>>4322692
Probably a prototype, doubt they would roll that hunk of junk out as is

>>4322692
don't care either ways

>>4322692
I hope that ain’t it, that looks shite

Would

what, did you guys expect a tasteful analog aesthetic film camera from fucking pentax? They've always made the ugliest cameras.

>>4322692
I've had a sinking feeling that this would turn into the Crosley of film cameras and it's starting to look like I am justified

File: PentaxLX-1.jpg (1.43 MB, 3000x2000)

1.43 MB JPG

>>4322702
>*blocks your path*

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T20
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 22.4 (Windows)
Photographer	MIKE ECKMAN
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2021:06:18 20:11:27
Exposure Time	1/105 sec
F-Number	f/1.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	1000
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	-1.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	5155
Image Height	3437
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

File: IMG_2083.jpg (36 KB, 480x345)

36 KB JPG

>>4322702
This one seems like a handsome lil guy and they could’ve gone with a similar design

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	480
Image Height	345
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4322692
looks like an Edsel

File: 1717833658206.jpg (117 KB, 900x675)

117 KB JPG

I can't understand why it is so big when it's only zone focus and half frame.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	900
Image Height	675
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:06:08 02:00:06
Horizontal Resolution	1 dp
Vertical Resolution	1 dp

>>4322734
if I were to guess it's either because Pentax no longer has the engineering talent to design or doesn't have the manufacturing capabilities to create propriety internals to make it small. Real shame when Pentax was known for small slr rivaling Olympus back in film days.

>>4322734
Because small cameras are dreary to handle

File: IMG_20210818_195850.jpg (1.32 MB, 3120x4160)

1.32 MB JPG

>>4322692
>f3.5

>>4322758
you say that again to my face, fucker, with your too-large inept hands

File: IMG_20240608_131619.jpg (900 KB, 1080x1425)

900 KB JPG

>>4322766
Small cameras are dreary to use.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1080
Image Height	2400
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Image Created	2024:06:08 13:15:55

>>4322770
Sorry, HANDLE, not use.

File: dsfsfsdfsdfsd.jpg (4.88 MB, 6786x4943)

4.88 MB JPG

>>4322770
Enjoy carrying that around for hours :^)

(example scan from Agat because posting camera pics without any photos to back them up is gearfag fetishism cancern autism)

>>4322772
Did you completely miss all the tiny cameras in the background? :A)

>>4322773
no, I duly noted you're one of those people to frame your I'm holding thing photo to show off other stuff in the background, your questionably sad gear hoard. Two 6x6 folders? What do you need two for? Did you actually use them past the initial test roll? What about that p&s? I wondered if/what photos you took with that mavica and whether you've ever posted any to /p/, I can appreciate the exotic appeal of "veentage digital", there's something fun about rendering contemporary stuff with web 1.0 looks. Poor impulse control and mantoy-hoarding however is something to shamefully avoid admitting, not flaunt. How's that P6 doing, btw, I recall them being prone to issues after so many decades, no problems? How's the WLF in direct sunlight, still useable? Does it have any microprism or some other focusing aid? I forget how their ground glass is designed. I try to stick to the thread subject and not derail stuff, so I didn't want to remark on your look at my gear photo, but, since you asked...

File: scan0012_s.jpg (84 KB, 2205x1500)

84 KB JPG

>>4322781
My point was, small cameras are dreary to handle, but I still use them from time to time as pictured by the tiny ones in the background.
I guess my subtle nod was too subtle.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Nikon
Camera Model	LS-2000
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2018 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	2528
Image Height	3716
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	638 dpi
Vertical Resolution	638 dpi
Image Created	2024:05:07 06:21:04
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	2205
Image Height	1500

>>4322783
there's nothing to "handle" on a point and shoot bub, unless you're having trouble pressing the shutter button. you can only whinge about bad ergonomics if there's stuff to interface with on the tiny camera. I honestly can't imagine what downsides there can be to having a smaller lighter image acquisition box. you could have answered my questions, too. is this a hurt pride thing?I'm genuinely curious about the stuff I asked. Why does one get two identical format folders, unless the first one turns out to be defective or something?

>>4322772
soft as shit lol

>>4322790
can you provide better half frame scan examples to contrast with that one to showcase this please?

>>4322704
Looks like a toy camera

>>4322789
Holding on to something is handling it

File: Screenshot_20240608-191138.png (905 KB, 1080x817)

905 KB PNG

The shape seems consistent with last year's prototype, and they said it was to be released this summer, so I guess it might be a legit "leaked" picture. I just hope that grip can be detached like the one on the KP. It looks like it has metal plates, if the price is good and it's a solid camera I might work.

I honestly don't hate it.
I'm zonne focusing anyway, it looks light and portable, 25 mm may as well have been made for me.
Like yeah it's a bit funny looking but as long as the lens is sharp sign me up.

>>4322772
>Enjoy carrying that around for hours :^)
I've hiked with 60+ years old oldfags humping a pair of alpa 12s plus tripods and shit and they were fucking ahead of me. get >>>/fit/

Fascinating how all new "retro tech" they make is either sub-par or hideously over-expensive. If I were younger I would hoard functional quality film cameras because it seems like economic conditions dictate that they will only produce crap.

