Would you buy a new film camera from Pentax?

**monochrome** · 03-22-2014, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by rt22306

For starters, turning the pages of my 1977-78 Sears Camera Catalog a Pentax MX with 50mm f1.7 lens was listed at $299.50 (the Olympus OM-1 with an f1.8 was $5 less). The K-1000 was $154.50 with an f2.0. With a metal body and similar to the MX or OM-1 (I have an OM-1n) feature wise but with 1/2000 top shutter speed, I'd be willing to part with...$500 body only if it were the real deal. Just to get the conversation started.

(I now duck out of the way...)

Using just CPI numbers and no changes to lost technology, the MX kit would cost $1,160.17 today. The K1000 would cost $598.58 (but you couldn't get either one. No one can make the parts of metal any more).

LesDMess · 03-22-2014, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by canonguy

No I wouldn't......too much great stuff used available.

Understandable since you are a Canonguy . . .

---------- Post added 03-22-14 at 08:06 PM ----------

Originally posted by monochrome

Using just CPI numbers and no changes to lost technology, the MX kit would cost $1,160.17 today. The K1000 would cost $598.58 (but you couldn't get either one. No one can make the parts of metal any more).

That's probably why the Leica MP - similar specs as the K1000, cost as much as it does to be able to sell new.

**TomB_tx** · 03-22-2014, 06:37 PM

Originally posted by LesDMess

That's probably why the Leica MP - similar specs as the K1000, cost as much as it does to be able to sell new.

Low sales volume also greatly affects the cost, as the processes to make parts now use cheaper tooling resulting in much higher parts cost. Covers that would have been formed by drawing sheet brass are now machined from solid billets, etc.

6BQ5 · 03-22-2014, 10:25 PM

Originally posted by rt22306

For starters, turning the pages of my 1977-78 Sears Camera Catalog a Pentax MX with 50mm f1.7 lens was listed at $299.50 (the Olympus OM-1 with an f1.8 was $5 less). The K-1000 was $154.50 with an f2.0. With a metal body and similar to the MX or OM-1 (I have an OM-1n) feature wise but with 1/2000 top shutter speed, I'd be willing to part with...$500 body only if it were the real deal. Just to get the conversation started.

(I now duck out of the way...)

Wow, that $500 is higher than I expected anyone to start out with!

The Vivitar V3800 sells for about $240-ish I think.

**gofour3** · 03-23-2014, 07:45 AM

Originally posted by 6BQ5

Wow, that $500 is higher than I expected anyone to start out with!

Yeah I would spend $500+ as well, as long as the 35mm slr camera is all manual and all metal.

Phil.

stevebrot · 03-23-2014, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by rt22306

I'd be willing to part with...$500 body only if it were the real deal. Just to get the conversation started.

I would suggest the Voigtlander R3M (about $670 USD, body only) as a bottom-end pricing benchmark for a mostly metal enthusiast camera and the recently-departed Zeiss ZM rangefinder (was $1500 USD, body only) as a more realistic estimate. Yes, they are both rangefinder cameras, but the effort to manufacture is about the same as for an SLR.

Steve

millsware · 03-23-2014, 11:23 AM

I am realizing that I probably set the bar too low at $200. More like an entry-level DSLR would probably make sense $500-600. In that case I'm guessing a lot more people would just shell out for a used copy in good condition (or 2 or 3) and get it CLA'd.

Just remember though, I think the assumption that there will always be a supply of cheap, good-condition vintage cameras is a little optimistic. I would guess that the market right now is about as high as the supply would get, as most people that are going to switch from film to digital have already done so. The remaining supply of "I found this in my grandfather's attic" might remain steady for a while, but not forever.

stevebrot · 03-23-2014, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by 6BQ5

The Vivitar V3800 sells for about $240-ish I think.

Yep. Its evil twin, the Nikon FM10 (both are made by Cosina) is about $70 dollars more. I can't speak to the Nikon, but the Viv has a reputation for VERY spotty quality. I hate to say it since I am a fan of the Cosina products. I don't consider either to be something I would want in my bag.

Steve

6BQ5 · 03-23-2014, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by millsware

I am realizing that I probably set the bar too low at $200. More like an entry-level DSLR would probably make sense $500-600. In that case I'm guessing a lot more people would just shell out for a used copy in good condition (or 2 or 3) and get it CLA'd.

