[Lord Lucan]

Pentax need to get on with producing the K1 III, not diverting its small resources into faffing around developing a new film camera that only a few people would buy. While having a pentprism might seem retro to the mirrorless fans, it has its strong points relative to EVFs but needs to be accompanied by the advances seen in the K3 iii - and more. Otherwise Pentax cameras will soon look as irrelevant as mahogony and brass plate cameras, no matter how warm the feeling given to fans of retro.

The current interest in film is largely powered by the availability of old film cameras at knock-down prices. That is part of its appeal to cash-strapped younger people - until they discover developing costs. I think the novelty soon wears thin (I've seen some accounts on YouTube), and what fashion there now is for film cameras might soon pass except with a few of the Old Guard. A newly developed film camera will be expensive. Moerover those calling for a new film camera are inconsitent as a group about what they want - some want it to match a modern camera in focussing and other automation, while others want a K1000 exactly, so even the small market for new film cameras will be sub-divided again.

[ffking]

Ricoh know that they can't compete in the mirrorless market - even if they produced something as good as the top mirrorless cameras being produced today (which would take a level of investment that they are not prepared to make, they would still have low sales because such cameras are already available and why should anybody change brand without a compelling reason - especially to Pentax who have never been a player in the professional 35mm/FF market.

They are - rightly, in my opinion - going for that section of the market enjoys cameras as objects as much as means to an end - an area where (for whatever reason) mechanical beats electronic. Obviously the output of the camera still has to be very high potential quality, but the photographer must exercise skill and judgement to achieve this, not rely on computerisation, which many find more satisfying and the results are different when the individual photographer does things his way.

They could concievably make high quality film SLRs that people who are disillusioned with digital and electronics and want something physical (a negative or transparency) to show for their efforts, or just enjoy the darkroom process would buy for the pleasure of using one, which wouldn't have to so expenseive if they back-pedaled on the electronics, but the lack of aperture ring on the new 21mm ltd suggests that's not what they're thinking.

[house]

Pentax need to get on with producing the K1 III, not diverting its small resources into faffing around developing a new film camera that only a few people would buy. While having a pentprism might seem retro to the mirrorless fans, it has its strong points relative to EVFs but needs to be accompanied by the advances seen in the K3 iii - and more. Otherwise Pentax cameras will soon look as irrelevant as mahogony and brass plate cameras, no matter how warm the feeling given to fans of retro.

The current interest in film is largely powered by the availability of old film cameras at knock-down prices. That is part of its appeal to cash-strapped younger people - until they discover developing costs. I think the novelty soon wears thin (I've seen some accounts on YouTube), and what fashion there now is for film cameras might soon pass except with a few of the Old Guard. A newly developed film camera will be expensive. Moerover those calling for a new film camera are inconsitent as a group about what they want - some want it to match a modern camera in focussing and other automation, while others want a K1000 exactly, so even the small market for new film cameras will be sub-divided again.

If you look at top level publications with strong photography an incredible amount will be analogue. Fashion, lifestyle, New York Times etc etc. In some of those fields it will dominate completely. Fashion lifestyle magazines for super trendy people will be mostly analogue.

[mbukal]

Pentax need to get on with producing the K1 III, not diverting its small resources into faffing around developing a new film camera that only a few people would buy. While having a pentprism might seem retro to the mirrorless fans, it has its strong points relative to EVFs but needs to be accompanied by the advances seen in the K3 iii - and more. Otherwise Pentax cameras will soon look as irrelevant as mahogony and brass plate cameras, no matter how warm the feeling given to fans of retro.

The current interest in film is largely powered by the availability of old film cameras at knock-down prices. That is part of its appeal to cash-strapped younger people - until they discover developing costs. I think the novelty soon wears thin (I've seen some accounts on YouTube), and what fashion there now is for film cameras might soon pass except with a few of the Old Guard. A newly developed film camera will be expensive. Moerover those calling for a new film camera are inconsitent as a group about what they want - some want it to match a modern camera in focussing and other automation, while others want a K1000 exactly, so even the small market for new film cameras will be sub-divided again.

you wrote the meaning exactly the same in everything I thought with my text

[Serkevan]

If you look at top level publications with strong photography an incredible amount will be analogue. Fashion, lifestyle, New York Times etc etc. In some of those fields it will dominate completely. Fashion lifestyle magazines for super trendy people will be mostly analogue.

I was under the impression that those magazines are film but medium/large format, and that's because the only thing remotely close to a Mamiya/Pentax 6x7 is a 40K€ (body only) Phase One 645. A film camera is more than an order of magnitude cheaper, and with the style of photography being what it is, there's no 30 fps burst shooting to drive up film&darkroom costs.