>>4322932
basically because they're "forgotten" tech. Not just in knowledge but also in infrastructure to supply and manufacture them. Pentax was proudly claiming in their video how they had to dig through old archives to teach and relearn how to make mechanical cameras.

>>4322905
Based large format boomers

>not k-mount
the little interest I had just evaporated

>>4323097
the camera isn't targeted at people who already own cameras or shoot film. It's targeted at people who will shoot 14 frames, put it in a drawer and never use it again. It's the exact same demographic as the vinyl and cassette revival.

>>4323101
retard
it's not about attracting people who already own cameras
it's about making it a path to buying more of the company's products

>>4323105
>the camera isn't targeted at people who already own cameras or shoot film
>the camera isn't targeted at people
>camera isn't targeted
>isn't
You can't read.

>>4322734
do we know it's half frame? maybe it's portrait full frame
that would be funny

>>4323101
That merely serves to devalue film as a photographic tool

>>4322789
One is 120 the other 135

>>4322692
They should revive the Q. Why a half-frame sensor when the body still is as big as a full frame camera jesus christ

>>4323201
So you admit that without hipster appeal sub-4x5 film is just worse digital

>>4323116
holy shit you actually are retarded
here I'll spell it out like you're 5 okay?
>pentax announces new film camera decades after everyone else stops making them
>they claim they're aiming at younger generations currently rediscovering film
>that's fair, I'm sure they've done their market research
>pentax is not a popular brand and should be looking for every chance to sell more product
>however the new film camera has a fixed lens
>that means it can't use any of the lenses any other pentax camera — which all use the same lens mount
>now imagine some of the people who buy this new film camera want to experiment different kinds of photography
>these different kinds of photography need different lenses
>these people can't just go buy any other pentax and put it on their film camera, they have to buy a different camera to do that
>that different camera doesn't have to be a pentax
>pentax, a company with low sales, is introducing a dead-end product with no ability to encourage repeat customers

>>4323209
>sensor

>>4323212
They already said this camera will be the base for a new film SLR. The lever mechanism and other parts are meant to be adapted for many different cameras, that would certainly explain the size. If this sells ok I wouldn't be surprised to see a new K1000 by the end of 2024.

>>4322692
Nice design, Would like to have one. But zone focusing f3.5 HF - not the thing i want spend my shekels on.

It looks really good, actually.

T-minus 6 days

Cost? Price?

>>4324464
if its not <$100 its not worth jumping at this instead of the likely just as poorly built rollei 35 af

maybe om-system will take a hint from their fellow dead brands and rerun an om film SLR with an integrated 40mm pancake who knows

>>4324468
Om system is not a real company anymore lol they’re a VC firm zombie brand.

>>4324471
so just like pentax

>>4324472
Nah not quite, at least Pentax still has daddy Ricoh who wants to keep Pentax as a legacy brand if nothing else. OM System didn’t even get to keep the Olympus name. Totally dead company walking.

>>4324468
They don’t sell film, so they’re going to price it as high as they think the average zoomer influencer will be willing to pay in order to recoup their R&D costs. They practically admitted as much when they said they planned to produce a consumer full frame and then a pro camera after this. This one isn’t meant for /p/

>>4324503
>This one isn’t meant for /p/
>S. /p/ official representative
It's obvious they'll sell it for as much as they can while keeping sales and profit, but not everyone wants a 35mm slr or espio mini, and those who do can get one

If it's above 200€ it's not really a "camera for the masses"

My personal limit is 150€ and i'm not even poor

File: Screenshot_20240615-155938.png (1.44 MB, 1080x1434)

1.44 MB PNG

>>4322734
>>4322738
>>4322758
It's the size of a GR, the hnds in the picture are just small

>>4325216
Where did you get these measurements from, though?

File: Screenshot_20240615-171303.png (21 KB, 110x122)

21 KB PNG

>>4325232
Basic math

>>4325232
Not him but it's a pretty reasonable assumption that that's a standard 40.5 mm filter ring

>>4325237
>>4325238
Makes sense. Please do forgive me; I am prone to being retarded at times.

>>4325216
>small hands
Why are all photographers manlets?
Too smol brained for actual hobbies?
Always wondered this

>>4325523
>small hands
Small hands engineer's blessing
>Why are all photographers manlets?
just street-sisters

>>4325523
most my photographer friends who are hobbyists are pretty tall and big actually

>>4325089
I hope they go for "cheap enough to buy on a whim" strategy.

>>4323097
>k mount in half frame
Damn nigga you retarded

>>4325583
Works for digital

>>4325581
Kodak Ektar h35 already fills that niche

>>4325592
>dude hear me out...
>how about we put a gigantic chunk of metal and glass in front of a puny portable camera so you get a nice x2 crop and the lens looks like shit!
Fucking genius, kys

>>4325596
1.4x crop, it's slightly bigger than apsc. Other that that you're absolutely right and anon is deeply retarded

>>4325583
>>4325596
>>4325600
>interchangeable lenses have to be big
this is your brain on DSLR

File: 3832fd68a74769d6d049c31a2(...).jpg (120 KB, 1000x1000)

120 KB JPG

>>4325640
Especially when we have Pentax in context lmao

>>4325594
I think he meant “cheap enough to buy on a whim and not be a toy camera”

>>4325698
iits gonna have a plastic lens anyways might as well be priced accordingly

>>4325796
We'll find out in 12h or so. But the feedback from a person that has actually tested the camera is that it's lens is absolutely great and by no means a toy camera

>>4325798
source?

