JohnGellings
Well-known
I wonder which focal length lens they will use. I hope it'll be a 40mm. Unfortunately for me, wide angles are hot, so I am thinking it'll be 28mm or 35mm. Did they already mention what it will be?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Classic cameras are good, but suffer from issues of parts availability and service.
A new camera is a new camera ... with a warranty, with service available, etc.
Many cheap, old, classic film cameras around yes, but if no one makes/sells new cameras, ultimately the supply will dry up and then where will we be? Buying new cameras, when you can afford it and when the offering is appropriately quality made, is a good thing ... it ensures the future.
G
Mackinaw
Think Different
lonemantis
Well-known
The Lidar AF tech in this is potentially the most interesting part of this camera to me. Lidar is a lot like the IR-based focus in cameras like the Hexar AF in that it always works with the same speed and accuracy regardless of light levels, but also does not get fooled by transparent surfaces like glass windows the way IR tends to. Combined with modern motors that are faster and quieter, as well as manual film advance, this could potentially be really interesting as an available light camera for pushed B&W and 800T colour stocks. A lot of that will depend on how the lens specs turn out, but the idea of a camera that functions like my Hexar in a Rollei 35-sized body is definitely interesting! And more interest and options in the film photography space will benefit us all in the long term too.
JohnGellings
Well-known
More details today:
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
Retro-Grouch
Well-known
Sounds better and better! So, someone explain why a relatively tiny company like Mint can produce a film camera with these specs, but Pentax can only manage (after much hype) their cheesy little half-frame fiasco? Yes, supposedly different markets, but if I were a young photographer, eager to dive deeper into 35mm film photography, I'd choose the Mint offering. There's room to grow and explore with that camera, whereas the Pentax feels to me like an insult to any thinking person, regardless of their experience or lack thereof with film.
AAlfano
Well-known
I wouldn't count Pentax out just yet. They indicated that they were investigating introducing more than one film camera, with a higher end compact to follow the initial offering. (Personally, I'd be delighted if they just reintroduced the GR-1v.)
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Retro-Grouch... Um, what's wrong with the Pentax? Not that anyone's actually seen one yet... Has anyone? 
I expect MiNT's Rollei 35AF will be pricier than whatever Ricoh/Pentax is coming up with.
If it's the fact that it's a half-frame camera that irks you, well, Olympus and Konica produced lovely half-frame cameras for years with great quality. I still have a couple of them somewhere in the closet...
G
I expect MiNT's Rollei 35AF will be pricier than whatever Ricoh/Pentax is coming up with.
If it's the fact that it's a half-frame camera that irks you, well, Olympus and Konica produced lovely half-frame cameras for years with great quality. I still have a couple of them somewhere in the closet...
G
Mackinaw
Think Different
The MINT full-frame 35mm and Pentax 1/2 frame will compliment each other perfectly. Looking forward to seeing the actual products.
Jim B.
Jim B.
agentlossing
Well-known
If you pay attention to all of Pentax's communication on this project, the first model released was always supposed to be a lower-end model.
agentlossing
Well-known
This sounds great, honestly!
armadsen
Established
MiNT's new details sound great. I was already planning to buy one, and this certainly keeps me with that attitude. But I'm also going to buy Pentax's. I think they're complimentary, and half-frame isn't intrinsicly inferior to full frame. I already have and shoot an Olympus half frame camera, despite it being inferior to my Leicas, let alone my medium and large format cameras. They're different tools with different strengths is all.
oldwino
Well-known
I know many people who have half-frame cameras, and they all sit in the closet. Nobody uses them long-term. It takes too long to shoot a roll, and the quality is often disappointing. I had a Pen FT for years, probably shot 5 rolls through it, as I quickly realized it was best doing more art-y, Daido Moriyama-type stuff. I think, after the initial buzz wears off of the Pentax camera, they will sit on store shelves. Or in closets.Retro-Grouch... Um, what's wrong with the Pentax? Not that anyone's actually seen one yet... Has anyone?
