I reviewed the Pentax 17 a while back, and even updated the review after a really long time. For most of us, this camera is probably something that you won’t even bother paying attention to. I mean, it’s a film camera: and you have to be a fan of doing that. Plus it limits you in many ways and is fairly expensive for what it is. In my walks around NYC, I also never see people using this camera at all. Instead, there are lots of other point and shoots people are picking up that appeal to them. Recently though, after nearly 16 years of reviewing cameras and 20 years in the journalism world, I’ve come to a very different point from lots of people who buy and shoot with cameras.
Like many of you, I’m jaded with all the cameras that come out being variants of the same thing over and over again. It’s annoying and no one is doing anything really unique and different.
Except that a few are.
Folks, I’ve nearly had it. I’m sick and tired of bringing around big cameras unless I absolutely really need to. For years, there weren’t any small fun point and shoot cameras that I could use for fun and instead I was forced to always bring big cameras with me.
But now there are loads of digicams getting revived and brand new point and shoot cameras being made in one way or another.
These days, I find immensely more joy in bringing around small, serious compact cameras and even non-serious ones.
The Pentax 17 currently fits that demographic. As I’m typing this article up, I’m reviewing the new Kodak film emulsions. I’m using my Natura S and that’s perfectly fine for me. To me, it’s the single best point and shoot camera ever made.
That’s just me though: someone is really bound to like the Pentax 17 in all its glory and oddity. There’s a lot to love about it. But as a reviewer, I can’t use the 17 because it would take way too long to shoot a roll of film. That, of course, is the whole point of the camera. So if you really want your film to last and you’re doing it purely for joy, consider the Pentax 17.