>>4325807
https://youtu.be/HNzCwZ1bYyI?feature=shared
01:28 to 03:40
Spanish channel dedicated to film

>>4325807
>>4325957
Back in March 1st they said the camera was in the last stages of production and to be released in summer. Two months pass and the last official update from pentax was that cryptic video centered in the camera's name (17) -uploaded at 22:00 (Japan time), on May 17th-. Now in a matter of two weeks we have these "leaked" pictures and a testimony that confirms there are already several copies in the hands of youtubers and other PR media. Chances are it'll be released either today or in July, which would be odd.

File: a854bb17a97d71e4e3d2e8f5f(...).jpg (42 KB, 564x564)

42 KB JPG

See you in July lads...

>>4326059
Some "influencers" are already having their hands on one.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rQHSj2HzUpE

File: Pentax-17-film-camera-10[1].jpg (71 KB, 720x719)

71 KB JPG

It's not a Pentax if it wouldn't be ugly as shit

>>4324503
>they said they planned to produce a consumer full frame and then a pro camera after this
source?

>>4326150
>>4326151
>bokeh on the dial
lmao what
>CR2
I hate those things like you wouldn't believe it
also what the hell is going on with the headphone jack on the back.

That is not a PC connector is it?

Anyway, not bad if its not retarded priced I will get one instead of my Chaika

>>4326059
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9sn-aaUhqU

Announcement in like an hour or so

>>4326151
the super flat lens and the recessed viewfinder look kinda silly but i like it otherwise
are they making other coloorways?

>>4326155
A bulb shutter release

>>4326151
>>4326158
>shrinkage
"I WAS IN THE POOL"

It's gonna cost like $500+.

File: ricoh.png (32 KB, 1105x261)

32 KB PNG

>marketing

>>4326150
>>4326151
>>4326153
OH FUCK YEA WOULD

It's time for film!

video just dropped
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hs4j6SUI3Lk

>>4326150
>only Auto and P(rofessional) modes
Yeah think I'll just stick with my old nikons

>>4326155
>cr2
same fuck those
would rather throw a few AAA batteries in my Nikon film camera

File: doroheh.jpg (10 KB, 200x200)

10 KB JPG

>the leak was real
lol ugly camera [spoiler]still getting it...probably[/spoiler]

>>4326190
500$ for a plastic toy camera
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

PENTAX
PENTAX
PENTAX

500$ for a camera you won't know is out of focus

>we'll make a film camera for new photography youngsters
>$500
>ugly af
pffftt no wonder Pentax flopped and is barely on life support

it's really telling how even the sponsored phototubers can't praise this monstrosity other than saying how it's "symbolic"

>>4326191
its not an ektar nigger
>>4326194
>you won't know is out of focus
skill issues
>$500
Yeah they fucked it up

>$500
LMFAO
I was thinking at $200 this would be overpriced but $500?
>max shutter speed 1/350
pfft what a complete joke, I don't see why anyone in this general market wouldn't save the $300 and get a Olympus Mju-I (1/500 shutter) + the remaining $300 in film
Will have double the image quality because not half-frame garbage, and will have much more film to shoot with
If I cared about shitting on this camera I'd do the math real quick to find the break even point at which the Pentax would make more financial sense, but who cares lol

Also tiny viewfinder is gay

>>4326199
Not even a shoe for uncoupled rf like wtf.

i'll buy it for the meme and keep it in a drawer

>>4326201
>Olympus Mju-I
>muh shitty 90s electronics

Was $500 confirmed? lmao shit
This is going to backfire and cause a run on the old compact camera market and prices are gonna shoot up on things like the mju/stylus, XA, etc. What are the other cameras in this category at same or better price points? My XA is aging badly and might have to replace it before the market gets influencered even harder

for $500 I can get an olympus pen series, with a faster real lens AND buy another one, and another one if it breaks

>>4326191
>>4326194
>>4326196
>>4326201
It's not $500

It's actually $599.99

>499.95
(:

I wish all the best to these guys. Prices going up so this is kinda expected.
I would better buy Sony a6000 w/ kit instead, but that camera wasn’t made for me nor any other analoghead. It was clear from the begging and I’m okay with that. I hope zoomers will spend their money to buy this beauty.

>>4326208
Oh god prices are gonna shoot up on those too ("can't afford the new pentax? You won't belieeeeeeeve how good this VINTAGE half frame camera is for HALF the price in my video!"). Got a Pen-F and 40/1.4 for half that decades ago. Maybe manual focus will turn them away

File: Screenshot 2024-06-17 135119.png (606 KB, 1256x846)

606 KB PNG

>>4326209

File: hahaddock.jpg (36 KB, 562x437)

36 KB JPG

>$500

File: Чайка-3_фото1.jpg (1.69 MB, 3648x2736)

1.69 MB JPG

>>4326211
>can't afford the new pentax? You won't belieeeeeeeve how good this VINTAGE half frame camera is for HALF the price in my video!

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ZOOOMERS GET AWAY FROM MY SOVIET SHIT

>>4326210
I can already see the video titles comparing it to X100V and shilling it to Fuji fanboys for film

My personal limit was 200€

I'm not buying this shit, maybe I'll get used one down the line.

