Cascadilla
Well-known
I can vouch for the build quality of both the MX and LX cameras. As a working pro I had 4 MX bodies that I wore out over 15 years with only a couple of repairs. I shot thousands of rolls of film with those cameras and they never let me down on a job. The 4 LX bodies I bought used and used until I switched over to digital in 2004. I still have 2 of them and they still work. Again, lots of film run through those cameras and a grand total of one repair--the film counter in one of them gave out. I agree with you that some of the later Pentax auto everything SLRs weren't the most durable and my first DSLR, the Pentax *istD didn't inspire confidence. Its biggest fault was the ease with which the door over the CF card could come open which would shut down the camera. The write speed to the card was lethargic--5 raw files and then you had to wait 45 seconds or more to shoot another picture, but that was the joy of early digital. Lots of other early DSLRs weren't much better. You're right that the current DSLRs from Pentax are well built--my K3s and K1 have been excellent, again with professional use.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
You are entitled to your opinions, just as I am to mine.
I was selling cameras when the Pentax Spotmatic was a current model ... It was a nice camera on the second to third tier of the quality brands. Pentax at the time (early 1970s) was not considered legendary, just a very good camera at a very decent price; a very popular brand. They were on par with Konica and Minolta, and a few others long gone now. I owned and used Nikon and Leica gear professionally.
In the digital realm years later, I had and used professionally the Pentax *istDS and K10D ... They were decent, somewhat cheap in feel but overall good lenses. Those are the cameras I let go of when I bought into Olympus E-1 and E-3 bodies, then E-M1, and a passel of Olympus HG lenses.
I moved from there back to Leica and Hasselblad (both digital and film), which are definitely at a different class level with respect to build (and price, of course).
I still have (and occasionally use) the Rollei 35S I bought in the 1980s. It was a little pricey then, but it's still working great today; its Sonnar 40mm f/2.8 lens is still excellent. (In fact, I just pulled it out and loaded it this morning for a few walk photos...) I also still have the Minox 35GT-E I bought in 1998, and use it similarly often.
Rollei 35S & Minox 35GT-E
The top of this Pentax 17 looks way too complicated for a "happy hobby snapper," unnecessarily so. Why on earth you need six automation modes to do what a film speed setting, an aperture control, and (optionally for manual exposure) a shutter speed control (or EV compensation for auto mode) can do so easily I do not understand. My Rollei 35S does as well for manual metering, my Minox 35GT-E the same for an auto metering camera. Both of them are "happy hobby snapper" cameras... easy to learn, compact and easy to carry, easy to use.
Such it is.
G
agentlossing
Well-known
After watching Bellamy's video, he seems happy with the build, so I'm more optimistic.
Mackinaw
Think Different
Second or third tier? I suggest you read Jason Schneider's excellent writeup on Pentax camera and lenses.
The Pentax Papers, part 1, 1919 to 1973: From the founding of Asahi Optical Co. to the last screw-mount Pentax
The Pentax Papers, part 1, 1919 to 1973: From the founding of Asahi Optical Co. to the last screw-mount Pentax By Jason Schneider In 1919 Kumao Kajiwara founded the Asahi Optical Joint Stock Co. in Otsuka, Tokyo as a “town workshop” turning out wearable eyeglasses and binoculars. By 1923 the...
www.rangefinderforum.com
Jim B.
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
It probably depended on where you lived.
At my high school in 1980~82, we had donated Nikon F & early F2 cameras in the AV department for the students to use for the year book, school paper, etc. Same as the local paper. At the local camera shops they were top dollar though. I lusted for one.
Best most of us could actually afford was Canon. I got an AE-1 & 50/1.8 when I joined the Army for that reason.
If you couldn't afford Canon, then you scrounged for used or made do with a Pentax, Minolta or whatever (and that's how we saw them then, as "whatever") until you could afford something decent from the big 2. Though once you bought into one of those 2, then you stuck with it due to the cost of lenses.
The ONLY time that cart got upset was when Canon had the guts to do the right thing, design wise, and change their mount from FD to EF for autofocus. Lot of people shifted to Nikon since they had to buy new lenses anyway.
