]

It is also likely that they're looking further into the future and that some parts can be carried over to an SLR, and they've hinted that the all mechanical SLR would be the final step so possibly an electronic SLR would come before that....maybe containing some parts from their DSLR range. It all makes it quite logical stepwise, and keeps development costs reasonable.

Yes, this is the path I have thought they seem to be following.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if they could eventually make something like the manual and mechanical Pentax MX again and a small range of manual lenses. This camera, circa 1976-1985, was the equivalent of around USD 1,050 today. I would be happy if they could do it for USD 1,250. Heck, I would even be okay with USD 1,500. But I think if they could do it for USD 1,250 that they would sell lots of them. They could show that Leica is not the only one capable of matching their past glory.

A camera like this is what I think is most needed to keep film going long-term. There need to be some nice-quality medium-price cameras like a good 35mm film SLR if we want the young generations to see film photography as a worthwhile and valuable pursuit.

"As difficult as it is to believe, the viewfinder of the MX is actually bigger and brighter than those of the larger, heavier cameras. Focusing even in dim light is child's play when working with the brilliant, Pentax Panoramic Viewfinder. Image magnification is large, too. The nearly life-size image (.97x with 50mm lens at infinity) makes it possible to work with both eyes open, adding considerably to viewing comfort."

"Also amazing is the fact that moving parts have been strengthened and enlarged. By reducing the number of moving parts, it has been possible to enlarge those remaining. The die cast body of the MX is the toughest designed by Asahi Optical to date."

"The MX employs a specially designed air damper which reduces mirror shock to a level never before attained, and completely does away with the need for mirror lock-up provision. Tests of the MX with 50mm, 135mm, and 200mm lenses indicate that mirror shock has been virtually entirely eliminated ."

"The new Pentax compact focal plane shutter developed exclusively for the MX is peerless in performance. The surface of the all silk shutter which faces the lens is rubberized for added strength... The standard range of shutter speeds (1/1000 - 1 sec., B) is provided, with the emphasis on maintaining the highest level of accuracy, rather than extending its range. Moreover, since the shutter is completely mechanical, it will function without batteries, so that the pro who finds himself on the top of the Andes or in the middle of the Sahara, or in the depths of the Amazon without a supply of fresh batteries can still get his assignment done."

 

[tykos]

The point is that you were saying if Pentax eventually make a film SLR again that it will have to have lots of features to make people happy. But I am saying that I don't think that is the case. Many of the most desired and nicest cameras have had very few features, essentially no features beyond the essentials for making a picture. I think if Pentax made a very simple well-made 35mm film SLR, that it would be very popular.

in my head i'm already hearing all the "i wanted a fully mechanical one!!!" "why shouldn't i buy an f2?" "i mean, it's nice, but it lacks the mirror lockup up feature, no way i'm buying it".

anyways: making an slr is the ultimate goal of this project, based on pentax' videos, and this is a necessary step to reach that goal. We'll see, i guess.

 

[Dustin McAmera]

I am very excited that Pentax is releasing a film camera and has plans for more. I do have a question to the more experienced members of this group now that details of the camera are released. I see it has an auto mode, but when I shoot film I keep my camera on manual and adjust the ISO, shutter and f/stop manually. Will this new Pentax allow for that, and will it allow more powerful lens than what comes with it?

Thanks,
Matthew

No. It has only several different auto modes. It does have exposure compensation, but no manual exposure except for 'B' shutter. The lens is fixed.

PENTAX 17

"It's time for film" Photography is an art in which the camera captures light, then forms an image of a scene based on that light. You can use the light to create your own image, using it boldly on some occasions, or more sensitively on others. A film camera portrays the scene exactly the way...

pentax.eu

 

[xkaes]

After seeing what it has to offer, I decided to buy a Lomo LC-Wide. Much smaller & more versatile with half-frame (25mm), square, and full-frame (17mm) exposures, plus multi-exposure capability -- at HALF the price!!!

But then I realized -- I already have one!

It's about the size and shape of the Lomo LC-M, and it should because that is what it was based on. And the LC-M was based on the Cosina CX -- which was designed after the Olympus XA. What sets the Lomo LC-W apart is a unique set of features and functions that can be used together to create amazing results from single half-frame images to multiple exposure panoramas. First, is the format flexibility. This can be set to half-frame (18x24mm), square (24x24mm) or full-frame (24x36mm). This can be changed mid-roll for interesting effects. Next, is the ability to take multiple exposures. A separate lever cocks the shutter without moving the film to add all sorts of special effects. The camera has a 17mm f4.5 lens which converts to about a 25mm in half-frame. The f-stop does not adjust but the lens can be zoned focused -- FAR or NEAR -- getting down a about 15 inches with the DOF. The shutter is automatically set -- according to the ISO and light -- from 1/500 down to several seconds, and requires three L44/A76 batteries. The LC-W has a tripod socket and cable release connection as well as a hot shoe. One or two LEDs in the viewfinder indicate exposure OK or LONG (use tripod or flash).