See you /p/ in a year or so

>>4326216
Nigga even if it's gonna shoot up like 3 times it's still chump change. People cannibalising them for the lens are a bigger concern.

>>4326205
Boomers like you have been griping about electronics going out for so long

My 80s Nikon film cameras work just fine tyvm :) I'll try not to let the stress of the electronics randomly fizzling out on me take away from my enjoyment of film photography, hehe.

On the Mju-l, it was just an example but a quick google does not reveal any glaring reliability problems unless you are talking out your ass.
>unless

>>4322692
probably real, look at how asian those fingernails are. He can probably disassemble my phone barehanded

File: P9200440.jpg (779 KB, 1600x1200)

779 KB JPG

Haven't seen such unhinged, horrorfest design since the Habbelsad days.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OLYMPUS IMAGING CORP.
Camera Model	E-PL5
Camera Software	Version 1.0
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2012:09:20 13:07:28
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	500
Exposure Bias	-0.7 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Auto, Red-Eye Reduce
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1600
Image Height	1200
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

As a mechatronic engineer I think the price is absolutely fair. A product like this needs tons of new tooling, testing, a long design period and the sales forecast won't be very high.

To put things into perspective, Olympus XA's launch price was $200 in 1979, which would be $865 today. The Olympus has a more complex lens but otherwise it's simpler, the construction isn't as robust and on top of all its target customers are vastly different.

>Just get a used camera, retard
Pentax makes new cameras, not used ones, so they can't really compete on price. I honestly don't know what you expected and why. This is cheaper than any of the classic pro level compacts were when new, when you take inflation into account. You absolutely get what you're paying for. It's a different matter whether you should pay for one, as this product is mainly for beginners and not for people pretending to be advanced.

File: 599 us dollars.gif (1.05 MB, 363x270)

1.05 MB GIF

>>4326209
ok nvm i changed my mind fuckin DROPPED that's more than i paid for my entire FE2 kit

>>4326241
You get Kodak Ektar with a glass lens for 10x the price but not 10x the image quality.

You shilled Pentax on /p/ 10-15 years ago too, right?

File: 599.png (572 KB, 1783x615)

572 KB PNG

>>4326213
563€ which is $599

>>4326232
>does not reveal any glaring reliability issues
I get your argument and agree with it largely, but the mju-I is known to have flash control boards that die. Not sure that it’s super common but it is a thing you do come across. (And you can find dead flash but otherwise working models on eBay for much cheaper). But to your point, I have an oly Xa, Minox gl, canonet ql17, af35mii and maybe one or two others, essentially all from the mid 80s or older, and the electronics work just fine. Sure, when they die they die hard, but otherwise we’re pushing past 40 years and they’re ticking along just fine. And that’s before we really knew certain capacitor chemistries liked to explode, and certain pcb formulations like to corrode, and a number of other improvements in electronics as a whole. This thing will probably last forever if well cared for.

>>4326208
Pentax gives you 25 years of warranty and free parts

>>4326245
I'd be surprised if the image quality isn't at least a little better but that price difference goes into other things like magnesium body parts, a mode dial, focusing, exposure compensation, ... Let's not pretend that people only care about image quality. Otherwise large format box cameras would be a lot more popular. Features and usability also matter.

Never even owned a Pentax but maybe this will be my first.

>>4326250
Anon...

Large format cameras make up the vast majority of brand new film camera production. Production of LF film cameras AND the lenses for them has not ceased for even one year. If one company went out another one was already going. They have been in constant demand.

Even leica hasn't continuously produced a film camera. They took a break for a while.

I think they've also been making 35mm and 70mm motion picture cameras non-stop but i'm not 100% sure if they have or they've just been maintaining old stock

>>4326251
I wouldn't call Linhof a box camera and those new large format cameras are not competing in price or production volume with either the Kodak or the Pentax. You complained that you don't get 10x image quality for 10x price with the Pentax but you absolutely could with a large format box camera. The Kodak is essentially just a fancy looking box camera. How many people have seen shooting photos with a wooden box with a $500 fixed focus large format lens?

>>4326259
You’ve been able to buy a $399 view camera for a long ass time now

>>4326261
Absolutely and the image quality is quite good but are they popular, easy to carry around, easy to use and will they inspire younger people to start shooting film? Would you recommend one to a beginner?

>>4326263
Yes yes yes and yes and a yes just in case

Anything smaller is the same as a phone

>>4326264
Well I guess I've been shooting in the wrong part of the city because I've never seen one in the wild.

>>4326246
so its still not $599, its 563€

>>4326239
yuck

>>4322725
kek, you're right

>>4322734
it has manual advance, and I will buy it.

>>4326150
>>4326151
>>4326153
I hate to say it but I like how it looks lol

>>4326218
> My personal limit was 200€
Mine was up to 300 euros but I knew it would cost 500-600 because this is the new development line, new technology, new research.
Crypto, COVID and the war in Europe broke the market. I spend 200 in the grocery store to buy nothing so it would be lame to expect new piece of equipment to cost the same price.

>499$
>Oh ok, a little expensive but it should be a little cheaper in euroland since $ to € current rate is 0.93
>549€
I'm done bros

>>4326382
>new technology
lmao u wot

>>4326388
When all employees who used to work with the technology are retired or on higher positions, you need to find new staff and teach them. For all today’s engineers it’s a new tech they need to learn. This is like starting new project development with Programming language B.

