Jump to content

New half frame film camera from Pentax at exorbitant price


wlaidlaw

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Pentax have interestingly just brought out a new half frame film camera but at the very steep price of £499. It makes my recent purchase of a Minox ML in perfect condition at £90 seem an incredible bargain and a Yashica 110 Wide with autofocus, 28-110 zoom  and motor wind for £8. The Pentax 17 is fixed focus. I could buy a whole Olympus Pen SLR outfit for less than that. Good luck to them but I suspect they are going to need it. I have never really liked the slit window perspective of the of the 24H x 18W mm negative. Did anyone ever make a half frame camera with a vertically running film? 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Those little minox's are great little cameras. I bought one in Hong Kong in 1998 (paid around 100 USD) and other than needing a new battery every so often been trouble free since and it takes great images. I put a roll through every few months when the film itch needs scratching.  

I think the young ones will buy the pentax17 in droves. I have a rollei 35 which I am gonna sell after the new rollei 35 debuts-- 

>>Did anyone ever make a half frame camera with a vertically running film? maybe the dial 35

Edited by prk60091
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a fair price for a newly developed film camera with manufactures warranty and support.

The price in line with what such a camera manufactured in the past would cost today when factoring in inflation.

What one can buy used for the same money is really as irrelevant as comparing apples to oranges.

Used is not new and vice versa.

The target group of this camera are not considering buying used.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

. Did anyone ever make a half frame camera with a vertically running film? 

Wilson

I think perhaps the half frame Yashica Samurai 3.0 had vertical running film.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I struggle to get through a roll of 36 before I want to see what I've got, the only way I'd imagine using 72 frames is if I came down with visual diarrhoea. But it's a posh camera for the kids and good luck to them and I hope it promotes more film use. Meanwhile the 'newish' Kodak half frame camera can be had for £50 and it does have a great fixed focus lens, and I know this because I eventually finished a roll of 36 using my own, an heroic feat. So it's not half frame that defeats me, it's not being able to buy rolls of 12 anymore.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

43 minutes ago, 250swb said:

if I came down with visual diarrhoea.

Isn't that what people with digital (& especially phone!) cameras have by default?  😉 

Now then, there's a term 'logorrhea' for a relentless superfluity of words. So what might be the equivalent for images?  Suggestions invited.  There could be prizes ... 🙂

 
 
 
' for a relentless
Edited by rogxwhit
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, rogxwhit said:

24, was that?

20 was a thing back in the day.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Anbaric said:

20 was a thing back in the day.

Very sensible, a 'two week' holiday is ten days on the beach, so that's two photos a day in 35mm and four in half frame, more than enough.

But it's about the anticipation of wanting to see what I've got. I can easily shoot a roll of 36 and (hopefully) start to anticipate a good shot I've made before the end. So I'll put my hands up and say if there are five frames left and the day is at an end I don't mind shooting rubbish just to finish the roll. So when I'm using half frame that rush to the end is either magnified or there's clearly too much film left and the camera is put aside for another day, and then it's a week, or a month or two, and by then I generally don't care what's on the film because I've moved on with other ideas. Of course the rush to the end is a slight exaggeration and it could happen with any length of film, but I don't like leaving film in a camera for too long because the images can become stale if what first excited me seems not longer relevant. At the moment I have 46 exposures on my Kodak half frame camera and have no plans for using the rest, so I guess it will get developed half used next time I do a batch of HP5.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 250swb said:

Very sensible, a 'two week' holiday is ten days on the beach, so that's two photos a day in 35mm and four in half frame, more than enough.

But it's about the anticipation of wanting to see what I've got. I can easily shoot a roll of 36 and (hopefully) start to anticipate a good shot I've made before the end. So I'll put my hands up and say if there are five frames left and the day is at an end I don't mind shooting rubbish just to finish the roll. So when I'm using half frame that rush to the end is either magnified or there's clearly too much film left and the camera is put aside for another day, and then it's a week, or a month or two, and by then I generally don't care what's on the film because I've moved on with other ideas. Of course the rush to the end is a slight exaggeration and it could happen with any length of film, but I don't like leaving film in a camera for too long because the images can become stale if what first excited me seems not longer relevant. At the moment I have 46 exposures on my Kodak half frame camera and have no plans for using the rest, so I guess it will get developed half used next time I do a batch of HP5.

