Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > Polaroid & Fuji Instax

Polaroid & Fuji Instax All things Polaroid and Fuji Instax

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 03-18-2017   #41
Registered User
dwojr is offline
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 183
According to Fuji rumors there will be two Instax squarecamerss, one film/digital hybrid and one film only.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-19-2017   #42
Registered User
willie_901's Avatar
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,293
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Hi Lynn,
How about my Land Camera 250? Is its lens any better than the lens in a Fuji? Just curious. Of course, no new film exists for the Land camera.
Based on some reviews of FUJIFILM's wide Instax film's below average rendering detail, it's not clear the new square film's performance justifies a more expensive lens.

Lomgraphy just released a new camera, the Lomo'Instant Automat Glass Magellan. The Magellan has a coated, glass, f/4.5 lens and costs $189. Unfortunately it uses the original Instax Mini film format. It has a 38mm lens (equivalent 135 format field-of-view = 21 mm) which seems silly for such a small print size. One has to be rather close to the subject(s) to achieve any sort of detail in a 6.5 x 4.6 cm print. I suspect the novelty of peoples noses rendering twice as large as their eyes would wear off rather quickly. On the other hand, at f/4.5 it is the fastest Instax lens to date. It may be great for photos of small groups of people and for low light. I'm also curious to see how well the flash covers that field of view. At f/4.5 the a low-power flash may be fine. Or, perhaps flash photographs with significant light drop-off will become aesthetically desirable.

Despite the fact that it has a selfie-mirror, I may pick up the film-only version of the new square Instax camera. The 6.2 x 6.2 cm (2.4 X 2.4") print size is acceptable - especially if it costs less than the Instax wide film packs. The sample images suggest it has a normal field of view. I can't find the lens' focal length though.
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
  Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:16.

vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.