Видео

I've had lousy luck with buying compact cameras in the past (SLRs have been safer buys) so it's nice having a brand new working compact that I can take anywhere. And I got the extended warranty so it's 3 years

It is missing full manual and faster shutter at least 1/1000s. It is $750 equivallent in EU (!)

You said dont argue .. but on the resolving power 6x9 still has the edge (just) 125mp approx

I paid this very sum for as new never been used 90's Nikon fm2n given the choice would I have picked the Pentax dohh!

Support Pentax?? And why doesn't Pentax support us analog shooters and sell that camera for some reasonable normal price? After all, there are plenty of other half-frame cameras out there for the normal price. It is obvious that Pentax like all such companies is taking advantage of this analog "hype" and imposing huge prices for films and all photography, especially analog equipment.

I appreciated the candid and slightly different approach to this review.

So many of the arguments sound like someone talking about the comfort that digital offered over film once it was new😅 Also the argument of saving with film costs ist just bs as you have to add the camera price into it. Young people and or beginners are not keen on dropping a 500$ on a film camera which before was synonymous for them to cheap thrift store or cheap disposable items. Source: I am a young beginner film photographer. I still hope the rich kids buy out this camera so maybe something worth of its hefty pricetag get manufactured by Pentax and the other companies. More that that i hope this leads to more film products and more labs popping up in cities.

Great post Hans.

Before digital I was a student and I couldn’t afford to buy a brand new film camera and still can’t but at least I got hope again lol

Did you buy one after you got back? Or plan to buy one?

Who's mad? other than the price

Reduce that price point!

Great comments, Hans. I agree. I think so much of the criticism of new products like this comes from an “it’s not for me” perspective. Everything isn’t for everybody. And this seems squarely in line with what the younger generation that is discovering film would want. I hope they sell a ton of them.

I ordered mine the day it came out - I knew it would be the perfect pocket camera (and it is.) All the dingleberries non-stop hating on it can't see past their own sense of entitlement to understand what it is, and how it is a great camera despite it not being what "they" want. I am three rolls into mine (developing the 3rd roll today actually) and I have really enjoyed using it. The price isn't bad at all - it is a quality, partially metal camera with modern film coatings and optics. Fantastic video / explanation and you are completely right on with all your points.

Full agreement!

Plenty of 1/2 frame cameras out there, especially from Olympus. Good cameras and good prices. The Pentax is just one more.

For me this is the best review I have seen. I completely agree with the story of the eternal search for the perfect image. I used to sent my holiday photos to a photo agency, which then sold them for me to magazines and for books. iWhen traveling I regularly returned to a place because I saw that the light would be much better within half an hour or so. Much to the dismay of my wife who expected me to just enjoy the moment with her. The Pentax 17 reminds me of my first new camera. A Fujica half and years later I have often thought back with a slight nostalgia to the simplicity of photography. In my quest for the perfect image, I ‘ve never really done zone focusing. I didn't dare, because the chance of mistakes was too great. Now I have to. Great!

When Pentax 17 news came a few weeks ago, I could foresee some folks will do unfair comparison, like Pentax 17 vs Nikon F100 + pro grade Nikkor lenses, or vs its big brother Pentax 67. It's indeed not a cheap thing, but on the other side isn't built to persuade film geeks to stop using their favourite gears. It's targeted toward younger, smartphone photographers, or some who are looking for camera for fun. Let's be honest, half frame shooters are typically not interested in making huge prints. I won't buy it, but hopefully Ricoh get sufficient fund for their next film camera project (perhaps an interchangeable-lens rangefinder :D )

Excellent presentation and pacing Hans!

I wanted to buy a half frame camera and thanks to Pentax i have one. Yes I could have bought a second hand one... but why? It's new, it's under warranty and it's Pentax!

Glad to see you, Hans. Missed your great reviews

Hans it’s so good to see you back. I relate with you letting go with a simple limited camera. Even though the Pentax isn’t for me I hope this sparks more evolution.

I agree with your opinion, but your size comparison data can be manipulated to serve a narrative. You put APS-C to FF is 2.3x, FF to GFX 1.7x. But the 1x base in this comparison is not the same. It's like saying from 20 yr old to 40 yr old it's 2x, and from 40 yr old to 80 yr old is also 2x, therefore, the age gain is the same. But in real life, you would say age 20 is 0.5x of 40, and age 60 is 1.5x of 40, hence age 20 to 40 is the same age gain as 40 to 60, which is 0.5x of 40. For your comparison chart, it should be APS-C (nikon) is 0.43x of FF. GFX is 1.67x of FF, 645 is 2.69x of FF, and 67 is 4.54x of FF, based on the image area definition from wikipedia on each format.

Great video Hans! I have owned the H6D-50C and currently own the H6d-100C. While the Sony image you showed was sharper, it is not fair to say that without saying how you shot those images. Were they handheld or on a tripod. I would be very surprised if you came to the same conclusion photographing both on a tripod. If you had any movement, shake, breathing, leaning etc, the image will be soft. The H6D-100C is not forgiving with not holding the camera steady. That has been my experience. Both the H6D-50C and the H6D-100C produce tack sharp images when hand held firmly and steadily, and extremely sharp when using a good tripod. Thanks again Hans!

ngl medium format look sounds like the biggest cope from people just to be different

A 100mm plus panorama makes a good 6x6 to 6x9 and more

Great video. Loved it. I concur with everything you said. I would like to add that there are “full frame” digital sensors, like the Phase Ones. I own one of them, it´s a real 6x4,5 and you can notice de difference. Personal opinion here: sensors smaller than 6x4,5 are not medium format. They are great, but more marketing than real.

