Hey everyone, I hope you’re doing well! I spent most of the last week finally writing, shooting, and editing my review of Pentax’s new film camera, the 17.
I was fortunate enough to have Pentax send me a camera a couple of weeks before it was released, and I wanted (and needed) to take time with this one before putting out my video about it.
This was a challenging review to make partly because it takes me forever to get through a roll of film while shooting half-frame (I ended up shooting four) and partly because I have mixed feelings about the camera, and I wanted to make sure I got my thoughts across clearly (I hope, at least!).
I just hit export on the video as I sat down at the computer tonight. It’s scheduled to go up on the channel at the beginning of August, but I thought it could be fun to share a few thoughts in this week’s issue of Field Notes.
So, when Pentax announced that they were going to be making film cameras again, like many people, I was incredibly excited. It’s not something that I ever would have imagined happening.
But when they said the first camera would be a half-frame model, I was a little surprised. I found it to be an odd choice, even though I love the format.
A Fun, But Strange Choice
A few years ago, I picked up an Olympus Pen EES-2, my first introduction to half-frame, and had a blast shooting with it. More than any other camera I’ve shot with, it inspires me to get creative and experiment due to both the extra frames per roll and the opportunity to seek out and make image pairs.
It’s a fun and relaxed process and something that I think everyone should try.
That being said, it has its limitations—the stand out is the smaller negative size for each image. There’s a noticeable drop in quality from a full-frame 35mm image, and you can only get so much out of it while scanning.
I totally understand that might not be an issue for some people, as we all have different needs, but for me, it makes half-frame a format that I only use for fun.
Pentax said part of the decision for half-frame was to help with the cost of shooting film by having more images per roll. While I can understand that, I personally don’t think the trade-off is worth it, as shooting full-frame 35mm can be done somewhat on the cheap with consumer film, and you still get 36 images and a lot more flexibility.
But regardless, it’s a new film camera, and it sounds like there will be more models in the future, so I can’t complain too much. I understand this is an entry-level camera looking to get people into film.
It Does The Job
So there’s been a lot of buzz about the Pentax 17, understandably so. New film camera releases are few and far between. But when you move beyond the fact that the camera is new, for me, at least, the buzz wears off.
And I hate to say that because I have a ton of respect for what Pentax is doing and want to support them as much as possible. But I’ve had a tough time getting excited about the camera itself.
It’s not bad by any means. In fact, it’s a completely capable tool, and I'm happy with several images I made using it.
I really enjoyed the lens—both its focal length and its performance. Considering the smaller size of the negative, the images from this camera are pretty sharp.
The meter also seemed to perform quite well, and I was happy with a lot of the exposures.
It’s also comfortable to work with and provides you with a rare confidence (in the film world), knowing that the tool you’re using is actually working properly.
If you’re into half-frame, ok with the feature set, and want to spend the money, then it’s a reliable camera with a warranty that you can buy and go and make your work headache-free.
Also, if you’re completely new to film, it’s a no-fuss way to get shooting, and it’ll give you lots of frames to get you comfortable with the process.
So yeah, maybe I’m just not the right fit.
The Camera - Moving Beyond The Excitement
For me, compared to other cameras in the half-frame world, there isn’t really anything that stands out (beyond the fact that it’s new) that warrants excitement.
I have mixed feelings about the build. The top and bottom plates feel premium but are contrasted by the thin-feeling plastic used for the rest of the body.
There’s leather on the front of the camera but not on the back. Not sure why?
There’s also a big gap between the lens beauty ring and the lens itself (necessary for movement while focusing, but it just feels like it lacks refinement).
The viewfinder is pretty basic, with two sets of fixed frame lines.
And the shooting modes are limited—basically full auto, with a few modes favouring specific settings. This isn’t a negative, but again, nothing there that jumps out at you.
So yeah, it’s not that the camera is bad; it’s just that it doesn’t really have anything that excites me to use it. It’s not crazy expensive, but considering its feature set, it’s at a price point that would be more than I’d want to spend.
If half-frame were something I shot often, I’d likely take the £500 that the Pentax 17 costs, look for an Olympus Pen FT, get it serviced, and have something quite unique that I look forward to picking up.
Even the EES-2 that I own has quite a different feel than the Pentax—its build is solid, and I love the unique design details, like the gauge on the top that reads out frame numbers. I also like that you can choose your aperture.
Again, though, I’m not new to film and I’m okay with accepting the risk and potential headaches that often come with older cameras.
I Am Excited For What’s Next
So yeah, this one isn’t for me, but I look forward to seeing what’s next. Personally, I’d love a full-frame 35mm point-and-shoot that’s a little more polished and a little more advanced.
As I said, I did make a bunch of work with the Pentax 17 that I was quite happy with, and it performed fine; it’s just that I wasn’t really ever that excited to pick it up.
Regardless, Pentax's decision to make film cameras again and actually follow through with their first model in a relatively short time frame is something to commend them for. I’m sure a lot of people will be happy with this one. It sounds like it’s been selling quite well.
Anyway, that’s it for this week. I’m off on a two-day trip up to Wales with the 4x5 camera to dive back into my Slate City project. It’s been a while, and I can’t wait to make some work again in that landscape.
Talk soon!
So shooting landscape becomes shooting vertical and vice versa? For half the res? I can appreciate what Pentax did or is trying to do (which I think is mostly trying to squeeze revenue out of the film revival, and on top bending over backwards to social media with the half frame), but I’d way rather invest in a second hand full frame film camera and lens and do it properly.
I just don't really understand why this camera would appeal to social media users. I mean, once you have shot a roll of film you need them developed, and then what? Scan prints yourself for posting online? No (wannabe) influencer has time for that 😁 Or have digital scans returned from a lab? 🙄 I guess the whole appeal to Film is because the tangible -offline- nature, right? Ah well maybe I'm just to old to understand 😂