leipol

Joined on Jan 18, 2006

Comments

Total: 15, showing: 1 – 15
In reply to:

JEROME NOLAS: Fuji got too excited on a recent instax wave and created this too expensive hybrid. I'll wait for analogue one. Instax wide owner.
PS. I don't like rhe design, too rounded. Make nice squared!!!

Besides Instax mini I'm also an Instax wide user. Would have liked if they released an Instax wide camera with comparable capabilities as the Instax min 90 neo classic + a monochrome version of the Instax wide film.

Link | Posted on Apr 19, 2017 at 16:47 UTC
In reply to:

barkersmadness: I bought myself a Lomo Instant (the San Sebastian one to be exact) and I must say I am rather disappointed with it. Most of the pictures have come out too dark and you never really know when to change the exposure and by how much. For a example, a picture I shot in the office (white walls) in the automatic mode (so with flash) by day came out really dark. I took a couple of pictures of our Christmas tree (with flash) and all of them turned out almost completely dark, even though I had changed the exposure. However, a picture taken at the beach will be way to bright. At the end of the day, it'll take you at least three films to "test" the thing and you will still be disappointed (I'm pretty sure I have wasted 3/7 films by now). It also seems to be rather too delicate, considering that it is almost entirely made of plastic (I unfortunately dropped it today and it seems to have loosened the batteries). Seems like a bit of a waste of money and I'm considering getting the Instax 90..

My Lomo'Instant that I acquired trough the Kickstarter campaign was also very disappointing. I shot 1 pack (1 op 10 pictures usable) and 2 pictures of a second pack. There it ended, it became a paper weight. Outdoors and using a light meter it gives just acceptable results, but indoors with flash: horrible picture quality. The second unfinished pack went into the mini 90. Never touched the Lomo'Instant again.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2017 at 18:03 UTC

I have the Polaroid Z340. It was the first Polaroid instant print camera using 3x4 Zink paper and had a design resembling the Polaroid Spectra/Image cameras. I was afraid that the 3x4 Zink paper one day would not be available anymore. Looks now that this isn't. In terms of quality the Zink prints don't reach the level of Instax Wide or mini film for color rendering. The 3x4 paper isn't much more expensive compared to the 2x3 paper.

Link | Posted on Jan 5, 2017 at 17:51 UTC as 10th comment

I owned the Polaroid Vision (Captiva) and used it until the 500 film was discontinued. In those days didn't know about the Olympus camera, later on I've read about this gorgeous interesting product. I also know that Polaroid had a printer using film to print digital images. Not sure if this was for 500 film.
Polaroid uses now ZINK technology.
I still hope that Fuji will pick up this idea, a digital camera with built in Instax mini printer. They already have Instax Share printers, bur perhaps the market for such a device is not interesting from an economical point of view.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2016 at 11:35 UTC as 3rd comment
In reply to:

Dervast: What about the printing costs per camera? Is instant film same cost (per print) on all those cameras? Which are the models that give a variety of films to shoot with ? (color, black and white variations)

Only for the Instax mini format, Monochrome.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2016 at 11:04 UTC

This roundup is only about the integral Fuji Instax mini film. Fuji makes also Instax Wide film, twice as big as the mini format. The wide film is not that much more expensive.
Vintage integral Polaroid cameras (SX-70, 600 and Spectra series) can use Impossible instant film but this film is expensive compared to Fuji Instax. Impossible released this year their own I-1 instant camera.
Sadly Fuji discontinued this year the FP-100 C pack film that could be used with Polaroid pack film cameras.
This is all analog.

If you would like to go the digital way there is the new released Polaroid Snap Touch or the original Polaroid Snap. With the Snap Touch you can decide to print or not to print. The original Snap prints every picture.

I'm using instant cameras for 46 years and prefer the analog instant. Besides the already mentioned there is also the New55 for b&w picture with negative in the 4x5 format.

