Comments are 100% moderated as of 8:48 a.m. today, Wednesday, Juneteenth. There are new Featured Comments on posts going back to "Sweet Spot." (Happy Juneteenth to all our Black readers, by the way. It's an exclusively Black holiday, and belongs to them, but if you're Black or you live in a city with lots of Black residents you know what a celebration it can be.)
I did pretty well with my new routine yesterday—got up early, got my constitutional in (an old word—Oxford Languages calls it "dated"—for a health walk), then showered. The plan only fell down when I sat down at the computer; I immediately got distracted. So it was well after three in the afternoon by the time I got the comments all done. By then it was so late I didn't write a new post.
So this morning I made it one step further...the comments are done early. Now here I am writing a new post, so maybe another further step too. I'll get there. One step at a time, pardon the pun.
It's beastly hot here. I stepped out of the house at 7:27 and it was muggy as could be. The wind was from the south. Yellow trefoil and pink peavine flowers mingled at the roadside. I saw an eagle. I told a person walking past in the opposite direction that I had seen it. The second person I mentioned it to said, "I know. She's got her nest down where we live, up in a tree." A few days ago I saw a coyote in my yard for the first time since I've lived here. I got an excellent view; I was inside, sitting in the armchair talking to my son, and first I saw him running along the tree line toward the road. I said to Xander, "Hey, a fox just ran by!" But a moment later he came trotting up the driveway back in the direction he came from, much closer to me, and I got a longer, better view. Not a fox.
+=+=+=+=+
I should point out that most of us might not be in the best position to judge the Pentax 17. TOP has young readers, and female readers, and people of color who read, but still and all, TOP readers do skew older, white, and male. So I'll just gently point out that if you're older than, oh, say, 35, and you're not Japanese, the Pentax 17 probably isn't for you. Not targeted at you, anyway. Although anybody can like anything they want to.
It reminds me of something I've mentioned before. It used to be that reviews were very important for movies. But then the movie studios figured out that there were basically four kinds of moviegoers: younger females, older females, younger males, and older males. If you could design a movie to appeal strongly to one of those groups, or to any two of those groups at once, then you'd likely have a success. If you could somehow figure out a way to appeal to three or even all four groups, so much the better, but those tend to be unicorns. I.e., rare.
I said that one avenue to success was to appeal strongly to one of those groups, but in practice it needs to be one of only three of the four. If you designed a movie to appeal to older males, good luck, because older males, by and large, don't go to movies. Accordingly, most movies these days are designed to appeal to one of the following: young females; younger males; both younger females and males; females of all ages; or older females. Occasionally they'll try for one that hits older males and older females (On Golden Pond might be an historical example), and some war or action flicks might be for both younger and older males. But those are generally not thought to be promising strategies.
So if you're an older male, and have noticed that few movies appeal to you these days, there's a good reason for that: they're not making movies for us any more.
Furthermore, then the studios and their marketing strategists figured out that most reviewers are older males. So why worry about what reviewers think? They aren't members of the target audiences! So movie studios started more or less ignoring reviews. Who cares if some old white guy doesn't like The Hunger Games or Frozen or Maleficent, Mistress of Evil?
Anyway, I don't have any insider information, but my suspicion is that the Pentax 17 is tailored to young people. Young people are driving the film fad; they're comfortable with lo-fi picture quality, which they sometimes value; they're comfortable with vertical rectangles, from shooting with cellphones; and they take readily to relatively cheap, fun-to-use cameras. Nikon Z cameras, like nicer new cars, might appeal, but they're simply priced out of reach. The new Nikon Z6III, which is nice but decidedly mid-line, not by any stretch the fanciest or best (or most prestigious), will cost $2,500. That's a whopping 6.7% of the median annual salary of 20- to 24-year-olds! The Pentax 17 probably mostly gives priority to the Japan home market, too, where half-frame has always been popular. Even the vaguely steampunk look and oddball design fairly shouts the kind of style that means "cute, young, fun" in Japan.
