I have only just noticed this.

Nobody outside Pentax knows whether the decisions made regarding this camera were a mistake or not. Pentax's aim, like all other commercial companies, is to make a profit. And that means that sometimes they will produce cameras with little appeal to the denizens of Pentax-User.

The 17, very obviously, is aimed at young people who know nothing of ISO or DOF or a dozen other things. They just want a camera that takes better pictures than their phone, and doesn't require a degree in post-processing digital images.

I understand that before finalising the design Pentax undertook a great deal of research in their home market, where most Pentax cameras are sold. There is therefore a good chance that they got it right with this camera.

But I do agree with Mac that it's not a camera for old stagers who know and love film, and who would probably be ecstatic to see a new MX or K2, made to last like the originals.

And if £500 seems high, a new MX would be a multiple of that.

Today's gem is this: "For PENTAX - Universa Car Tele Converter"

I racked my brains to imagine why you would need a tele-converter for a car. Then it hit me. The original title was in German, and the translation software had decided that auto was short for automobile, and hence car.

You're the William Blake of the photographic world. Superb.

Well, I gave it a quick test, and I have to say it's not half as bad as I thought. It's perhaps not as contrasty as some lenses, but I have put a photo into the gallery that has had almost no post-processing and is as punchy as one could wish.
The reason for the lack of PP is that I am struggling to come to terms not only with a new (to me) very complicated camera, but also a not particularly intuitive RAW convertor.
I am not quite sure why I wrote this lens off all those years ago, but it may be because I had just purchased a *Ist D, and it didn't really inspire me on APS-C. You seldom hear people weeping because they lack a 60mm lens, which in effect was what it was.
Until now.

I am not for a moment suggesting your assessment of the lenses you have used is wrong. One thing to remember, of course, is that a lens can never be better than it was meant to be, but, thanks to ill-treatment or poor construction, it can always be worse.

But even when I bought the lens (having lusted after it for years) I recall that it wasn't uniformly admired.

Anyway, I am going to give it a go while the light is good and see hw it performs on a K1.

And to answer Walkeja, yes, this is the famous pancake lens. And it works best on a Super-A.

I have just been reading or re-reading some of John Riley's well-researched articles on the K-mount. One thing that struck me was his description of the M 40mm as "stellar".
In my collection I have one of these and it has never impressed me. So I took a look at "another forum" where they have user reviews of almost all Pentax lenses, and was surprised at the wide variety of opinions expressed. Many people give it 9 or 10 out of 10, whilst others don't recommend it at all.
Now I know that you have to take some of these reviews with a pinch of salt, but I cannot recall another lens which attracted such diverse opinions. And I can only conclude, unless somebody has a better explanation, that a large number of these lenses weren't made as well as they might have been.
The lens appeared in 1977, at a time when Pentax was rushing to put out a whole new range of bodies and lenses. Unlike the original K series lenses, which were mainly just Takumars with a bayonet mount, nearly every M lens required a completely new construction, if not always a completely new optical design. So it would not be surprising if some corners were cut.

Hilarious. It seems to me that there are some people who might benefit from a bit of artificial intelligence.

Thank you for your comment. Might I ask what you are doing to avoid the world being destroyed by AI?

PS: Telling people they are sleepwalking isn't quite enough.

Today I saw a fountain pen described as "an exquisite timepiece". If this is the state of AI, I think we can relax for a few years.

You're on a roll, Spad. You have a great eye, and you get the best from your equipment.