I expect MiNT's Rollei 35AF will be pricier than whatever Ricoh/Pentax is coming up with.
If it's the fact that it's a half-frame camera that irks you, well, Olympus and Konica produced lovely half-frame cameras for years with great quality. I still have a couple of them somewhere in the closet...
G
Mint's project has the opportunity to let people grow into photography - if the lens is close to being as good as the original Rollei Sonnar, the image quality should be much better than the Pentax, thus hopefully encouraging continued use, even if it means it becomes a "sometimes, when I want to shoot film", sort of camera. Let's face it - film is an expensive hobby.
Neither of these projects is going to replace the Phone camera.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Um, no. I had Pen F and EE half-frame cameras for years, so did several of my friends. I probably shot two or three rolls a week with them in those times. The economy of having so many exposures per roll was a major boon to starving students. And to travelers.
These cameras actually teach you more about good exposure and processing since it's harder to make top notch negatives on a smaller format. Better for students to learn on. And about framing and using all the available negative space.
36 shot rolls too long?.. buy 24s, learn how to pull a half roll, or roll your own. Easy for students to learn. What's the big deal?
Students do better when given a fun challenge than when everything is just easy.
Film was always expensive. You dis a format that saves money on film.. seems contradictory.
G
These cameras actually teach you more about good exposure and processing since it's harder to make top notch negatives on a smaller format. Better for students to learn on. And about framing and using all the available negative space.
36 shot rolls too long?.. buy 24s, learn how to pull a half roll, or roll your own. Easy for students to learn. What's the big deal?
Students do better when given a fun challenge than when everything is just easy.
Film was always expensive. You dis a format that saves money on film.. seems contradictory.
G
JohnGellings
Well-known
Oh all places where new film cameras should be celebrated, it is here. For many, many years, we have had new film cameras be either toys or Leica with nothing in between. Now, two in-between cameras are coming out and people are complaining. Though the Pentax is closer to the toys, it still should be better. For MINT, an AF P&S cameras was a smart place to start. All of the good models from the 90/00s sell for too much used. This is new at a price that is the same or lower. I think my old Minilux cost the same in 1995.
And who cannot finish a roll of 72 exposures? Jeez, do you guys even like to photograph?
And who cannot finish a roll of 72 exposures? Jeez, do you guys even like to photograph?
AlexMogens
Established
I think the Pentax/Ricoh has a definite niche, but it's probably not us for the most part. They're a Japanese company making a camera mostly based on feedback from Japanese people. They've long used half frame formats as a way to economize in that country. 6x4.5 started off as half frame 6x9, for example. They called the format 'semi.' Later, Olympus dominated the market for half frame. It doesn't seem like many non-Japanese camera companies even made them. So, I suspect that if this camera announcement doesn't make a lot of sense to us, it's because it's not really for us and not because Pentax doesn't know what it's doing.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Who is "us"? "We" are photographers in my book, not Japanese, Americans, British, nor Europeans.
Why is Pentax/Ricoh singled out as "mostly based on feedback from Japanese people" and not Nikon, Canon, Cosina, Minolta/Sony, etc ... all Japanese companies with worldwide markets? MiNT Camera is Taiwanese... are they preferring Taiwanese people feedback?
I remember the modern introduction of 645 cameras well in the 1970s: 6x4.5 was not specifically intended for economy, it was based IMO on the notion that most commercial photographic use for print-quality photos was neither 1x1 nor 2x3 format but 4x3 format ... why waste a third of the film if the images are going to be cropped 90% of the time, and you can shoot a few frames longer without reloading? A similar argument was presented on the introduction of 6x8/6x7 vs 6x6/6x9... IIRC, early Nikon cameras were 24x32 format on a similar basis, vs 24x36. They went to 24x36 to match the Leica format for marketing reasons...
