Topic: Getting into the peel-apart business

[Urban Hafner]

The recent TIP announcement prompted me to finally get my act together and get into the instant film stuff.

I'm actually interested in products that are produced today. And from what I've seen of the TIP films they don't look all that impressive. So that leaves me with the Fuji Type 100 compatible films, the Fuji Instax stuff, and maybe some larger size Fuji film? As I don't want the probably crappy stuff from the Lomographic Society (the instant backs for the Diana and LC-A) and as I'd like to have a bit more control than what the Fuji Instax cameras seem to offer, I'm "stuck" with peel-apart film, right?

So, that leaves me with the following options:

The Polaroid 600SE or Mamiya Universal. Which are probably just too big for how I use my cameras.

The Polaroid Land Cameras (100-450). They seem to be smaller (and I like folding cameras). Are they any good, and what model would you suggest?

The Holga Polaroid back. IIRC, it's compatible with the Fuji film (Wikipedia just fails me, so I can't check). Are they readily available and how easy are they to use?

A polaroid back for a camera is out of the question as I don't have a camera with changeable backs.

So, please share your thoughts and suggestions with me. Please remember that I'm looking for a "small package". Oh and I might have some facts wrong, of course. So please tell me that, too. I might end up with something I hadn't thought of.

Urban

[choppert]

I've got a spare Polaroid Land Camera 320 that's not being used that you can have for half a dozen rolls of B&W 120 film

Great condition, great fun!

Matt

EDIT - This is THE resource for Polaroid http://www.rwhirled.com/landlist/landhome.htm

[Miller]

Urbanhafner

The Land Cameras (LC) are a good choice but it all falls down to disposable income. The 180, 190 & 195 are coveted as they are fully manual and use no battery. Used prices are now in excess of 200 pounds and probably appreciating so always a good investment.

Of the other battery required automatic LCs  I would probably stay away from all those with plastic lenses unless you want that look and stick with those with three element glass.

Then there is the choice of steel body as against plastic (not much difference in weight). Steel bodies will normally give you the ability to use a tripod and they are sexier with leather strap to boot.

Things also get interesting as some LCs have a Zeiss viewfinder which is probably more sought after and others some other brand. Plastic bodies can be had for beer money while the steel bodies have started to rise in price.

Just test run a plastic body, glass lens 340 earlier this week and I was impressed with the performance considering I have a 180 and G00SE at my disposal.

Models 350, 250, 450 and 360 [steel/tripod] are good for dipping your toes into the water of peel apart.

Regards and the link below will help.

http://polaroids.theskeltons.org/d350.htm

[This-is-damion]

Ill second  (third, forth?) the land cam suggestion.

At one time I owned 5 of them.... with current purge on all things not nailed down, I'm down to one.

Its the best bet for what you are after I think. 

 

[gothamtomato]

I have a Polaroid 195 (which I've had for at least 15 years). I got it by letting my camera shop know I was looking for one, and then when one came in (that looked like it had never been used - still had the sticker on the strap) they called me. These were greatly prized by photographers for proofing, because they are fully manual, before digital came along - so I had to pay about $600 for it. And even that was a good deal at the time.

You can find them MUCH cheaper now.

[Francois]

The Instax gives you slightly more control than an Holgaroid would. You have 3 exposure settings. Shutter speed and aperture are computer controlled. The flash can be turned off (mine is an Instax 100) and you have 2 focus zones. It works on 4 AA's which seem to go on forever. It's light yet big and bulky. A guy at the camera shop once told me it was totally sick... I took that as a good thing

[moominsean]

but the instax isn't peel-apart...

[Urban Hafner]

Thanks everyone for your replies! Especially Matt for your kind offer. I do have some 120 black & white film in my fridge ... I'll hunt around for images and decide if I want to go for the plastic look or not.

Francois, for some reason I really dislike these extending lens thingies. I don't know why, I'm more into those folding cameras.

Urban

[Ed Wenn]

Urban, I have both Instax and peel apart films (now why is no-one here surprised about that) and they each have their charms, but for a number of reasons I'd go down the Land Camera route. I'll add my congratulations to Miller for a succinct and very good summary of the Land Cam options.

I currently own three. 2 have plastic lenses (a 230 and a 340) and the third is a glass beauty; the 360. From my posts here over the last 6 months you'll probably notice that I use the 360 all the time these days. It's also the camera that Damion & I use in the first Filmwasters video podcast (which I think you've seen).

I would kill for a 195, but the prices were too steep so I ended up haunting evilBay looking for any of the Land Cams with glass lenses and the Zeiss finder. Miller mentions this too and it's actually an important thing to mention. With the cheaper Land Cams you have to compose your shot through one window and then focus through a second. While this isn't a great hardship, it is a bit of a pain and if you can avoid it you'll be happier.

I was happy with the plastic lenses, but compared to the 360 they do produce a noticeably softer image. In fact on one of mine plastic Land Cams the image is soft to the point where it looks like a toycamera...which is why I've kept hold of it.

Miller's other great comment was about the metal body and the tripod. I use my 360 on a tripod quite a lot for close-up work and some portraits. I'd be lost without the metal body & the tripod mount. It's a question shooting style on one hand, but the other it means you have a more versatile camera and that's rarely a bad thing.

Batteries in my opinion aren't a big deal. They don't make the exact same ones that they used to, but you can buy a smaller battery, put tinfoil at each end and then tape it into the battery container. I've done this with all my land Cams and it works like a treat. If you end up buying one, jut post here and I'll supply details of which battery type I use in my 360 (I don't have it to hand).

Be warned though; if you want to do close-up work out shoot anything under about 1.85m the Land Cam won't work for you without the use of close-up filters and either a lot of guesswork or a lot of preparation.

[Urban Hafner]

Thanks Ed. I'm currently leaning towards a Land Camera with a glass lens. I don't think I'm so much into the toy camera look (anymore). There's currently a Land Camera 350 with close-up and portrait kits and a flash gun. AFAIK that one's with a glass lens, right? I might give that a go. Though I'm not sure how much they are worth.

Urban

[moominsean]

I would kill for a 195, but the prices were too steep so I ended up haunting evilBay looking for any of the Land Cams with glass lenses and the Zeiss finder. Miller mentions this too and it's actually an important thing to mention. With the cheaper Land Cams you have to compose your shot through one window and then focus through a second. While this isn't a great hardship, it is a bit of a pain and if you can avoid it you'll be happier.

the two window focus/compose thing also goes for the 195, which isn't cheap. unless you want to switch out for a zeiss finder, which can be found on a couple cheap folders. just to confuse you.

[Francois]

Be warned though; if you want to do close-up work out shoot anything under about 1.85m the Land Cam won't work for you without the use of close-up filters and either a lot of guesswork or a lot of preparation.

Years ago, I found this nifty set of close-up lenses in a leather box. Polaroid thinking about everything, it came with a special tape measure indicating field size and camera focus for sharp pictures.

Indicated on the lenses:
#1 lens has a max field of 22 x 28 inches
#2 - 10 1/2 x 14 inches
#3 - 8 x 9 1/4

And here is a picture of the kit and a close up of the tape measure in case somebody wants to make a custom tape or ruler using a paint pen.

[Sorry, image deleted during forum software upgrade. Please re-upload if so inclined.]