File: Screenshot_20240618-081711.png (277 KB, 599x552)

277 KB PNG

>>4326215
Your brain on pentax

>>4326388
>>4326391
Plus manufacturing. There isn't the benefit of scale that digital cameras have, plus the cost to startup new manufacturing lines is enormous. Obviously if you know your staying in something for the long haul you can hedge a bit and spread that cost out, but who knows if Pentax will have been able to do that

Pentax shills in full blast. It's like late 2000s- early 2010s all over again.
History sure keeps on repeating.

>>4326355
Same, it looks great to me except for the cringe bokeh dial.
I think it is actually a good product, but just not something people like us would be interested in. This camera has to make a profit. They have to get people were buying disposables into it so it needs auto exposure and simple zone focus. Making a $3500 professional manual film camera when u can get equivalent used stuff for $30-1000 in any design u want used would sell nothing at all there is just too my supply in any design or spec you could wish for.

I hope this goes well for them. It kind of makes me want to buy a Olympus OM4Ti for some reason.

>>4326405
I don't know man I think I'll get one. After seeing it up close it has the character of a daily camera. And they deserve the support just for having the balls to pull this off. I just hope the build quality is as good as it seems and it passes the test of time

>>4326414
It has a plastic lens. That's all the information about quality you need...

>>4326428
Nigga it's optic glass, the plastic is in in the barrell just like half of today's lenses

>>4326430
Kit lenses

>>4326428
This “plastic lens” with HD coating provides an excellent image quality.


Also good review I want share there, with hq scans inside (not YouTube white border previews)
https://kosmofoto.com/2024/06/pentax-17-first-impressions/

>>4326438
These shots are horrible man. Is no camera reviewer capable of taking a decent frame?

Imagine buying this instead of a 500€ digital camera.

>>4326455
phones have rendered digital cameras obsolete for 99% of people. yes new flagships are that good. u wont be able to tell on instagram. film is the new expressive media for the hobbyist

>>4326438
The reviewer received 5 (FIVE) free rolls of film to shoot on a half frame camera, yet posts a little over a dozen crappy snaps
Honestly wasn't expecting much because half-frame but I've seen better pictures taken with this thing on Youtube. Most of his shots are out of focus

>>4326459
Everyone in my family bought the iphone 15 pro max except me. It is not that good. I see their photos daily. I’ve used their phones.
>inb4 you need to look at them smaller than a credit card
Why the fuck would i do that? I have 4k and 8k screens on my laptop and desktop. Because teenagers only have phones and are too high on weed to zoom in?

Anyone who would buy this camera already received one for free to review. Mostly YouTubers and Instagram zoomers.

They plan on making bank with the 23 potential customers left?

>>4326470
most people have the munchies and are fat so doordashed mcdonalds made real food obsolete bro.

>>4326459
>yes new flagships are that good
They aren't. They are impressive, but not that good. The worst part is probably the image processing pipeline, which is awful, especially on Samsung phones, probably due to female holes that wanted camera that removes pimples and pores and shit from the skin.
iPhone is a bit better, but nothing groundbreaking. Impressive? Sure. The fact they managed to fit entry level 2008 digishit into such small place and made it work good in low light conditions. Well, 3 digishits.
> u wont be able to tell on instagram.
I do not use instagram.
It's a dumb platform. If a photo is shit, it goes into whatever messenger normal people use.
If photo is good, its being posted on shit like flickr and link posted to messenger or whatever whatsapp.

>>4326478
nta but this is cope of the highest order. you sound like a friendless old boomer

>>4326492
NTA social media really is shit. Instagram is not where you go if you have real friends. It's where teenagers with fewer and fewer real friends go to cope. Like porn is for sex, social media is for friendship. The constant stream of content is a distraction. If social media were a chemical substance it would have been schedule 1 already because it has no known utility and causes addiction and dependence issues resembling cigarettes - but like tobacco, it has deep pockets behind it, and can't be used as an excuse to jail black people, which is why neither social media nor tobacco are schedule 1 drugs.

>>4326384
This camera is a scam the pricing says it all.

>>4326414
The plastic film back is piss poor.

>>4326471
Kek. This.

>film is overpriced
>let's find a solution for young broke filmshitters
>release a half frame camera to save money on film
>price it at a premium so all that saved money for film is spent on the body upfront
You can't make this shit up

>>4326492
Idk man. Instagram is shit anyway, and phone screens are too good for their shit photos. As for phones, they have one more benefit over digishit. They are ridiculously fast. AF is fast, no slow SD cards or limited buffers...
But then again, limitations of digishit are fun. Limitations of film are fun. Phone has less limitations

>>4326591
>AF
What fucking AF? Holding one up to a wire fence or any FG obstruction in the focus range is a shitshow. The sensor is just so small everything is in focus 90% of the time.

File: DSLRphile.jpg (16 KB, 270x270)

16 KB JPG

>Schizo format camera
Are you a screaming homeless person or something? Buy an iPhone or at least a modern smartphone, not some hunk of plastic crap which uses absolutely ancient technology from the 20th century.

>>4326595
Do you need attention, zachary? Really bro, I think maybe your problem is you're not shooting enough. Sell your t2i, and buy an olympus e-pl5 and the smallest lens you can get on it (it'll be a 17mm, 20mm, or 25mm) and just take that shit everywhere with you in single point AF-S.