 

[Cholentpot]

I think I've come 'round to being impressed that Pentax went and did something unique. There's never been a camera quite like the 17. It's a strange one sure but it's got loads of things that we've been complaining about fixed. The flash for instance, every darn tootin' point and shoot has some convoluted flash system. I want it on, off or auto. I can set the 17 to shoot wide open all the time. Great. Exposure comp? Excellent. Manual wind? Perfect!

Slap some autofocus on this thing and you have a really sweet point and shoot worth every cent of the $500. I don't really like scale focus but I do love half-frame. I'd kill for the 17 in an autofocus version.

 

[xkaes]

I don't really like scale focus but I do love half-frame. I'd kill for the 17 in an autofocus version.

Sounds like you'd love the Konica AA-35 (AKA, Konica Recorder). Yes, I know, you can only get it USED, it doesn't have a film advance lever, and it does have a HORIZONTAL frame, but it's half the price, comes in various colors, and even has a DATE model. It's so thin many people mistake it for a DISC camera!

Quite a camera at the time, with many innovative features. It had a 24mm (f4.0-16) auto-focus lens, focusing to 3 feet. Built-in CDS meter automatically sets shutter speed (1/60 - 1/250) and aperture, in a programmed-exposure system. Although the focus and exposure were strictly automatic, these limitations are somewhat overcome by the other features, such as a built-in motor-drive, auto-exposure, and flash. First drop-in the film. It ran vertically, so the pictures come out horizontal, unlike most half-frame cameras. Then set the film speed (ISO 100 - 400) and you are set to go. The camera focuses the lens, then exposes the film, then advances the film. A RED/GREEN LED in the viewfinder tells you whether the exposure was correct or not. All this in a very thin, attractive body. The camera had the same shape of the disc cameras of the time -- its's so thin you assume that it CAN'T be 35mm! And it had a built-in sliding case to keep everything protected -- well, almost everything -- not the flash and the viewfinder. When the roll is done, flip the switch on the bottom of the camera and the motor rewinds the film into the cassette. The camera came in a variety of colors, such as red, grey flannel, etc.. No tripod socket, flash shoe, PC contact, filter thread or cable release socket. But it DID have a wrist strap! Takes two AA batteries that operate the flash, the meter and the motor drive. It is the same as the Konica Recorder.

 

[Cholentpot]

Sounds like you'd love the Konica AA-35 (AKA, Konica Recorder). Yes, I know, you can only get it USED, it doesn't have a film advance lever, and it does have a HORIZONTAL frame, but it's half the price, comes in various colors, and even has a DATE model. It's so thin many people mistake it for a DISC camera!

Quite a camera at the time, with many innovative features. It had a 24mm (f4.0-16) auto-focus lens, focusing to 3 feet. Built-in CDS meter automatically sets shutter speed (1/60 - 1/250) and aperture, in a programmed-exposure system. Although the focus and exposure were strictly automatic, these limitations are somewhat overcome by the other features, such as a built-in motor-drive, auto-exposure, and flash. First drop-in the film. It ran vertically, so the pictures come out horizontal, unlike most half-frame cameras. Then set the film speed (ISO 100 - 400) and you are set to go. The camera focuses the lens, then exposes the film, then advances the film. A RED/GREEN LED in the viewfinder tells you whether the exposure was correct or not. All this in a very thin, attractive body. The camera had the same shape of the disc cameras of the time -- its's so thin you assume that it CAN'T be 35mm! And it had a built-in sliding case to keep everything protected -- well, almost everything -- not the flash and the viewfinder. When the roll is done, flip the switch on the bottom of the camera and the motor rewinds the film into the cassette. The camera came in a variety of colors, such as red, grey flannel, etc.. No tripod socket, flash shoe, PC contact, filter thread or cable release socket. But it DID have a wrist strap! Takes two AA batteries that operate the flash, the meter and the motor drive. It is the same as the Konica Recorder.

View attachment 372486

This camera has been on my radar for a long time.

However, dropping $250 on a camera that may or may not work doesn't do it for me. Maybe on an SLR or TLR which is fixable. But spending that much on a point and shoot that may or may not decide to give up the ghost on a random Tuesday is too much of a gamble for me.