This is wrong bro. The digital realm and new optics have HIGHER resolution resolving power and absolutely can deliver the tonal gradation. You absolutely can see a difference in DMF over FF that is as high impact as the difference in analog MF. Also the high bit depth rate of DMF is noticeably more malleable than most FF files. The sensors are also capable of more dynamic range. Anyway you were close but not quite right.

Missing that it’s the size of the pixels. You can shove more small pixels into the smaller space and call it the same megapixels. But it isn’t the same is it. GFX has better tones because of a larger sensor and larger pixels. has better dynamic range. It’s better period. Larger than full frame is the tag line. That is the look.. You can draw many similarities across formats for similar looks because mostly the lenses remind you of another brand or format look. But as far as tonality it is pixel size and dynamic range.

It is jerks like you guys who talk talk talk talk about these cameras and the prices go up and no one can afford them. Good photography is not about the camera, it is about the eye, the soul that creates great images. I am so tired of you bloggers who are talking about cameras. Your photos sucks by the way, just like all those other so-called photographer's who talk talk talk about cameras. None of you guys are photographers.

I have the audio on my phone turned all the way up and all I can hear is the annoying background music.

Hans, thanks for this interesting and informative "Intro" to the Hasselblad system. As a landscape, product and occasional wildlife photographer, I currently shoot the Nikon Z System, and am happy with the sharpness and detail I get with the Z8 and several superb NIkkor S optics. The one comment that surprised me was your statement that the Sony 85mm G Master lens was "sharper" and "Better" than the Hasselblad lens. Having never used Sony gear, I cannot comment other than that I was always under the impression that Hasselblad optics were among the sharpest lenses made. Likewise, I would be interested to compare them to my NIkkor S optics, i.e., the 50mm f/1.8 S lens, which is particularly sharp. Thanks again sir!

Great video. Thanks.

I like to explain to people the GFX system is a crop-sensored medium format sensor. Hopefully someday Fuji will come out with a 645 or 6x7 sized sensor.

There is one more aspect to look at with medium format. On a larger projection area the effect of Lens diffraction at higher f-Stop Numbers is less pronounced, so a given Image taken at for example f32 on a full frame sensor will be noticeably more soft than on a big 6x7 negative. Even when cropped to the same relative Image Size.

Enjoyed listening to you.

Great, thanks for your description of the differences.

I’ve been around since the film days. The reason that you saw more difference from 35mm film to medium format films is that 35mm film did not have the quality as 120 roll film. As you pointed out, full frame digital censors are far superior to 35mm film. Ergo, the jump from full frame to medium format was more noticeable in film. Here is one for you. The real noticeable difference in quality in film was 4X5 (and above) view camera. There are photographers shooting 8x10 sheet film today and scanning them and these images compete very well with digital. When you get down to it there are many different considerations involved. I just went from the Canon 5DSR (50 megapixel)to the Fujifilm 100s. I did that because I am getting better resolution and tonality from a Camera that is only slightly larger than the full frame camera.

Mine has a battery drain issue- anyone know how to fix that?

To mimic my old Autocord which had a 75mm lens at F3.5 I use the Canon EF50mm at F1.8 on an EOS R. Taking 3 shots with the camera sideways/portrait followed by stitching and 1:1 crop. DoF (if wide open) is slightly exceeded by the EF Lens. Sounds great? If I take a 20+ year old slide shot with the autocord, place it on a light table and eyeball it via a pentax loupe. Not even close. I'm "in" the scene wallowing in memories :)

Can you please explain how you went from scanning DNG to having a good, well white balanced file in Lightroom? Your scan was perfectly converted by negative lab pro and I wonder how this happened. My dng files don’t come out good even after adjust white balance in Lightroom. Thank you

No comparison whatsoever between 35 mm film and medium format film. Medium format reins supreme. And of course, large format is far better still -

Great idea about that! Thanks for share!

With a 6x7 film camera the look is real, digital MF, not so much. Not worth it for me. I sold the GFX I had and lost money on it. The only regret was buying it in the first place.

You have real talent for video. You tell a great story and are very engaging. I am enjoying your channel very much - thank you!

The other way to think about it is that if you choose a higher megapixel camera, then you get the extra luxury of being able to shoot in crop mode if you want more reach without changing lenses. You end up with less megapixels than the maximum, but still very respectable. This is my strategy for travel photography where I don't want to change lenses. If there's something that I want to get a little closer to, I can flip on crop mode and get that extra reach. Of course I could always crop later in post, but it's nice to be able to see the composition in-camera. If you use the Tamron 35-150mm f2-2.8, then you have an incredible amount of flexibility in range, maintaining a max aperture of 2.8, and can use crop mode to extend reach to effectively 225mm when you need it.

This is why I didnt bother with fuji, I like the camera, but its just a bigger sensor (or baby medium) - hence why I shoot phase. the sensor size is so much closer. Also if I may mention, the medium format has another quality thats hard to replicate, that is the out of focus transition. this will be different with every camera and is dependent on the cone shape of the light from the exit of the lens to the camera sensor, also flange distance as a major part, so flange distance + rear moving element. So the circle of confusion on an out of focus area changes at a different rate from system to system. Medium formats tend to have a more narrow cone where as fullframe (and mirrorless) tend to have a wide cone.

I love the Sony 70-350 APAC lens, and didn’t want to give it up when I moved to my first full frame A7IV. The 14?megapixels seem fine. My bird photos are extremely detailed. The weight savings is great.

Don't you think that using a 645 lens, without added glass, on a Sony A7Rii or more allows you to use the middle of the lens where there is less Chromatic Aberration and distortion, than near the edges of the lens?

You need a pop screen on your mic.