Forget the professional aspirations for now you suck too bad

>>4326593
Modern phones have hybrid AF just like mirrorless, phase and contrast. As for sensor size, it's similar to diffusers
Digishits, 1/3", 1/1.7" etc.

>>4326597
Digishits *

>>4324602
>It's obvious they'll sell it for as much as they can while keeping sales and profit
Multiple people (including itt) were saying that a brand new camera shouldn't be more than $100-300, so it was clear to me that either there's little business sense among film photographers, or they expected the P17 to be some sort of charity product, or both. Pentax is a company, not some passionate tinkerer, but that seemed to be lost on some people.

>>4326154
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXUmpqY3nWQ&t=309s

>>4326718
thanks babe

>>4326718
So £500 entry level, £2000 consumer full frame and £5000 pro level.

>>4326717
Pentacks can have fun not selling any cameras then.

File: 20240313_093740.jpg (166 KB, 998x1352)

166 KB JPG

>>4326805
It'll sell well. From what I've seen sll this years the camera world is pretty much like the motorcycle market. Every time a new model comes out all coments are the same
>If only it had X or Y it would be perfect
>Insertbrand could have made something good but fucked it up
>I was waiting for it to come out but without X or Y and for that price I'll get a used one/stick with what I have
Fast forward a few months and it sells fine and plenty of owners talk about them and review them online constantly. The only ones seething are the window shoppers that wouldn't have bought it anyway

>>4326805
that's been Pentax's strategy for years now haha

Why did the steal x100v's design?

Kinda want to run a roll through my Olympus Pen now.

File: 2024-06-20 23_21_40-(34) (...).png (309 KB, 1028x500)

309 KB PNG

That's a big problem

>>4327264
Shutter lag was an annoying problem with many digicams

Genuine question, why would youngings shoot film(as this seems to be the targeted demographic)? Is this just targeted for instaniggers or "muh sovl" retards?
Like I'm turning 30 this year and have shot film cameras as a kid, but there's no real reason to use film outside of nostalgia reasons at least to me.
If you shoot film, why do you prefer it over a modern mirrorless? Sincerely don't understand it.
>well it's physical and it's nice to have the pics physically
Not a real reason as it's around the same cost to have prints done digitally and larger either from a printshop or a half decent printer. Especially since the photos will be smaller with a lot less keepers.
>it limits you to what you can shoot so you have to get it right the first time and you can't just burst your way through to a good photo
Disable burst mode then?

Only recently got into the hobby and it's genuinely confusing to see people prefer it at least online who aren't boomers still using disposables.

>>4327299
i like the process after you shoot the roll. it's fun. It's not practical or efficient and I have a capable mirrorless that blows any film camera i have out of the water, still like shooting film and doing the development stuff. I know some people pretend that film is somehow better or superior or whatever but I hold no such delusions, i just like it is all.
You could just as well ask "why drive a manual car? automatics just make more sense" or anything along those lines. Some times it just has nothing to do with the "better" choice.

>>4327300
Manual driving isn't a great analog as it has benefits for racing and drifting respectively, but I see where you coming from.
Are you doing the development yourself? That's pretty fucking neat
> I know some people pretend that film is somehow better or superior or whatever but I hold no such delusions, i just like it is all.
Entirely valid reasoning, and you also have a mirrorless to shore up it's weaknesses.
Thanks for the response mang.

I only started treating this as a hobby for maybe around 4-5 months or so, and since I wanted to start small to see if it's something I want to pursue I snagged a canon r50 and it's honestly blown me away as I thought it was going to be total shit. Then finding out that people are preferring film or wanting to pursue film after my initial experience genuinely confused the fuck outta me lmfao.

File: Add-Developer_2.62-1720x968.jpg (193 KB, 1720x968)

193 KB JPG

>>4327303
>Are you doing the development yourself? That's pretty fucking neat
yup, i have one of these lil niggas and they're great. Its partly nostalgic for me, still in my 30s but old enough to have had a photography class in high school and college with full darkrooms. The smell of the chemistry just does something nice for me. If you look at this as a hobby of process rather than as a hobby of results, then maybe it might make more sense. At least how I approach it anyway. the r50 is a nice little kit, if you're new to all this the shitposting and memeing around here might fly over your head as genuine criticisms of everything lol.

File: chipmunk (1 of 1).jpg (3.17 MB, 2560x1952)

3.17 MB JPG

>>4327307
That's really fucking neat, I was expecting like full dark room/red light style, shit has come a longgg way since we were kids lmfao.
Is that the name of it(add developer?), curious and want to check it out and maybe some vids on the process. Probably will never go back to film, but always like learning new things and seeing niche tech shit.
And yah, Rf100-400mm just arrived today and had a blast even though 2 hours in 92f and 55% humidity made me sweat like a whore in church, might upgrade bodies in a year or two to nail down fundamentals more. I don't feel limited by the body yet besides slower AF on the new lens, lack of weather sealing, and no ibis but those aren't reasons to upgrade right away.
>one of my shots from the walk

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS R50
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.3.1 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:06:20 18:00:22
Exposure Time	1/800 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Partial
Focal Length	400.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB

>>4327309
nice photo. when people ask me why would you still use a camera instead of just your phone, it's uses like this that come to mind. Glass first body second is definitely the way to approach it.
>is that the name of it
nah, that one's specifically called a paterson tank, but that's just one brand/style of it. You still have to load it in the dark somehow, but once loaded and locked you can use it in daylight. I use a "changing bag" which is just like 2 pillowcases inside each other made of blackout material lol. here's a video that kind of gives a rundown of the process https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPQ7OPy8T2w. If you're not coming from any photography background, i'd say it might be fun to get into, but i wouldn't recommend splitting your attention between film and digital at the start.