[house]

I was under the impression that those magazines are film but medium/large format, and that's because the only thing remotely close to a Mamiya/Pentax 6x7 is a 40K€ (body only) Phase One 645. A film camera is more than an order of magnitude cheaper, and with the style of photography being what it is, there's no 30 fps burst shooting to drive up film&darkroom costs.

I don't think it's cost driven at this point. It's the look. As you say much of it is medium format but there's plenty of 135 stuff in there as well. They give slightly different "vibes" so 135 looks a bit more immediate and is used when it should look even more "natural" and in situ.

There's certainly no 30fps type shooting! In reality though that's such an incredible niche, one that's barely photography at that! It's more machine operator. I think that's the distinction younger people feel more acutely than many older. Photography vs getting the shot.

[GUB]

A good adapter, i.e. with a lot of electronics to convert the protocols, in a 1mm space (46.5mm - 45.46mm) ?

That is why each mount would either need a dedicated body or perhaps a master mount that you swap for different mount systems. So you could have a Ricoh C, Ricon N , Ricoh M and a Ricoh O camera as well as the Flagship Pentax K-1 iii.
If you look at the threads on this site a heck of a lot of the users seem to be utilising past lenses - Pentax would be aware of this and would see the vast opportunity elsewhere.
EDIT and there would be little need to rush the development as new cameras are still being sold. But once their gear starts getting old there will be a bunch of grumpy old sods (just like here) that will be angry about the loss of choice.

---

Last edited by GUB; 02-14-2022 at 12:29 PM.

[redrockcoulee]

A good adapter, i.e. with a lot of electronics to convert the protocols, in a 1mm space (46.5mm - 45.46mm) ?

Would not the opposite turning direction be an even larger problem with an adapter?

---------- Post added 02-14-22 at 12:44 PM ----------

The prices for good film cameras have skyrocketed in the past five years but still nowhere near the cost of making a new one and it makes no sense to make a new cheap one..

Perhaps Pentax wants non Pentax shooters to remember its glory days and then buy a DSLR when they need a new camera?

Good publicity at a low cost and catering to both existing and potential customers is how I see this.

It would be nice if they made sure that the brass gear for the MZ series were readily available.

[Zygonyx]

OK for an SLR meeting.
An next one also in english, for a better international attention.
That's cool

[Kunzite]

OK for an SLR meeting.
An next one also in english, for a better international attention.
That's cool

Is that official, or a rumor?
It would be neat, really neat...

[MMVIII]

Old technology? It is the same technology going into a DSLR and a mirrorless. It is about what viewfinder you want, not technology. Mirrorless cameras has been around since photography was invented.
It should be obvious by now that Pentax have no plans at present to make a mirrorless camera....

---------- Post added 02-14-22 at 05:57 PM ----------



I don't think so. Newly made version of these cameras would be too expensive. There are after all several millions of used ones in existence. If they intend to make a new film body, it must be a camera that add values and features not available on older cameras.
Pentax do have a finished developed film body that never reached production; the MZ-1. Developing cost is written off long ago. With updated AF and metering it could conceivably be put in production, though I don't believe it will happen...

That's an interesting thought. The Mz-series was the line to which the SMC FA limiteds were introduced. The MZ-1 would be a worthy classic, if updated to support KAF4 it would offer a distinct advantage to all vintage cameras, as it could use the newest lenses. But, again, just a thought experiment, not a prediction. I don't think this will happen either.

[TwoUptons]

This could be all about film photographers without being much about film...

If you want a full frame camera that shoots like a 35mm SLR, there are really only a couple of those left, and in a few years, far fewer...

So if you like the feel of shooting film but don't like developing it, buy a K1...

I think Fuji, with their film profiles and form factor, has done a terrific job of capturing this, and Pentax is obviously in a good position to capture folks who like the look and feel of SLR shooting.

It makes sense to me...

That said, if Ricoh wants to get back in the business of repairing cameras, I have a couple of ZX-Ls that need a new gear

-Eric

[thibs]

That's an interesting thought. The Mz-series was the line to which the SMC FA limiteds were introduced. The MZ-1 would be a worthy classic, if updated to support KAF4 it would offer a distinct advantage to all vintage cameras, as it could use the newest lenses. But, again, just a thought experiment, not a prediction. I don't think this will happen either.

Well, MZ serie was made with aperture rings in mind so, that's a tiny little problem lol.

That being said, I'd kill for a MZ1 !

[MMVIII]

Well, MZ serie was made with aperture rings in mind si, that's a tiny little problem lol.

That being said, I'd kill for a MZ1 !

Yes, it must be a KAF4+
And, no doubt, there would be a group of enthusiasts that would be very happy. Me included

[WillWeaverRVA]

I just hope there's a price drop announcement for the K-3 III.