Still growing up, I can't say I ever saw another teen with a Pentax in hand. Only Canons and Nikons and an occasional Minolta or mom's Instamatic.
At my high school in 1980~82, we had donated Nikon F & early F2 cameras in the AV department for the students to use for the year book, school paper, etc. Same as the local paper. At the local camera shops they were top dollar though. I lusted for one.
Best most of us could actually afford was Canon. I got an AE-1 & 50/1.8 when I joined the Army for that reason.
If you couldn't afford Canon, then you scrounged for used or made do with a Pentax, Minolta or whatever (and that's how we saw them then, as "whatever") until you could afford something decent from the big 2. Though once you bought into one of those 2, then you stuck with it due to the cost of lenses.
The ONLY time that cart got upset was when Canon had the guts to do the right thing, design wise, and change their mount from FD to EF for autofocus. Lot of people shifted to Nikon since they had to buy new lenses anyway.
Still growing up, I can't say I ever saw another teen with a Pentax in hand. Only Canons and Nikons and an occasional Minolta or mom's Instamatic.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Thank you, but I've been reading Jason Schneider's articles since the 1970s or before. He's entitled to his opinions too. We don't all have to agree.Second or third tier? I suggest you read Jason Schneider's excellent writeup on Pentax camera and lenses.
The Pentax Papers, part 1, 1919 to 1973: From the founding of Asahi Optical Co. to the last screw-mount Pentax
The Pentax Papers, part 1, 1919 to 1973: From the founding of Asahi Optical Co. to the last screw-mount Pentax By Jason Schneider In 1919 Kumao Kajiwara founded the Asahi Optical Joint Stock Co. in Otsuka, Tokyo as a “town workshop” turning out wearable eyeglasses and binoculars. By 1923 the...
Jim B.
G
chuckroast
Well-known
You are entitled to your opinions, just as I am to mine.
I was selling cameras when the Pentax Spotmatic was a current model ... It was a nice camera on the second to third tier of the quality brands. Pentax at the time (early 1970s) was not considered legendary, just a very good camera at a very decent price; a very popular brand. They were on par with Konica and Minolta, and a few others long gone now. I owned and used Nikon and Leica gear professionally.
In the digital realm years later, I had and used professionally the Pentax *istDS and K10D ... They were decent, somewhat cheap in feel but overall good lenses. Those are the cameras I let go of when I bought into Olympus E-1 and E-3 bodies, then E-M1, and a passel of Olympus HG lenses.
I moved from there back to Leica and Hasselblad (both digital and film), which are definitely at a different class level with respect to build (and price, of course).
I still have (and occasionally use) the Rollei 35S I bought in the 1980s. It was a little pricey then, but it's still working great today; its Sonnar 40mm f/2.8 lens is still excellent. (In fact, I just pulled it out and loaded it this morning for a few walk photos...) I also still have the Minox 35GT-E I bought in 1998, and use it similarly often.
Rollei 35S & Minox 35GT-E
The top of this Pentax 17 looks way too complicated for a "happy hobby snapper," unnecessarily so. Why on earth you need six automation modes to do what a film speed setting, an aperture control, and (optionally for manual exposure) a shutter speed control (or EV compensation for auto mode) can do so easily I do not understand. My Rollei 35S does as well for manual metering, my Minox 35GT-E the same for an auto metering camera. Both of them are "happy hobby snapper" cameras... easy to learn, compact and easy to carry, easy to use.
Such it is.
G
I was also around in the 70s when the Spotmatic was popular and also was working in a camera store.
I speak as a lifelong Nikon shooter - the idea that Nikon was pro quality and the Spotmatic wasn't was built somewhat on marketing fluff. The Nikons got attention because all the pros were using them. Why? Because the military and the photojournalists coming back from Vietnam discovered them cheap in Japan and Hong Kong on the way home. Once the journalists showed up with an F on TV, that was it. Nikon won ... or did until Canon gave them a run with the F1.
