Photo News: Expensive Z 6III and Pentax` analog half-frame camera

Contents

If we are wrong in this column, then we are really wrong, because: Contrary to last week's recommendation to Nikon, the new Z 6III does not cost 2000 euros, but is just a little more expensive. More precisely: it is 50 percent more expensive. At 3000 euros, which Nikon is asking for the body alone, you can only speak of the mid-range with good will. But according to the data sheet, the camera is worth it, more on that in a moment, but first let's stay with the price structure and the question of why Nikon is doing this.

The answer can be found by looking at all the new mirrorless system camera launches of the last two years: Nikon stuffs the devices with all the technology that is ready for the market. As a result, the Z 8 was gradually given many of the functions of the flagship Z 9 via firmware updates, and the product positioning is primarily based on the form factor and the controls. As the competition in the professional sector never sleeps - see Sony's A9 III and Canon's announced R1 – Nikon, which has already filled out its portfolio at all price points, must secure or expand its market share wherever possible.

Nikon occupies all price points

This leads to the strange situation - only at first glance - that the Z 6III is now more expensive than the Z 7II (ab 2949 €) in terms of market prices, albeit only around 200 euros, depending on the offer. One might think that a Z 7III would follow immediately, but so far, there is no sign of this. This is striking because Nikon started its mirrorless Z series in 2018 with the Z 6 and Z 7, which were introduced at the same time. The fact that both cameras, the Z 6III and Z 7II, still have their raison d'être and that Nikon simply wants to occupy many price points is shown by the fact that the Z 6II will still be available. And of course, the Z 7II still has the higher resolution, namely the 45 megapixels, which otherwise only the Z 8 and Z 9 offer, but not the new, fast sensor of the Z 6III or the extended AI autofocus. The new Z 6, on the other hand, remains at 24 megapixels, just like its predecessor.

This is the resolution of older upper mid-range cameras, such as the Nikon D750, which was released almost ten years ago. Of course, resolution isn't everything, but anyone who wants to save on ultra-expensive super-telescopes for sports and events, for example, and rely on cropped images will be annoyed. Especially as there is now a large gap between 24 and 45 megapixels in the Nikon range; there is no real middle ground. On the other hand, Nikon is also competing with itself in the professional segment with the Z 6III, because 24 megapixels are often sufficient in the studio for portraits or in product photography, where you can get close to the subject.

Why not a Z 8?

And then there's the psychological factor: if you're prepared to spend 3000 euros on a new camera, why not spend 4000 on the Z 8, which gives you state-of-the-art technology and 45 megapixels? It turns out that by differentiating through price - and, in the case of the Z 6III, resolution - Nikon is pushing customers towards the top models. This is because there is more to be earned from them, partly due to their even more robust construction and therefore fewer repairs. At least if we disregard the teething troubles with quality defects, but these are likely to have been exceptions to the pandemic.

On the same day as the new Nikon, the Pentax 17 was also presented, which could hardly be more different, and not only because it works with 35-millimeter film. In many respects, it is also aimed at the young target group that is increasingly interested in analog photography. The trend was triggered years ago by the instant image instaxes, of which the long-awaited Wide 400 model was released this week. However, with the Pentax, which has been in development for at least two years, the goal was not just simplicity, but completely analog photography. The aim was to create more images, less snapping.

Please rewind the film for more portrait photos

And so you actually have to pull the film out of the cartridge using the transport lever, and when it is full, rewind it using a small crank. Motorized transport, perhaps even a small display like the last 35mm cameras - all bells and whistles that you don't need, Pentax probably thought. And also a cost factor. Although the Pentax 17 is not a bargain at 550 euros, the development and production of the camera must have been costly, even retirees are said to have been called back to the development department. There must have been savings on functions. And users are also expected to save money, as film is now known to be expensive.

As a result, the Pentax 17 only photographed in half format, i.e. two images next to each other on a 35 millimeter image. This is where the camera gets its name because it takes 17-millimeter photos. This halves the resolution, but also doubles the number of photos per film. With a little discipline, a day's outing is possible with just one cartridge; that's 72 pictures, after all. Even the target group that grew up with smartphones can cope with this. And the format is also intended for them because: The half-format automatically allows you to take portrait shots, as preferred by Instagram and TikTok. Of course, you can also see this in the viewfinder. And incidentally, the lens (37mm-KB equivalent, f/3.5) can be smaller and therefore cheaper, which in turn is good for Pentax.

Lithium battery instead of rechargeable battery

Less good, on the other hand, is the decision to use a non-rechargeable CR2 lithium cell, as was common in many analog SLRs. Although they are readily available, they are an environmental mess. This is also obviously a cost-saving measure. There is no need for charging electronics or battery management, which would be necessary for a lithium battery. After all, unless a motor is installed, the lithium cells last for years without any major self-discharge. In any case, no tester has ever discharged a CR2 in the few days since its launch.

Above all, of course, there is the question of image quality - and this is surprisingly good despite the half-format. At least according to the test video from Petapixel, where they also worked with pretty good films such as Kodak Portra 400 and Ilford FP4 125. Depending on the offer, the former costs around 20 euros, i.e. 28 cents per half-frame - even the prints in small formats are cheaper. But be that as it may, the Pentax 17 seems to be more than just a toy or photo learning tool, which is why the test of the camera is also our recommendation for a long watch on the weekend. Incidentally, the camera is not to be the last result of Pentax's "Film Camera Project", as the company announced - the commitment to the analog image therefore appears to be long-term and is likely to depend entirely on the success of the first camera.

(nie)