So have patience, Photo Dawgs. The cameras pointed at us might be coming, but this ain't it. Again, that doesn't mean you can't like it. In the early '90s, I did get the inside scoop on a camera called the Contax Aria, and I learned from a very reliable inside source that it was specifically designed to appeal to Japanese females. But I liked it. Another example: the newer Mamiya 6 (1989, first camera I reviewed for a magazine) was designed with the idea that it would appeal to wedding photographers. I got that straight from Henry Froehlich, the co-founder of Mamiya America Corporation who retired as its Chairman of the Board. The Mamiya 6 turned out to have wide appeal to lots of different kinds of photographers but not to wedding photographers. You can like whatever you want.
Another comment I'm coming across is along the lines of "who would buy a Pentax 17 when there are so many great old film cameras available used?" I'm not entirely in agreement with that sentiment. I have a whole shelf of those older film cameras, and those old film cameras are getting...well, old. At age 67 I tend to think things are recent when they're really not. For me, for instance, we just switched over to digital. But no. I once defined the era of the transition as 1995 (when newsrooms could buy a 1.3-megapixel Canon/Kodak DCS-3 for $12,500) to 2007 (when all those buildings at Kodak Park were demolished). That's not recent. That's 17 to 29 years ago. That's a long time to younger people. Similarly, apart from a very few exceptions, it's been a long time since most mainstream film cameras from major makers were available new. The Pentax 17 is the first new Pentax film camera in 20 years, so it's said. That's a long time in film-camera years. It's going to sell to some people who are 20 years old. The great mass of disused "left over" film cameras from the film era is aging out. It's high time some new ones started to come along. Not everybody wants a new one, of course, but not everybody wants an old one any more, either.
+=+=+=+=+
So you might think it was redundant when that woman I passed mentioned that the eagle I saw had her nest "up in a tree." Where else would it be?
But not really. I chair a meeting of a 12-step program at the Fire House in Branchport, NY, every Sunday, and for several weeks there was what looked like a wounded bird in the gravel parking lot not twenty feet from the main door. The firemen had put up three orange cones around her to protect her from clueless vehicles. Curious as to whether she was being attended to, I called the Fire Chief, Nancy Oppel, for the story.
Turns out she was a killdeer, a kind of bird that likes to lay their eggs in gravel because the gray and black spotted eggs are camouflaged. Then she'll protect the eggs by putting on an act; pretending she's wounded, she'll lure predators away from the eggs, feigning injury and putting on a threat display, then flying away or attacking if you get too close. The "wounded" bird in the parking lot at the Fire House was actually just sitting on her eggs! Strange place for a nest if you ask me. But apparently the chicks hatched last week, and there are some new killdeers in the world, and all is well.
Mike
Original contents copyright 2024 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)
Featured Comments from:
Kenneth Tanaka (partial comment): "I think the '17' will quickly become a short-lived novelty…that may command 2x prices in a future retro resale market. (I see a distant future feature on Antiques Roadshow.) Speaking of antiques…the summer heat sometimes prompts me to make irrational purchases. (OK, same goes for the cabin-fevered winters.) Yesterday I bought a like-new-in-box Epson R-D1x! Yup, the nearly 20-year-old first digital rangefinder that presaged the Leica digital M! I had always wanted to try one of these out but never had a chance. I can’t wait to get my hands on this 6-MP CCD marvel with its retro meters and fake film advance (shutter-cock) lever! Now we’re talkin’ Antiques Roadshow!"
Mike replies: Wow, what a find! I'm sure I don't have to say "have fun with it." But have fun with it!
BG: "Thank you for noting that we old white geezers who think we know everything about film cameras are not the target audience for this new Pentax half frame. I hope it is a roaring success."
Rick Popham: "Killdeer chicks are very cool. They can walk almost as soon as they're hatched, and they look like miniature versions of their parents. Keep a lookout for them!"