Objective differences between these camera lines did exist, but in my direct observation, Nikons actually came in a lot more for service than Spotmatics did. Why? Because more people were shooting more Nikon more often. In fact, the pro rental place I worked at only offered Nikon as a 35mm option.
The Spotmatics were built like tanks - just like the Nikon F. The Spotmatics had an OK meter - just like the Nikon did. Nikon had the edge with more lenses and a bigger overall system, but they were not wildly better built. Both were very well engineered. I did hate the Spotmatic thread mount and much preferred the F's bayonet.
In fairness, Nikon also won because it was more modular. The ability to change out backs, motor drives, prisms, and so forth made the F a really versatile machine, and I'm sure this contributed to its success as well.
Last edited:
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Pretty much the same for me although I was in high school from '68 to '72... At age 14, I was all set to buy a Minolta SRT-101 when my uncle handed me a Nikon F Photomic FTn and told me to give him the money I was going to pay for that Minolta. The Minolta at the time was selling for $129.00 at the shops in Manhattan, the Nikon with 50/1.4 lens was three times that and I certainly couldn't afford it on my own.
My high school had a bunch of donated cameras for the Photo Staff to use ... most of us used our own cameras because most of that stuff was junky and prone to failing at the worst moments. My friends were all envious that I got the Nikon; they had Canon, and Minolta, and one or two had other cameras; I cannot recall anyone who had a Pentax.
That said, at the photo store where I worked during the first years after high school, I sold a lot of Pentax cameras because they were generally less expensive than the Nikon/Canon/Olympus range, and we didn't carry much in way of Minolta or Konica gear.
Pentax always made good optics, their manual focus lenses were very nicely made and finished. My own interactions with their late-'90s/early-'00s AF lenses was a little less wonderful on the build and mechanical side. Although the L series lenses were optically super ... I still have one of these L series lenses, the SMC Pentax-L 43mm f/1.9 Special in Leica Thread Mount, adapted to M-bayonet with the usual Leica adapter. And it remains a favorite, imaging and quality right there with my Leica lenses.
SMC-Pentax-L 43mm f 1.9 Special
But I'm way far afield from the Pentax 17 at this point.
G
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
Good for him and yeah we are. Still I'm really happy that Pentax has had the courage to do this. I have too many expensive hobbies to buy one (tomorrow will be an IWI Jericho Enhanced instead of a Pentax 17 I think ...
) but I think it's a good buy for anyone who does get one.
JeffS7444
Well-known
It's too soon to call the 17 a success, because we're talking about pre-orders, which can, and often are, canceled for whatever reason, such as speculators who lose interest when easy profits don't materialize.
JohnGellings
Well-known
Well, it could just have no pre orders and be forgotten. I mean, in recent times, I cannot think of a camera that has enough pre-orders to be considered sold out and not be considered a success.
JeffS7444
Well-known
IIRC, Nikon got badly stung with their S3 and SP reissues.
JohnGellings
Well-known
They claimed there were a lot of pre orders and that it had sold out? Back then... ?
Also, that was 20-25 years ago. However, it seems strange that if in 2000, the S3 didn't sell well, they'd do it again in 2005 with the SP.
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
Considering what they want when I look for an SP 2005... 😱😱😱😱
😈
😈
armadsen
Established
They actually did 3 releases: S3 in 2000, black paint S3 in 2002, then SP in 2005. Seems weird that they’d keep going if the first S3 release was a flop. But I’m glad they did! My S3 2000 and SP 2005 are two of my very favorite cameras.
JeffS7444
Well-known
But when inflation is taken into account, it's cheaper today than it was when it was new.
gavinlg
Mentor
Yeah mine have been flawless - 50 1.8, 35 1.8 and 40 f2, but I've used pretty much all the Z lenses. Unfortunate about the decentred copy - in my retail experience the Z lenses have been pretty consistent but there's always bad ones in any batch.
neal3k
Well-known
I got a notice from B&H that mine will be here Sunday.
JohnGellings
Well-known
Slightly jealous...
chuckroast
Well-known
Just gave notice to B&H that I ain't buyin' one until they show up on the used market for half price in about a month