>>4327314
Yeah it's a massive difference, I started practicing and learning the histogram with my s23 ultra in manual but a standalone is literally worlds apart. Even more so upgrading from my RFs55-210mm lens.
Thanks for the vid, I'll check it out.

>>4327314
man I get there can be a sort of autistic appeal to doing everything precisely and by the book, but ilford is not making it look enjoyable at all
thank god for rodinal that makes it so I don't have to deal with that bullshit

>>4327318
Yeah I don’t go step by step like they show in that video lol, there’s a lot more freedom when doing b/w, that was just to show the new anon what the process is like. I do inversions between shitposting here and just treat it chill. You can get autistic about it but you get diminishing returns in how good your negatives will be. I’m snapshitting with my dogs, good enough is a low bar.

>>4326886
This camera looks like it was made out of obligation to renew the license for the brand

For anyone saying they fucked up or it backfired, or no one will buy it.. you know already sold out in the Japanese markets, right?

You know that Japanese teens was their primary target, right? And that half frame is extremely popular here, right?

>>4327327
yes, the overpopulated country where people buy plug in hot pads instead of actual stoves certainly has some weird shopping habits most likely influenced by their already overwhelming sense of unimportance. Every relatable hero in every piece of media that comes out of that place seems to be a useless loser too. Japan loves stuff that sucks.

>>4327331
>overpopulated country
damn youre retarded

>>4327264
What a fucking hideous clickbait video. 11 minutes of nothing just to say that Chris Nichols mentioned a small delay. The lens has a focusing motor and it adjusts to the selected distance when you half press it, simple as that

>>4327299
I'm just over 40. Its more of a tactile process. Its not the gear (which is what digital shotters focus on). For example I like to make pinhole cameras and use paper negatives. I like to make cyanotypes. I like to dev and print.
I also shoot digital but feel nothing in the process.
This pentax camera looks like hot overpriced garbage. Give me a pen ee or konica eye over that.

>>4327441
Big big problem

What’s with the bitching with regard to the CR2 battery?
I genuinely don’t understand why this keeps being brought up.

>>4327458
Thanks for the response man, see that makes a bit more sense as you're also diy-ing the camera, so it's an entirely different hobby to me. For me I just love animals in general so I like seeing em, and then I find the process of bringing raws back to life super satisfying, as equally as enjoyable as taking the shot.
It reminds me of figure/bust painting I like to do in a way, as I usually do neutral gray primer and you're building light values/volumes/colors, etc.
>>4327461
cr2s suck even good quality ones have shorter lifespans, used em a lot in gun stuff, they're annoying and not easily found locally in a pinch(rip radioshack) vs 18650s.

>>4327461
>What’s with the bitching with regard to the CR2 battery?
CR2 is common, ubiquitous, even, in the firearms industry and optics and lights and night viewing devices and Goddess-alone only knows what else powered by them is killing innocents around the world every day, every hour, every minute. By buying CR2 cells you are supporting those manufacturers of death when you as a photographic artist should be either bringing the world's beauty to people so that they stop with strife and violence or at the very list using your talen for reportage to enable viewers to see the kind of bastardry the military-insulation complex inflicts upon innocents week in and week out each day.

>>4327467
I had no idea they were used in gun shit. Weird. I’ve never had any issue finding them, but maybe I’m spoiled. I lived near a brick and mortar photo shop and near a battery and lightbulb store. Now I’m in Japan and every battery type is in the supermarket.
>>4327469
Well damn when you put it like that…

>>4327472
Yeah still is kinda common in a lot of light and laser/ir systems but 18650 or good ol AA is preferred heavily.
In America, it's pretty hard to find them casually, you need to hunt for them especially if there's not a tone of tech-like stores.

>>4327473
>In America, it's pretty hard to find them casually, you need to hunt for them especially if there's not a tone of tech-like stores.
Weird, in Australia I'm one of a pretty small number of people to use an Eotech and PVS14s are not very common but I can find CR2s fucking everywhere.

>>4327475
Wait really? Maybe it's more of a APAC thing?
I can find em at bestbuy or frys, but usually I had to go to radioshack before they died.
Primarily I just order online, but for obvious reasons that isn't the best when you need it lol.

>>4327476
Yeah supermarkets, a decent number of what we call servos but you'd call gas stations, and a very common big box hardware store stock them readily, and you've probably got a 50:50 chance at a convenience store if you were desperate and didn't mind paying.

>>4327476
>>4327478
>Maybe it's more of a APAC thing?
But you might be right about that, I'd not ever given it any thought.

>>4327478
>>4327479
Wild, for us, our gas stations may carry 9v, AA/AAAs, but that's about it.
Always interesting to find those differences between geographic locations lmao.
Thinking it has to be more so for APAC, unless some eurobros can chime in.