KeithB: "I read a joke a long time ago in Reader's Digest. A man would leave his front door in the morning, walk around his house, and then continue on to his morning walk. When someone asked about this he said, 'Young man, that is the Preamble to my Constitutional.'"
Yes, the new Pentax is definitely targeted towards younger people: that was stated explicitly in some of the teaser material that Pentax has been "dropping"(even a senior like me can know what that means today*) for over a year now I think.
A hopeful sign was a comment by a young woman in a video from B&H (indeed, young woman) who said the camera was "first in a line of new film cameras by Pentax".
*Senior: I've got a theory that this term/idea has shifted quite a bit. I first saw inklings when I used to go to the Famous Ballroom in Baltimore in the '70's to see jazz shows, and my preference was hard bop. There would be these guys in the audience who were clearly seniors, but being hard bop fans seemed to make them a good deal less "senior" by general demeanor. My second inkling was, as I myself got older, how I realized that those older people from my childhood looked and behaved like seniors---yet at the time were only in their '50's. But they seemed so much older, and it wasn't just a trick of me being a kid.
Now, I'm thinking of all of us who truly are seniors spinning Hendrix on our desired listening platforms and I'm thinking: "this is senior?". And check out some of the coverage of the latest Stones tour.
Posted by: Tex Andrews | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 10:50 AM
I think you are absolutely right on your demographics breakdown POV. I believe there is a market for this Pentax because of all the reasons you mentioned.
I think the older demographic group(s) are more likely to be negative if a camera is not in their wheelhouse list of qualities they appreciate and like.
As far as the older cameras not being available and or not in good condition though, I have a different perspective.
I've been steadily buying film cameras since 2003 when the digital onslaught came and still continue to buy them routinely ....well because I love the mechanical engineering, tactility, and the user interface.
Everything from Konicas, to Leica M6s and pretty much everything in between. Deardorffs, Rolleis etc. etc. Purchased a perfect M6 and a 50mm Summilux in 2006 for 1000.00 as an example when people were almost giving film cameras away.
Heck a Nikon FTN that I had since 1976 still works perfectly.
Probably have over 200 cameras in a dedicated room for the collection.
(yeah I know. I am crazy) and probably you can't imagine why anyone would want to have 200+ cameras.
But here's the thing, over 85% still function 100% and work fine. I really don't believe if someone wants a good functioning reliable camera that there will be a shortage anytime soon.
I worry more about an existential threat like a runaway AI takeover and or a nuclear war than shortage of film cameras.
Posted by: Alan | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 10:53 AM
Mike, at the risk of seeming like a whiner (and a white guy who doesn't quite get it), Juneteenth has it roots in black culture, but it is not exclusively a black holiday. It is holiday that recognizes the end of institutional slavery in America and the radical restructuring of America government and society toward a more perfect union. At least that is the promise.
While Juneteenth itself arises from a delayed enforcement of the Emancipation Proclamation in Texas, the actual end of institutional slavery came with the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The civil war amendments to the U.S. Constitution are arguably the best thing that ever happened in American government following the Declaration of Independence. Even despite the clarity of the civil war amendments, dark forces in American culture, some in high places (e.g. the Supreme Court ala Plessy v. Ferguson), have never accepted the basic principle of equality in law and equality in opportunity. Juneteenth is an opportunity to celebrate that basic and most fundamental of American principles.
Anyway, one man's thoughts.
Posted by: Christopher Dale | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 11:15 AM
Re: the Pentax 17
I remarked on Kirk Tuck’s blog yesterday that the Pentax 17's small design and features (or lack of same) remind me of Kodak’s Instamatic cameras that our mothers used to capture many of our childhood moments. It sure seems like an update of that go-everywhere family fun camera concept. (And, in fact, Kodak itself already has an update to that concept, in the form of the Ektar H35 Half-Frame Camera!)