I have many Leica film cameras plus a few Rollei cameras. They are all sitting with half finished films in them, so Steve, I know exactly what you mean. The Minox 35ML is the only one I regularly finish films in, as it is small enough to fit in a shirt pocket or my bag, so I always have it with me. I will be using my R9 for the big family reunion today (38 people). 

Wilson

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, spydrxx said:

I think perhaps the half frame Yashica Samurai 3.0 had vertical running film.

There may have been some more consumer cameras in that format, but 35mm film was originally invented for motion picture cameras, and there have been plenty of those. 6x4.5 medium format was split evenly between portrait and landscape, Fuji had a popular line of point-and-shoot style vertical 645 cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Only full frame for me, but to be honest? 499 is not a bad price for brand new technique including guarantee and service parts. I mean, any Minox will die sooner or later, while this one has at least a 30 year life span a head. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw "exorbitant price" in your headline and thought you were referring to a brand whose name starts with a letter four letters before 'P' in the alphabet... 😀

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The final versions of the Minox 35 for example the ML, had cured most if not all of the earlier faults, with the shutter and light meter. Also the final versions use a 28L lithium battery rather than the extinct PX27 mercury cell. A lot of the problems of the earlier models were down to battery leakage and corrosive vapour emanating from the mercury cell. My 35-GT was working perfectly for 25 years, when a friend persuaded me to sell it to him and it is still working. I always regretted it and have since acquired a 35-ML.

I have tried to give away some of my non-Leica film cameras over the years but had no takers. I think the only ones I could readily sell for sensible money, would be my Goldilocks family of Rolleiflexes, 3.5 Planar Rolleiflex f in 6x6, 3.5 Rollei Baby in 4x4 and 8x11 Micro TLR Rollei (takes Minox cassettes) and maybe my complete and all rebuilt and working Graflex Combat KE-4 70mm film kit in its Hallicrafter alloy case with three lenses. 

Some of the later and rather plasticky Japanese 35mm cameras from the likes of Yashica, Kyocera, Ricoh, Nikon, etc can be had for little to no money, so if they break, throw them away and get another. From time to time I have ended up buying a cheap camera to use in locations where I would not want to risk one of my digital or film Leicas. I now have a number of these and they stubbornly refuse to die. Some of them are excellent little cameras with fantastic lenses e.g the Kyocera 110-Wide. It is a little bigger than the Minox 35 but has a Zeiss designed 28-110 zoom autofocus lens and motor drive. I took it to India about 5 years ago, along with my M240 and an R9 to use during the Holi festival where the locals chuck bucketfuls of coloured powder over you. The quality of the images from the little Kyocera were indistinguishable from those taken with primes on the R9

Wilson

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, 105012 said:

I saw "exorbitant price" in your headline and thought you were referring to a brand whose name starts with a letter four letters before 'P' in the alphabet... 😀

A Leica, you can pass on to your children or even grandchildren. I doubt if anyone will be doing that with the Pentax half frame. I have and use my Grandfather's 1935 Model II (D), my Great Uncle's 1934 Model III (F) and my father's IIf. Two of my grandchildren are using a borrowed couple of my older Leica cameras. 

Wilson

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My first half frame was an Olympus Pen F in the 1960s which produced excellent razor sharp images with their standard 38mm/1.8 lens. I still have some of those negatives (my slides were destroyed in a flood) which I've digitized and most folks think they were taken with the Leica I also owned at that time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, pop said:

Even the Leica II mini?

Philipp,

If it is still working, why not. One of my Grandchildren is in fact using a Leica Mini-Zoom 35mm from around 1994. I offered him the Mini-Zoom or the rather better but ugly silver painted Kyocera 110 Wide. Form over function ruled and he chose the Leica. 

Wilson

Edited by wlaidlaw
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...