Just remember though, I think the assumption that there will always be a supply of cheap, good-condition vintage cameras is a little optimistic. I would guess that the market right now is about as high as the supply would get, as most people that are going to switch from film to digital have already done so. The remaining supply of "I found this in my grandfather's attic" might remain steady for a while, but not forever.

A cheap supply of good used bodies will lasts for a long while yet. I agree that we're still seeing a steady of supply of "attic discoveries" and "estate finds". Most people see these old cameras as being junk, especially when they think they are broken when all they really need is just a fresh battery in some cases. At some point film cameras will get aurora of being antiques and then people will start snapping them up either to use or to keep as symbols of a bygone era. Then prices will jump and there may be a viable market for new film cameras. LPs followed this path as people were jumping to CDs. Now LPs are going through a revival for their unique sound and feel. Players and discs are being manufactured all over again. Granted, it's all done in smaller quantities than before and gone are the high quality Made in Japan gear (for the most part). A lot is made of plastic in farther east Asia. We may see a new film body one day but it will not be made the same way as before. Think of your modern day DSLR but now imagine it with film instead of an image sensor. What would you pay for that?

**monochrome** · 03-23-2014, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by millsware

The remaining supply of "I found this in my grandfather's attic" might remain steady for a while, but not forever.

Forever is a very long time. There were millions upon millions of rangefinder and SLR film cameras made. For instance, about 8,000,000 Yashica Electro's over about 15 years - just that one camera body. It was the first AE camera! Sure, lots of old mechanical cameras have simply been thrown away. I retrieved my father's Argus C3 from the trash pile when he passed away in 2007. I'd guess anything bought is the 50's is very unlikely to be in the possession of its original owner now. In ten years we'll say that of cameras bought in the 60's. In ten more we'll say that of cameras bought in the 70's and that will be about the end of the 'Original Owner' fully mechanical film SLR's. Ten more years will finish out the AE-type as well.

In thirty years there won't be any more people living who bought manual focus SLR's when they were new. Of the - let's just guess 50,000,000, 10,000,000 of them Pentax, to be conservative - mechanical and AE film SLR's made from 1960 - 1989, how many will be left, and what will be the demand for those that are left?

And if Pentax made brand new (affordable) film cameras today, how many of them would still be working or repairable, using the assumed current technology (lots of plastic parts) in the same thirty years?

I'm betting on more of the classic film cameras to still be around in thirty years.

**ChrisPlatt** · 03-23-2014, 12:31 PM

The V3800 and FM10 are entry level cameras built down to a price by Cosina.

The Bessaflex 35mm SLR bodies they marketed a few years ago were of much higher quality, with a higher price to match.
The recent Zeiss Ikon 35mm RF camera, made by Cosina, as well a their own Voigtlander line of RF cameras and lenses are also of extremely high quality.

Chris

dubiousone · 03-23-2014, 01:01 PM

I don't see Pentax offering a new film camera. The number of labs seems to be dwindling; this could change if demand does but I don't see that happening. I believe Nikon still makes the FM-10 but I am not impressed. Besides, with the availability of older cameras out there, students would probably choose one of them over it. Now, I stumbled on to a Minolta Maxxum Stsi (long story, ran a roll through it and sold it the same week) It was auto focus auto everything or as manual as you like. Other than being a plasticky little thing, it took excellent photos. It was DIRECTLY responsible for me purchasing not one but TWO Nikon N90's. Talk about tough; built like tanks, as auto or as manual as you want, excellent auto-focus/exposure, I'd like to find a Pentax that is its equal in the same vintage. (any hints would be welcome, I don't know a P-whatever from a PZ) I don't see them making anything new; for that to happen there would need to be a resurgence in film. If they did, it would be some plastic-bug thing. Nikon is making the all metal new-hottest so there's no reason they couldn't or Pentax, make a film camera the same, all metal. But who would pay $2000 for one?