Unfortunately, I don’t think that its thoughtfully minimalistic design will save it from the new realities of today’s terrific phone cameras and their integration with communications tech. So I think the “17” will quickly become a short-lived novelty…that may command 2x prices in a future retro resale market. (I see a distant future feature on "Antiques Roadshow”.)
——
Speaking of antiques…the summer heat sometimes prompts me to make irrational purchases. (OK, same goes for the cabin-fevered winters.) Yesterday I bought a like-new-in-box Epson R-D1x! Yup, the nearly 20 year-old first digital rangefinder that presaged the Leica digital M! I had always wanted to try one of these out but never had a chance. I can’t wait to get my hands on this 6mp CCD marvel with its retro meters and fake film advance (shutter-cock) lever! Now we’re talkin’ “Antiques Roadshow”!
Posted by: Ken Tanaka | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 11:47 AM
A further comment on the Pentax 17: its lens contains only three elements. For $500 I'd expect at least a 4-element Tessar.
Posted by: Allan Ostling | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 11:56 AM
I think your story about movies perhaps has truth but it is so approximate as to be, really, wrong.
I am in my late 30s and female, white-adjacent. I have a good friend who is 61, male, white. We probably both see more than one film a week in the cinema (he sees more than me), and perhaps another one or two streamed. So perhaps over 100 a year of which over 50 in cinemas. Yes we see some several times (recently for me Furiosa, Civil War, Monkey Man, but others too). Perhaps less than 100 distinct movies a year each. We like very many of the same films (not all: he saw Zone of Interest several times I know it is brilliant but could not watch it again).
I think what you describe is what happens if you consider only big-budget blockbuster films. But that is not even slightly close to all the films which are made which you can see. It is the same argument people use that all movies today are just sequels, superhero films, or both: it is simply not true. 2023 was an astonishing year for movies, 2024 will be at least good.
Looking only at blockbusters is like looking only at photographs of sunsets I think: it just does not represent the artform.
Mike replies: Isn't your second paragraph the Anecdotal Fallacy? As if I said that the average height of a woman is 5'4" and of a man 5'9, and you said "that's not true, my friend is 6'5" and I'm taller than he is." And the last paragraph is the Straw Man fallacy: I never said they were only looking at blockbusters. You speculated that, then you refuted the value of doing so. Obviously I'm talking about studio films, which might rule out art-house films and independent films and so forth, but the thesis could just as easily apply to small budget movies as large budget ones.
Besides, I didn't make it up. I read it someplace. Although, unfortunately, I can't cite my source! --Mike]
Posted by: Zyni | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 12:10 PM
When I was a teenager my parents rented an acreage in the country (near Calgary, Alberta). We had killdeers in a nest immediately beside the driveway. Everyday when we left or came home, the killdeer would put on the wounded bird show trying desperately to lead us or the car away from the nest. If she'd built the nest a hundred yard away from the driveway she could have relaxed. The family kept coming back, too. They were there for several years.
Posted by: Dillan | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 12:16 PM
Thanks for explaining that the Pentax 17 is meant for a certain subset of the camera-buying population -- and not necessarily the usual U.S.-centric market that most of us assume.
Yes, it's limited in the "manual" controls. It's basically a point and shoot with some extra choices.
But to learn the basics of a film camera, I think there's enough control without being too difficult. Zone focus will be fine for most photos. (Back when half-frame cameras were more common, people didn't complain so much!) The other settings may require memorizing some details, so that you know which one to use in a particular situation.
Ricoh/Pentax already addressed the question of their choice a half-frame format in their videos. And also the question about older cameras and limited parts supplies.
As far as the price is concerned, I don't think some people realize how much certain parts of this camera are going to be substantially higher than "commodity-priced" parts of the usual digital camera. The entire cost of developing certain parts, like the film wind lever assembly, will be borne solely by Pentax. There will be no sharing of sales of sensors or shutters as on most digital SLR cameras. No Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. to help to share the development costs.
