Pentax to produce new film cameras. Let's discuss.
I made a video reacting to Pentax's announcement that they are going to produce a series of new film cameras. That's their intent, anyway. You can watch it and follow the links in the description to the actual announcements. I wanted to discuss with you all what your thoughts are about this idea! Is it good? Bad? What would you like to see?
Something I forgot to mention in the video but is included in the written press release is that Pentax wants to including the community in this effort. They are calling it a "co-creation project". That gives me hope that they will listen and actually fulfill film shooters needs.
Sometimes it seems that Pentax is a hobby of executives at Ricoh. :-).
You have to give them credit, to me they come off as a company that is really geared towards the art of still photography.
Leica still makes film cameras and Nikon and Nikon did up to a few years ago. It doesn't seem like that much of a crazy stretch. The largest drawback of film photography to me is the expense in processing. Not access to cameras.
Perhaps this is aimed at the JDM?... maybe used film cameras are more expensive in Japan?
Will this camera be modern or retro styled? Will it be autofocus?
Where I live it's going to cost about $30 (last time I checked) to develop and scan a roll of film- not counting the cost of the film. So in buying a cheap used film camera..it could cost you as much to see if the things works as it did for the cost of the camera itself.
Watched a Video that was pretty down on the whole Idea and left this comment.
[
Yeah, Used Film cameras are probably always going to offer a greater value, though there are a lot of people who only like to buy new things. Won't be surprised if the first camera is plastic since they said it's going to be a compact probably point and shoot, but hopefully the follow through on the promise to build durable cameras that will last, especially on the follow-up SLR and Fully mechanical camera they talked about in their video.
As for glass, I've got no concerns. I've got a few pentax bodies and lenses and they're great! Not to mention, their parent-company Ricoh already produces great image quality in the GR cameras they sell right now.
Film is expensive, but I'm in my early 20s and there's a ton of people already spending $2+ per picture on polaroid and Fuji-instax photos. Plus quite a few of my friends love film as they enjoy the process and the Tactile nature of it.
I hope we get other companies joining the competition and driving up the bar for camera quality, as well as film companies investing in Color stocks after seeing the greater demand.
Film seems like it's come back and is here to stay, like how Vinyl records are popular and you can buy great again turntables today. These aren't better than digital in their technical qualities, but they're a lot of fun!
]
I'm looking forward to more updates on the cameras. I've got a Ricoh R1 and if they can make something Comparable it'd be a winner. (would you be interested in testing out a Ricoh R1, James?)
Quote from Pierson Mason on December 22, 2022, 7:25 pmWatched a Video that was pretty down on the whole Idea and left this comment.
[
Yeah, Used Film cameras are probably always going to offer a greater value, though there are a lot of people who only like to buy new things. Won't be surprised if the first camera is plastic since they said it's going to be a compact probably point and shoot, but hopefully the follow through on the promise to build durable cameras that will last, especially on the follow-up SLR and Fully mechanical camera they talked about in their video.
As for glass, I've got no concerns. I've got a few pentax bodies and lenses and they're great! Not to mention, their parent-company Ricoh already produces great image quality in the GR cameras they sell right now.
Film is expensive, but I'm in my early 20s and there's a ton of people already spending $2+ per picture on polaroid and Fuji-instax photos. Plus quite a few of my friends love film as they enjoy the process and the Tactile nature of it.
I hope we get other companies joining the competition and driving up the bar for camera quality, as well as film companies investing in Color stocks after seeing the greater demand.
Film seems like it's come back and is here to stay, like how Vinyl records are popular and you can buy great again turntables today. These aren't better than digital in their technical qualities, but they're a lot of fun!
]I'm looking forward to more updates on the cameras. I've got a Ricoh R1 and if they can make something Comparable it'd be a winner. (would you be interested in testing out a Ricoh R1, James?)
Good point about film prices - I do hope they stop rising, but I agree even at the current price it still fits in the kind of luxury hobby budget many photographers (very fortunate) have. Just another use of discretionary income if someone has it.
Also agree about how vinyl is here to stay now after it's resurgence. It's a medium that has proved itself worthy of use even with more convenient methods of listening to music, and I think film is the same way. It really will never be about the convenience, and it's still popular. So in that since it's future proof as technology continues to evolve digital photography.
And yes, the Ricoh R1 is definitely a camera I want to try. It looks fantastic. I want them to remake it too, because I hear they are difficult to repair if they break.
In the grand scheme of things people waste money on $7 cups of coffee all the time. I had an $11 dollar burrito the other day (it was worth it).
One of the audiophile You Tube channel hosts (Cheapaudioman) stated "I'm into vinyl for the expense and inconvenience". I thought that was funny, but accurate.
The local library here, not my town or I would complain, actually loans out vinyl records which is the equivalent of lighting money on fire. Someone has great taste in music because the selection is terrific, but within a couple of weeks they are so scratched, I would consider them unplayble. Which you should expect, given the condition of the CD collection they have. Those all still sound fine.
Do people like the sound of surface noise- pops clicks and skips? Should records come pre- scratched, warped or with fingerprints and dust? 🙂
I understand vinyl for the real music enthusiast and audiophiles , but for the average consumer spending $20-30 dollars and up on a new record is befuddling.