>>4327461
In some countries it's not that common and you have to go to an electronics/parts shop to get one. Not a big deal to be honest but it's not something you'll find in every corner everywhere

>>4327481
>Always interesting to find those differences between geographic locations lmao.
Yeah it's funny how much shit in life you just take for granted as normal til you go somewhere else lol.

>>4327481
European here. Round button, AA/AAA are everywhere (supermarket, gas stations...) 9v was something common for toys 20 years ago but now it's almost gone just like CR2 and other formats. For those you need to go to specific stores, but you can find them easily there. Anyways CR2 have a shelf life of 10 years and this camera uses one for every 10 minimum, so you just buy 3 or 4 and you'll be good for the better part of a year

>>4327485
*For every 10 rolls

only fools buy cr2 CELLS when everyone knows that 18650 BATTERIES are two cr2 CELLS arranged north south serial with a wrapper so for basically the same price an 18650 BATTERY can be separated into two cr2 CELLS with nothing more than a pen knife and a firm handshake.

>>4327485
Interesting, 9vs are used in our smoke/carbon monoxide alarms here.
Personally not interested in a film camera, but that's not too bad battery usage wise.

>>4327469
Pentax confirmed for being complicit in genocide

>>4327494
>complicit
I think you mean enthusiastic

>>4327299
>>4327458
I just got into film recently, and doing my own development
I never did it in school, and before now hadn't used film since disposables in grade school
for me it's to be able to use cameras/formats that aren't available in digital
so 100% a gearfag thing for me; if there was an actual commercial 6x8 digital back I'd jump on that
all the photos get scanned, the film is an intermediate to digital
doing my own development is because I figure why should I pay someone else to look at my photos? I don't have to do it with my digital cameras
>>4327469
>>4327472
>>4327473
>By buying CR2 cells you are supporting those manufacturers of death
based?
but honestly I've seen CR123As used more in gun stuff
my Sekonic also uses that

>>4322692
I watched a video on a guy reviewing one. It's bad, but not as bad as everyone on here is saying. I hope it does well.

>>4327576
It's bad for it's price.

It would be decent at $200, at most what it is worth.

Why would anyone buy this when they have their phone? Buy another phone within your budget and add 500€ to your budget, then buy a smartphone for that price.

>>4327641
not everyone is addicted to the goy slab anon

>>4327641
Because then you’re stuck with digimaxxed rockwellcore “photos” with wax skin and wormy details instead of nice grainy SOVL

>>4327649
You're reading this on one right now.

>>4327652
It takes 3 seconds to slap a SOVL preset on all your pictures. Scanned film is digimaxxed too, the only real deal are the negatives. As soon as you print or scan them, it's not representative of how actually film is.

>>4327691
This post is cope

Phones are cancer, phone cameras are garbage, phone photos are garbage. Scanned film is 10000x better than your phone snap. Cope.

>>4327691
Who says I'm printing or scanning? The more time passes the more I realise people who disregard anything that's not entirely digital are the moral disease of our time

>>4327696
you just went full schizo. next up you defy all expectations and marry a horse.

>>4327696
Printing is analogue

>>4327629
Agreed. You can get a decent 4x5 camera with lens and filmbacks for that price, hah.

>>4327859
For 500 you should be able to get AT LEAST one and a half frame. One and three quarters even

I just bought one for my wife. She wanted a point and shoot with film for vacations. She doesn’t know anything about photography and I’m not teaching her. Yall can keep seething about the price but I’m not poor. My only regret is ordering it through (((Adorama))) but again who cares, I’m not poor.

>>4328564
>im not poor im not poor
>only $500
you are poor if you have to try convince some anons that $500 is a lot

>>4328571
One would think so, yet everyone in this thread is bitching that $500 is just too much.

File: 1719213637000.jpg (339 KB, 1200x675)

339 KB JPG

>for Instagram!;
why the fuck don't they make a 24x24 square format camera

>>4328573
it's just too much for what it is. if they slapped a good lens on it then maybe it would be worth $500
film is a terribly small niche. i hope pentax realizes this and the next iteration of that cam will be a $2000 digital rangefinder

>>4323017
no they didn't forget tech. the market is way too small to make it inexpensive

>>4322783
is this how you always take a shit

>>4328627
Its not “too much for what it is”. They are selling it at the price I was willing to buy it. Thats how markets work. There are only 3 available film cameras currently in production. The $6000 Leica, this thing, and the cheap “Kodak” chinkshits for $50. Used cameras don’t count, they are failing at a rapid pace, the electronics on my Mintolta died and now its a brick. You are a poorfag. With inflation, $500 in current year is $200 from 2019. My income went up 150% during that time. Just because you are a broke ass nigga that forages from dumpsters, doesn’t make it my problem. $500 is cheap. Thats 2 trips to Walmart for groceries. The Pentax 17 looks cute. My wife will love it

>>4328901
Don't forget to buy one for your wife son!

>>4328906
>wife son
>>>/y/

>>4322693
lol

>>4328628
>the market is way too small to make it inexpensive
nope. the market for a cheap fil camera is huge

>>4322766
Why can't the Agat 18k come with a built-it flash, bros?

>>4335382
because you can put your own auto thyristor flash of your choice on it now

>>4328906
And her buck.

comments have been deleted. intedesting

>>4335651
from what? schizo

>>4323211
Everything only looks the same to a person who themselves is very nondescript