This camera is to get new film photographers used to the idea of choosing settings before snapping the photo, in my opinion. Taking photos the old way by taking time to compose the photo and judge the lighting, unlike the quick snaps of a cell phone.
I haven't shot film for a while -- gotta check my developing supplies -- so I doubt I'll purchase the first model of the Pentax film camera line. But if they are hurting for sales, I may go ahead and get one and play around with a format I haven't used before.
If Pentax sells a bunch of the 17, I'll be waiting for their first 35mm format SLR.
Posted by: Dave | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 12:20 PM
The funny thing about cinema is that the majority of big stars are older white dudes. The five biggest films at the box office in 2023 featured male leads aged between 43 & 56 ( 61-year-old Tom Cruise had to settle for number nine)
The biggest-paid actor was another older dude, Adam Sandler (57), thanks to his deal with Netflix.
Posted by: Sean | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 01:14 PM
I notice that Nikon makes APS Z cameras at lower price points, and they seem to be aiming them at a younger demographic, such as highlighting their vlogging-friendly features (I'm pretty sure vlogging's not an old guy thing yet, but I am rather out of touch). I still have a Nikon EM body somewhere, which was a simplified compact SLR marketed at women. Japanese camera makers were seemingly very interested in selling to Japanese women, often with what looked to me like a chauvinistic approach, making me wonder if they ever considered simply hiring female camera designers (though there may not have been any to hire in Japan in those days). The perennial formula seemed to be: simpler (i.e. automated), smaller, lighter, and available in white (and sometimes other colors).
I live in what I call a grown-up movie desert. It seems like 95% of the screens around here are showing kid or kid-friendly movies on any given day, which gives me a different impression of Hollywood's target audience. I can see how they'd be easier to export, too, as these movies tend to have less and simpler dialog and little political content. I'm actually not far from Manhattan, which is the opposite of a movie desert, but making that trip is still a pricey and time consuming way to see a movie (not to mention that sitting in a movie theater is never at the top of my list of things to do in Manhattan).
Posted by: robert e | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 01:29 PM
A friend reports that the first manufacturing run of the 17 is sold out. I believe this info comes from one of those Pentax fan sites. The thing is that even if they sell 10 billion of them and it turned out to be one of the most profitable products ever developed by Pentax, there will be curmudgeons who insist it was no good because it's not what they wanted.
I don't understand the argument that the presence of all those vintage film cameras are better buys. If so, then why didn't they all sell? Besides, the better bodies aren't that cheap and often require a CLA. And a lens, which is also used. With no warranty.
Meanwhile, everybody and their cousin has been trying to convince mw for a decade or more that the smart phone is today's camera of choice, but all I ever want to do with mine is destroy it with a hammer because it's so annoying to use. Even as a phone.
Posted by: Robert Roaldi | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 02:55 PM
There are movies being made for adults, even adult males, but they don't play in movie theatres. That ship sailed.
Posted by: Robert Roaldi | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 03:07 PM
Yes, after some deeper thoughts about the Pentax 17, young people can enjoy film photography without burning a hole in their pockets. The 72 images would resonate with their style of typically machine-gunning with mobile phone cameras.
Posted by: Dan Khong | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 05:02 PM
TOP really is a little world of wonders. I had no idea about killdeers and their behaviour. I checked my Audubon app and it turns out we have them here, and there are local sightings reported. Something to watch out for. Thanks Mike!
Posted by: Ed Hawco | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 05:58 PM
Re: Pentax 17
Half frame fits the current trend in photos - most iPhone/smartphone photos seem to be taken in a vertical format because that's how people hold the phone when taking photos. Vertical video too!
We've seen revivals of vinyl records and now cassette tapes for audio, instant cameras and the retro Nikon Zf/ZFc are popular. Might be time for a new inexpensive film camera.
Wonder if any of those in store development machines still exist - collecting dust in the back room at drugstores?
