Pentax 17
On 18/06/2024 14:03 BST Bill anotherdrunkensot@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/18/2024 12:47 AM, mike wilson wrote:
On 18/06/2024 05:05 BST John Francis johnf@panix.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 04:03:50PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote:
On Jun 17, 2024, at 3:57 PM, Bill anotherdrunkensot@gmail.com wrote:
It looks a lot more complete than I was expecting.
A lot more usable than I was expecting.
A little more expensive as well, but then, it is a Pentax.0.
About the same as 120 gallons of gas, in early 1973 that would have been about $40, in 1974 that would have been about $60.
I can't remember exactly how much I paiid for my first Pentax (SP II + 50mm/f1.4) in 1972,
but I'm pretty sure I paid significantly more than that.
The place in the UK offering the new beastie also offers (when in stock) the K1000 for over £100 less. Although that in itself is daylight robbery, I know which I would choose.
The problem with the camera from the POV of the PDML isn't the camera,
it's that we are all too fucking old. The target market isn't a bunch of
people in God's waiting room.
We are both talking about the camera that uses a way outdated and very expensive imaging technology, aren't we? In which case, anyone buying a superfluous and expensive unit when there are arguably better and certainly substantially cheaper options seems to be a few frames short of a roll.
On Jun 18, 2024, at 9:03 AM, Bill anotherdrunkensot@gmail.com wrote:
The problem with the camera from the POV of the PDML isn't the camera, it's that we are all too fucking old. The target market isn't a bunch of people in God's waiting room.
bill
Exactly. I am most likely using the cameras I will die with-- a K1 and K3. Gave away or sold all my darkroom equipment years ago. Film involves work. I’m too old for wotk!
Paul
%(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List
To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-leave@pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Am 17.06.24 um 22:42 schrieb Bob W PDML:
£499 in the UK.
To me, it doesn't look like a Pentax and, even worse, it doesn't look
like something that should cost 500 quid.
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Fotos : https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012
On 6/18/2024 7:11 AM, mike wilson wrote:
On 18/06/2024 14:03 BST Bill anotherdrunkensot@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/18/2024 12:47 AM, mike wilson wrote:
On 18/06/2024 05:05 BST John Francis johnf@panix.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 04:03:50PM -0700, Larry Colen wrote:
On Jun 17, 2024, at 3:57 PM, Bill anotherdrunkensot@gmail.com wrote:
It looks a lot more complete than I was expecting.
A lot more usable than I was expecting.
A little more expensive as well, but then, it is a Pentax.0.
About the same as 120 gallons of gas, in early 1973 that would have been about $40, in 1974 that would have been about $60.
I can't remember exactly how much I paiid for my first Pentax (SP II + 50mm/f1.4) in 1972,
but I'm pretty sure I paid significantly more than that.
The place in the UK offering the new beastie also offers (when in stock) the K1000 for over £100 less. Although that in itself is daylight robbery, I know which I would choose.
The problem with the camera from the POV of the PDML isn't the camera,
it's that we are all too fucking old. The target market isn't a bunch of
people in God's waiting room.
We are both talking about the camera that uses a way outdated and very expensive imaging technology, aren't we? In which case, anyone buying a superfluous and expensive unit when there are arguably better and certainly substantially cheaper options seems to be a few frames short of a roll.
Apparently Pentax figures there are enough people out there who want to
shoot film who will also want new film cameras and the advantages that
new provides.
Now I don't sit on the Ricoh board of directors, but then nobody who
posts here does either, and to be blunt, the target market for this
camera are people who are half a century younger than the average age of
the soon to be crated and put into underground storage inhabitants of
the PDML.
bill
On 18 Jun 2024, at 16:01, Bill anotherdrunkensot@gmail.com wrote:
[…]
Now I don't sit on the Ricoh board of directors, but then nobody who posts here does either, and to be blunt, the target market for this camera are people who are half a century younger than the average age of the soon to be crated and put into underground storage inhabitants of the PDML.
bill
35mm landscape is the best format for shooting coffins.
Am 18.06.24 um 16:15 schrieb Bob W PDML:
35mm landscape is the best format for shooting coffins.
MARK!
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog :http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio :http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Fotos :https://www.fotocommunity.de/user_photos/770012
mike wilson wrote:
The problem with the camera from the POV of the PDML isn't the camera,
it's that we are all too fucking old. The target market isn't a bunch
of people in God's waiting room.
We are both talking about the camera that uses a way outdated and very expensive imaging technology, aren't we? In which case, anyone buying a superfluous and expensive unit when there are arguably better and certainly substantially cheaper options seems to be a few frames short of a roll.
I've still got Pentax film cameras if I want to play with film. The thing I don't want to have is more to scan to use digitally. I already have thousands of slides still to scan + my late father's negatives to do. Photography should be fun, not another job on the 'to-do' list.
Malcolm
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com