View Poll Results: Would you buy a new film camera?
Yes	39	32.77%
No	59	49.58%
Depends on price	21	17.65%
Voters: 119. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Would you buy a Pentax Full Frame DSLR? extended poll	i83N	Pentax Full Frame	113	04-02-2015 07:12 AM
If you could only spend $600 dollars for a new camera, which would you choose?	OldNoob	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	36	02-14-2014 07:25 AM
Would you buy a Pentax Full Frame DSLR?	Tesla	Pentax Full Frame	364	07-11-2013 10:01 AM
Would you buy a camera with a dent like this?	Abstract	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	28	02-06-2011 01:43 PM
What would urge you to buy a new Pentax DSLR?	froeschle	Pentax DSLR Discussion	39	12-09-2008 09:22 PM

03-22-2014, 01:23 PM	#91
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by rt22306 For starters, turning the pages of my 1977-78 Sears Camera Catalog a Pentax MX with 50mm f1.7 lens was listed at $299.50 (the Olympus OM-1 with an f1.8 was $5 less). The K-1000 was $154.50 with an f2.0. With a metal body and similar to the MX or OM-1 (I have an OM-1n) feature wise but with 1/2000 top shutter speed, I'd be willing to part with...$500 body only if it were the real deal. Just to get the conversation started. (I now duck out of the way...) Using just CPI numbers and no changes to lost technology, the MX kit would cost $1,160.17 today. The K1000 would cost $598.58 (but you couldn't get either one. No one can make the parts of metal any more).

03-22-2014, 05:03 PM	#92
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by canonguy No I wouldn't......too much great stuff used available. Understandable since you are a *Canon*guy . . . ---------- Post added 03-22-14 at 08:06 PM ---------- Originally posted by monochrome Using just CPI numbers and no changes to lost technology, the MX kit would cost $1,160.17 today. The K1000 would cost $598.58 (but you couldn't get either one. No one can make the parts of metal any more). That's probably why the Leica MP - similar specs as the K1000, cost as much as it does to be able to sell new.

03-22-2014, 06:37 PM	#93
TomB_tx Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,446	Originally posted by LesDMess That's probably why the Leica MP - similar specs as the K1000, cost as much as it does to be able to sell new. Low sales volume also greatly affects the cost, as the processes to make parts now use cheaper tooling resulting in much higher parts cost. Covers that would have been formed by drawing sheet brass are now machined from solid billets, etc.

03-22-2014, 10:25 PM	#94
6BQ5 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,348	Originally posted by rt22306 For starters, turning the pages of my 1977-78 Sears Camera Catalog a Pentax MX with 50mm f1.7 lens was listed at $299.50 (the Olympus OM-1 with an f1.8 was $5 less). The K-1000 was $154.50 with an f2.0. With a metal body and similar to the MX or OM-1 (I have an OM-1n) feature wise but with 1/2000 top shutter speed, I'd be willing to part with...$500 body only if it were the real deal. Just to get the conversation started. (I now duck out of the way...) Wow, that $500 is higher than I expected anyone to start out with! The Vivitar V3800 sells for about $240-ish I think.

03-23-2014, 07:45 AM	#95
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,091	Originally posted by 6BQ5 Wow, that $500 is higher than I expected anyone to start out with! Yeah I would spend $500+ as well, as long as the 35mm slr camera is all manual and all metal. Phil.

03-23-2014, 11:07 AM	#96
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by rt22306 I'd be willing to part with...$500 body only if it were the real deal. Just to get the conversation started. I would suggest the Voigtlander R3M (about $670 USD, body only) as a bottom-end pricing benchmark for a mostly metal enthusiast camera and the recently-departed Zeiss ZM rangefinder (was $1500 USD, body only) as a more realistic estimate. Yes, they are both rangefinder cameras, but the effort to manufacture is about the same as for an SLR. Steve

03-23-2014, 11:23 AM	#97
millsware Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 70 Original Poster	I am realizing that I probably set the bar too low at $200. More like an entry-level DSLR would probably make sense $500-600. In that case I'm guessing a lot more people would just shell out for a used copy in good condition (or 2 or 3) and get it CLA'd. Just remember though, I think the assumption that there will always be a supply of cheap, good-condition vintage cameras is a little optimistic. I would guess that the market right now is about as high as the supply would get, as most people that are going to switch from film to digital have already done so. The remaining supply of "I found this in my grandfather's attic" might remain steady for a while, but not forever.