Posted by: JH | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 09:06 PM
Mike, you nailed it with your old white man observation and the target audience of the Pentax 17 but it has been rather funny reading the keyboard warriors / photography nerds and tech geeks wail at the design choices made and of course the cost.
I hope this side hustle for Pentax firms into a steady stream (by the looks of it, they have sold out and in typical Japanese fashion are apologising profusely for not anticipating demand correctly) and that they can crack and release my K-1 iii - and the HD DFA* 35/1.4 which of course will upset the same keyboard warriors, photography purests and tech geeks :)
Posted by: Robbie Corrigan | Wednesday, 19 June 2024 at 10:15 PM
"Spleen Venting" time i'm afraid !
Pentax 17. Your assumption that older white males, your demographic as said, have been responsible for 99% of negativity on this camera as far as I can surmise reading on the WEB. Are they let down by this concept and if so why. they do not have the monopoly on camera wants nor do they regulate future trends.
The young I am afraid will have that monopoly and as trends come and go this so called "Retro"vibe for analogue in photography, movies and music is proof that "WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND".
We of a certain age took to the digital like lambs to the slaughter in photography and music. We cleaned our pallet of inconsistencies , quirks and I am afraid character. How many times have I heard images too clean, too perfect, too sharp. Music could be the same.
The Pentax 17 is aimed at a demographic that influenced its design not only supporting their output on the Web but also to hook them into a resurgence of film and cameras which may or may not come about in the future. I suppose it depends on sales and feedback etc.
With this will come better, easier processing and digital conversions for viewing and broadcasting. This can only be good for those (of a certain age) who do shoot film, who do buy / collect old film cameras a kind of meeting of the old and new.
Modern manufacturing, electronics and lens coating apart from a new warranty / security and peace of mind has to be better for the consumer, user. You may not like the design but IT IS A PENTAX ! they bought you the Q series and the K-01. BTW I have owned and used both and enjoyed the experience. Simple and straight forward cameras. I GET IT ! OR GOT IT as I don't have either now.
As a digital 100% user like many I have wondered along the analogue daydream. Looking at old film camera on line planning hypothetically what I would choose like many out there.
Do you go FULL TILT yet another system with all its component parts and outlay. Or, simplify and occasionally shoot film on a compact easy to use camera which when the subject deserves it can be easily done. This is where the Pentax 17 designed for the young can be embraced by the not so young. I see this , I get this.
Rollie 35, Olympus XA, Contax t2, Yashica t4 etc
Snobbery aside a Pentax 17 could fulfil this as an occasional film camera for a digital shooter.
I shoot Sigma DP2Quatro (my little medium format camera !) Panasonic GX9 w/ 9mm, 15mm, 25mm and Panasonic G90 w/ Olympus 12-100mm (first zoom in over 8 years). Will a Pentax 17 be joining them , who knows. I am 70 and been pushing a shutter since the early 70s. Time to embrace the future, maybe !
Afterthought; Wim Wenders film PERFECT DAYS he shoots Olympus analogue he is surprised to find his niece does too.
Posted by: martyn | Thursday, 20 June 2024 at 06:26 AM
I'm an author and longtime reader and fan of TOP who was slightly taken aback by the Juneteenth commentary in this post. As someone else has said in this thread, I do not think it is an exclusively Black holiday and something for "them." By coincidence I was interviewed about Juneteenth yesterday on the PRX The World radio show and I spoke about this at length, throwing in a rancor-free reference to this blog. Interested readers may listen here: https://theworld.org/segments/2024/06/19/the-enduring-global-legacy-of-enslavement
[Jeez, and you didn't even give me a name check. My luck.