I will say that putting on a vinyl record encourages better listening, it requires some commitments to physically sit and listen.
I think part of my issue with film photography and vinyl is my idea of "better". Which has to do with, in part me being an old fart. I was there before digital music and photography.
I think music reproduction should be accurate to the actual event of the musicians playing it. Pop's and clicks are noise interfering with it. Tape hiss is noise. A recording that is 50 generations down of from the original master is not going to be better. A bad mix is never better and a bad recording will always be bad no matter what format.
Color film looked "better" to me up till about 2006 or 7. Prior to that everything looked "digital" not a good thing. I remember going to a nature museum here with my wife and kids. They had an artists display of macro shots of bugs. Big prints . I pointed out to my wife, these are film for sure. The color and dynamic range looked great (at the time). I memorized the photographers name and ended up meeting him at a reptile show years later. He was blown away that I remembered his photos and yes they were shot with film- medium format if I remember correctly. Around 2010 digital photography started to really kick ass quality wise and I was pretty much sold.
What a lot of people like today is films with color casts and I guess grain is no longer a bad thing.
B&W is a different story BUT I don't have enough experience shooting digital black and white. I sot a roll of Ilford 400 a while ago, had scans done and was like...holy cow is that grainy. I have a roll of Pan F 50 in the fridge, but honestly I don't know when I'll get around to shooting it. that was my favorite film way back.
I will say that I follow some film photgraphy on IG. Lots of really good photos. I could see where like vinyl encourages more active listening, maybe the cost per shot results in slowing down and doing better photos.
This kind of interesting. I shot these two a long time ago. My Nikon FM2 50mm f1.8 AI-S vs D7000 with 35mm f1.8. Both at f8 1/8 second on a tripod with window light. Self timer on both cameras
The film in the FM2 was consumer grade daylight Fujicolor and it was processed at Walgreens. The D7K shot is SOOC other than a crop. I probably should have shot one with the 50 on the DSLR also.
Yes different lenses to accommodate the crop factor, but both are super sharp high quality consumer grade lenses. The idea was to shoot and develop in a real consumer type method. Nothing fancy. No RAW files, or film that required refrigeration and no drive to an actual camera store (because they were all gone) for processing.
The results are interesting. I should repeat this with better film. Different subjects.
try to ignore the color difference.
Uploaded files:
I think there is more DOF on the film shot. I must have taken a really long time because part of that orchid pedal is orienting itself towards the light in the film shot.
I once took so long to shoot a dragonfly emerging from it's larval stage that the lily pad flower it was crawling up on opened up during the series.
Uploaded files:
Quote from KankRat on December 23, 2022, 5:22 pmI think there is more DOF on the film shot. I must have taken a really long time because part of that orchid pedal is orienting itself towards the light in the film shot.
I once took so long to shoot a dragonfly emerging from it's larval stage that the lily pad flower it was crawling up on opened up during the series.
there is more DOF on the film shot, as the DOF at 50mm f8 is shallower than on 35mm f8 at the same subject distance.
Quote from Estelon_Agarwaen on December 24, 2022, 11:34 amQuote from KankRat on December 23, 2022, 5:22 pmI think there is more DOF on the film shot. I must have taken a really long time because part of that orchid pedal is orienting itself towards the light in the film shot.
I once took so long to shoot a dragonfly emerging from it's larval stage that the lily pad flower it was crawling up on opened up during the series.
there is more DOF on the film shot, as the DOF at 50mm f8 is shallower than on 35mm f8 at the same subject distance.
The film camera has the 50.
People say the opposite:
longer focal length = shallower DOF at same aperture.
Personally I don't think that's true,. I may need to prove that to myself. It's -17F windchill here . This maybe a good week. but that's another discussion.
Possible that my focus maybe tiny bit off which would matter this close and also I don't think I had any extra sharpening to the jpeg in camera or in post, where Walgreens may have applied some, and also that might explain the yellow warmer on the film. You have to remember, you are not actually looking at the image on the film, but a digital image of it.
However that was part of the exercise. Without going thru any great effort these are the end results.
Quote from KankRat on December 24, 2022, 3:59 pmQuote from Estelon_Agarwaen on December 24, 2022, 11:34 amQuote from KankRat on December 23, 2022, 5:22 pmI think there is more DOF on the film shot. I must have taken a really long time because part of that orchid pedal is orienting itself towards the light in the film shot.
I once took so long to shoot a dragonfly emerging from it's larval stage that the lily pad flower it was crawling up on opened up during the series.
there is more DOF on the film shot, as the DOF at 50mm f8 is shallower than on 35mm f8 at the same subject distance.
The film camera has the 50.
People say the opposite:
longer focal length = shallower DOF at same aperture.
Personally I don't think that's true,. I may need to prove that to myself. It's -17F windchill here . This maybe a good week. but that's another discussion.
Possible that my focus maybe tiny bit off which would matter this close and also I don't think I had any extra sharpening to the jpeg in camera or in post, where Walgreens may have applied some, and also that might explain the yellow warmer on the film. You have to remember, you are not actually looking at the image on the film, but a digital image of it.
However that was part of the exercise. Without going thru any great effort these are the end results.
may have used imprecise wording: i meant more bokeh, my bad