Half-frame 35mm has a couple of specific niches that it works beautifully for. I remember well the film strip projector used in my grammar school ... all the strips were half-frame 35mm spools that were easy to load and project for a 30 person class. Half-frame 35mm works beautifully for microscopy and other forensic image recording:: lots of frames with more than adequate resolution, so minimal disturbance of the setup for reloading. For travel, half frame 35 posed a lot of photos of satisfying quality with a smaller camera and lenses, less reloading, etc. Leitz used to offer both 24x36 and 18x24 versions of its cameras too ... Oskar designed the leicht kamera as an exposure test device for 35mm cine film, and doubled the frame size after he found the still images remarkably good but needed more film area for good still image quality given the film of that time (19teens to twenties). Film quality has advanced a little over the past century...
I dunno. Your post sounds very prejudicial to my ears, and not very tightly linked to the objective capabilities/advantages/engineering decisions characterized by different formats.
G
Why is Pentax/Ricoh singled out as "mostly based on feedback from Japanese people" and not Nikon, Canon, Cosina, Minolta/Sony, etc ... all Japanese companies with worldwide markets? MiNT Camera is Taiwanese... are they preferring Taiwanese people feedback?
I remember the modern introduction of 645 cameras well in the 1970s: 6x4.5 was not specifically intended for economy, it was based IMO on the notion that most commercial photographic use for print-quality photos was neither 1x1 nor 2x3 format but 4x3 format ... why waste a third of the film if the images are going to be cropped 90% of the time, and you can shoot a few frames longer without reloading? A similar argument was presented on the introduction of 6x8/6x7 vs 6x6/6x9... IIRC, early Nikon cameras were 24x32 format on a similar basis, vs 24x36. They went to 24x36 to match the Leica format for marketing reasons...
Half-frame 35mm has a couple of specific niches that it works beautifully for. I remember well the film strip projector used in my grammar school ... all the strips were half-frame 35mm spools that were easy to load and project for a 30 person class. Half-frame 35mm works beautifully for microscopy and other forensic image recording:: lots of frames with more than adequate resolution, so minimal disturbance of the setup for reloading. For travel, half frame 35 posed a lot of photos of satisfying quality with a smaller camera and lenses, less reloading, etc. Leitz used to offer both 24x36 and 18x24 versions of its cameras too ... Oskar designed the leicht kamera as an exposure test device for 35mm cine film, and doubled the frame size after he found the still images remarkably good but needed more film area for good still image quality given the film of that time (19teens to twenties). Film quality has advanced a little over the past century...
I dunno. Your post sounds very prejudicial to my ears, and not very tightly linked to the objective capabilities/advantages/engineering decisions characterized by different formats.
G
AAlfano
Well-known
I don't think it's unfair to say that Ricoh directs most of its marketing towards the Japanese market. I am a fan of Pentax and Ricoh and I follow the company quite closely. They release many videos on YouTube only in Japanese (often without English subtitles). Look at the official GR Blog (GR official | RICOH official community site)—although it does have an English translation, the vast majority of the featured photographers are Japanese, and the marketing events are almost exclusively in Japan. Ricoh's Japanese website is also much more comprehensive than its US site. Whether this is the inention of the company as a whole or the result of lack of interest in photography and optical products from the American division of the company, I do not know.
It seems clear to me that the company's marketing is focused on the Japanese home market to a much greater extent that the larger manufacturers like Canon and Nikon. I'm not mentioning any of this in a judgmental or prejudicial way. To me, this makes Ricoh/Pentax and its products more interesting, not less.
It seems clear to me that the company's marketing is focused on the Japanese home market to a much greater extent that the larger manufacturers like Canon and Nikon. I'm not mentioning any of this in a judgmental or prejudicial way. To me, this makes Ricoh/Pentax and its products more interesting, not less.
JohnGellings
Well-known
Imagine that... focusing on the Market that you understand!
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
I feel it's worth pointing out that this is something Fuji's been known to do as well; the Instax Mini cameras are very heavily orientated towards a female Japanese demographic where that format was wildly popular (and, if I remember right, some of that product line was basically referencing/building on the popularity of a certain type of photobooths they have over there that's popular in the same demographic). The fact it became popular in the West was a secondary concern.