03-23-2014, 11:31 AM	#98
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by 6BQ5 The Vivitar V3800 sells for about $240-ish I think. Yep. Its evil twin, the Nikon FM10 (both are made by Cosina) is about $70 dollars more. I can't speak to the Nikon, but the Viv has a reputation for VERY spotty quality. I hate to say it since I am a fan of the Cosina products. I don't consider either to be something I would want in my bag. Steve

03-23-2014, 11:54 AM	#99
6BQ5 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,348	Originally posted by millsware I am realizing that I probably set the bar too low at $200. More like an entry-level DSLR would probably make sense $500-600. In that case I'm guessing a lot more people would just shell out for a used copy in good condition (or 2 or 3) and get it CLA'd. Just remember though, I think the assumption that there will always be a supply of cheap, good-condition vintage cameras is a little optimistic. I would guess that the market right now is about as high as the supply would get, as most people that are going to switch from film to digital have already done so. The remaining supply of "I found this in my grandfather's attic" might remain steady for a while, but not forever. A cheap supply of good used bodies will lasts for a long while yet. I agree that we're still seeing a steady of supply of "attic discoveries" and "estate finds". Most people see these old cameras as being junk, especially when they think they are broken when all they really need is just a fresh battery in some cases. At some point film cameras will get aurora of being antiques and then people will start snapping them up either to use or to keep as symbols of a bygone era. Then prices will jump and there may be a viable market for new film cameras. LPs followed this path as people were jumping to CDs. Now LPs are going through a revival for their unique sound and feel. Players and discs are being manufactured all over again. Granted, it's all done in smaller quantities than before and gone are the high quality Made in Japan gear (for the most part). A lot is made of plastic in farther east Asia. We may see a new film body one day but it will not be made the same way as before. Think of your modern day DSLR but now imagine it with film instead of an image sensor. What would you pay for that?

03-23-2014, 12:09 PM	#100
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by millsware The remaining supply of "I found this in my grandfather's attic" might remain steady for a while, but not forever. Forever is a very long time. There were millions upon millions of rangefinder and SLR film cameras made. For instance, about 8,000,000 Yashica Electro's over about 15 years - just that one camera body. It was the first AE camera! Sure, lots of old mechanical cameras have simply been thrown away. I retrieved my father's Argus C3 from the trash pile when he passed away in 2007. I'd guess anything bought is the 50's is very unlikely to be in the possession of its original owner now. In ten years we'll say that of cameras bought in the 60's. In ten more we'll say that of cameras bought in the 70's and that will be about the end of the 'Original Owner' fully mechanical film SLR's. Ten more years will finish out the AE-type as well. In thirty years there won't be any more people living who bought manual focus SLR's when they were new. Of the - let's just guess 50,000,000, 10,000,000 of them Pentax, to be conservative - mechanical and AE film SLR's made from 1960 - 1989, how many will be left, and what will be the demand for those that are left? And if Pentax made brand new (affordable) film cameras today, how many of them would still be working or repairable, using the assumed current technology (lots of plastic parts) in the same thirty years? I'm betting on more of the classic film cameras to still be around in thirty years.

03-23-2014, 12:31 PM	#101
ChrisPlatt Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Rockaway Beach NYC Posts: 7,694	The V3800 and FM10 are entry level cameras built down to a price by Cosina. The Bessaflex 35mm SLR bodies they marketed a few years ago were of much higher quality, with a higher price to match. The recent Zeiss Ikon 35mm RF camera, made by Cosina, as well a their own Voigtlander line of RF cameras and lenses are also of extremely high quality. Chris

03-23-2014, 01:01 PM	#102
dubiousone Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 112	I don't see Pentax offering a new film camera. The number of labs seems to be dwindling; this could change if demand does but I don't see that happening. I believe Nikon still makes the FM-10 but I am not impressed. Besides, with the availability of older cameras out there, students would probably choose one of them over it. Now, I stumbled on to a Minolta Maxxum Stsi (long story, ran a roll through it and sold it the same week) It was auto focus auto everything or as manual as you like. Other than being a plasticky little thing, it took excellent photos. It was DIRECTLY responsible for me purchasing not one but TWO Nikon N90's. Talk about tough; built like tanks, as auto or as manual as you want, excellent auto-focus/exposure, I'd like to find a Pentax that is its equal in the same vintage. (any hints would be welcome, I don't know a P-whatever from a PZ) I don't see them making anything new; for that to happen there would need to be a resurgence in film. If they did, it would be some plastic-bug thing. Nikon is making the all metal new-hottest so there's no reason they couldn't or Pentax, make a film camera the same, all metal. But who would pay $2000 for one?