Best

Link | Posted on Nov 24, 2016 at 13:23 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply
On article Leica-branded instant camera rumored to launch soon (43 comments in total)

Notwithstanding I have a Fuji Instax mini 90 I want one as my own Christmas present. The design is gorgeous. Something different when compared to other cameras that use Instax mini film. Perhaps a little expensive for a rebranded Fuji Instax but you only live once.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2016 at 14:13 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Fujifilm to introduce monochrome instax mini film (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

GuitarCamera Man: Exciting news, they have given me more incentive to buy an instax camera or Lomography Instant camera.

The Instax mini 90 is very good and Lomography have a kickstarter campaign running for a Lomo Instant Automat.

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2016 at 10:17 UTC
On article Fujifilm to introduce monochrome instax mini film (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Attila Orhan: Are those Fuji cameras printing every shot taken? I'm looking for an instant camera for just printing the selected shots, not every shot taken. Is there such an instant camera on the market?

Fuji Instax cameras are analog. Polaroid has digital instant cameras that prints on ZINK (Zero INK) paper. If you just want to print selected shots, the Polaroid Z2300 is the available option. Other option: use smartphone, print selected picture on a printer. Polaroid has the Zip, Fuji the Instax Share. There are also other manufacturers of portable printers (Canon, LG, ...).

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2016 at 10:14 UTC
On article Fujifilm to introduce monochrome instax mini film (62 comments in total)
In reply to:

Calvin Chann: I've never seen it as cheap as you say it is. Retail is more like $10 per pack of 10.

I have to buy 5 double packs of instax mini films and then it costs 90 €. So it is 15 € for 1 double pack of 20 pictures. But buying just 1 pack of 10 pictures price is 11 €. It is at a well known shop in Antwerp.

Link | Posted on Sep 6, 2016 at 16:40 UTC
In reply to:

vscd: Fuji rocks. Fuji Acros is one of the best b/w films available today. Velvia and Provia still rock and the retrowave is still coming up, I think. @Fuji: PLEASE NEVER STOP MAKING FILMROLLS! Please.

Instax goes strong. Last year around this time there was.a shortage of Instax (mini) film. Fuji has build a new factory for production of these films early this year.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2015 at 21:16 UTC
On article Lomography launches Lomo’instant Wide camera (39 comments in total)

The specifications look good. However I would like to see some samples of a production camera by a user. I participated last year in the Kickstarter campain for the LOMO'INSTANT that uses the Fuji Instax mini film. I still regret it. A lot of vignetting, flash pictures bad, diffcult to use., etc. I hope they have it right for the Wide camera.

Link | Posted on Oct 14, 2015 at 16:12 UTC as 3rd comment | 1 reply

I could not resist, I pre-ordered one. Just love those Instax mini's.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2013 at 16:02 UTC as 5th comment

My first digital was a Kodak DC 130 Blueberry, it matched my iMac. After 2 or 3 years its viewfinder broke. After that I rediscovered film photography but also have a number of digicams like a Leica M8 and Fuji X10. However they do not get much use. I still prefer film. But I must admit I use more Fuji film than Kodak for general use. On certain occasions however I find Portra film the best color film available, I would miss it.
I'm also a big fan of instant photography. But what became of Polaroid? They came back with classic instant. Just a rebranded Fuji Instax mini 7s and rebranded Instax mini film, all made by Fuji.
What about Kodak printers? Perhaps they are available in the USA but I have not seen one in my country. It is all Canon, HP and Epson.

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2012 at 04:54 UTC as 34th comment
In reply to:

snegron: Looks like big corporations won at last; film is dead. Now we have no choice but to use digital 100% of the time. I'm sure the higher ups at Kodak knew this way in advance and more than likely had some back door deals with other investors. Thanks a lot Kodak.

Film is certainly not dead. Who could have thought that after 110 film was gone in 2009 it is back in 2012 in B&W and color at the Lomography company. I wonder who is making the new 110 film. A fact is that prices of used Pentax 110 SLR's are reaching an incredible height on auction sites. I still have my complete set. The only question is who can develop these 110 films...

Link | Posted on Aug 26, 2012 at 04:20 UTC
Total: 15, showing: 1 – 15