My brother and his wife for many years lived on the edge of the Forest Preserve in River Forest near Chicago. One year I saw torrents of Black people streaming towards the woods laden with picnic baskets and such. I wondered what it was all about so I went out and started talking to people. First I asked what Juneteenth was, because I had no idea! They schooled me about it, but several people were of the opinion that it was really none of my business. Then I asked, "should white people celebrate Juneteenth?" A guy in the first group I asked exclaimed "hell, no!" Many people discussed the question with compassion and thoughtfulness, and some were abrupt and crude, but the consensus was clear. One woman said, "We're descended from slaves and you're descended from enslavers." Another man said "the last thing we want is a bunch of sanctimonious white people taking over our holiday." One young guy said "just leave us alone and let us do our thing." (I'm paraphrasing these quotations because I don't remember exact wordings very well.)
That was decades ago but I've always gone with that. If anybody disagrees, that's okay with me. They can make up their own minds and arrive at their own positions. --Mike]
Posted by: Howard W French | Thursday, 20 June 2024 at 11:28 AM
I was also surprised and a bit dismayed when I read the statement that Juneteenth was for "them." Make no mistake, I'm an elderly white guy but lived through and supported, as best I could, the civil rights movement. The use of the word "them" to me could imply that you see Black people as the "other." I really do not think you do but think your choice of words was unfortunate.
Posted by: Eric Brody | Thursday, 20 June 2024 at 01:02 PM
A pedantic note from a fellow editor – vehicles are not clueless, their drivers are.
In the same manner, a camera does not take intrusive unwanted photos of strangers – a photographer does.
Please excuse my tedious pedantry but it's a common mistake, particularly when reporting on collisions, that perpetuates harmful myths about more vulnerable road users (or road dwellers in the case of you killdeer): https://www.rc-rg.com/
Posted by: Jack Luke | Thursday, 20 June 2024 at 01:07 PM
Although I understand how you came to your comments about Juneteenth day, it is dangerous to extrapolate an opinion in our multi-cultural society from one experience just like we would never judge a photographer from a few photos made on one day. Juneteenth is a federal holiday for all Americans not just African-Americans and we can all celebrate a major liberation that took place in our country on June 19 1865.
Posted by: Andrew Holman | Thursday, 20 June 2024 at 04:07 PM
I reread my dismissive post regarding the Pentax 17. Good grief, at 75 I have become one of those cranky old farts (Can I say 'farts'?). Shaking his fist at the world.
Really, I hope it does well. But $500 seems a bit thick, do young folks have that sort of disposable income? My entire digital kit, a used OMD-EM10 + lenses was only about $700, that is a used body and 3 manual focus lenses plus adapters for Pen F and OM legacy lenses.
But I still shoot paper negatives with a home built 4x5 (masked to 4x4) using a Kodak 100mm f8.8 triplet from an old Kodak Tourist folder. It covers 4X4 pretty well, and with ISO 6 it is always on a tripod anyway. Still keeping my hand in a bit of silver halide.
Posted by: john robison | Thursday, 20 June 2024 at 04:49 PM
Let's talk about the upcoming Rollei 35AF film camera instead: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWz7A2e05Xc&t=1625s.
Posted by: Paul | Thursday, 20 June 2024 at 08:20 PM
I know the Pentax 17 isn't for me. I've shot half-frame back when half-frame was a thing, and I wasn't too excited about it then.
I am more curious about the Mint/Rollei 35AF. That could have some value to me as a "walk-around" camera. But then again, the line gets blurry with my digital "walk-around" camera, the little Olympus Pen E-P5. It definitely punches above its weight class. I don't see the Rollei 35AF replacing it, and I have other small 35mm film cameras to use (including the original compact camera design, the Leica Barnack series). Still, a nice new film camera, with decent autofocus...hmmm
Posted by: Hank | Friday, 21 June 2024 at 10:07 AM
The Pentax 17 is not for me. But as a long-term user of the excellent Pentax DSLRs and lenses (including legacy glass), I’ll be delighted if it brings some money into the relevant division at Ricoh, which might improve their claim on R&D funds for future digital cameras. Is photography in the future to be solely the province of Canon, Nikon and maybe Sony?
Posted by: Timothy Auger | Friday, 21 June 2024 at 11:42 AM