Author Topic: The Lomo Instant Square Camera (Read 3590 times)

clagom · « **on:** August 29, 2017, 10:47:20 AM »

The Lomo Instant Square Camera
Looks nice:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lomography/the-lomoinstant-square-camera

Francois · « **Reply #1 on:** August 29, 2017, 02:54:13 PM »

Reminds me a lot of the old rigid body Kodak instant cameras...
Too bad Instax film is so darn expensive....

clagom · « **Reply #2 on:** August 29, 2017, 04:19:01 PM »

Quote from: Francois on August 29, 2017, 02:54:13 PM

Reminds me a lot of the old rigid body Kodak instant cameras...
Too bad Instax film is so darn expensive....

Yes indeed it's quite similar to those Kodak cameras.
The project btw got funded already, after just 5 hours :O

Francois · « **Reply #3 on:** August 29, 2017, 08:18:22 PM »

Not surprising in a sense.
People know that those Lomo kiskstarters are essentially risk free. More of a promo thing than anything else.

jharr · « **Reply #4 on:** August 30, 2017, 04:22:27 PM »

Quote from: Francois on August 29, 2017, 02:54:13 PM

Reminds me a lot of the old rigid body Kodak instant cameras...
Too bad Instax film is so darn expensive....

Bring back The Handle and maybe I'll kick in!!

tkmedia · « **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2017, 03:10:29 AM »

i rather the identical Happy Time Coca-Cola cam! Maybe they can get a branding deal! but maybe with Almdudler!

Francois · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2017, 01:56:29 PM »

If I had one, it would go directly to eBay!
Money money money money... And the world would be mine (cue James Bond villain laugh)

16mman · « **Reply #7 on:** September 01, 2017, 07:25:25 PM »

I wonder of this will inspire Fuji to make an analog camera for their film too? I think that's one of the reasons people are rushing to buy this camera: Fuji's version isn't really anlog, it just uses analog film to print to.

Francois · « **Reply #8 on:** September 01, 2017, 09:51:26 PM »

What I really don't get is why Fuji decided to go that route?
It surely is more complicated and more expensive to produce a digital combo than to just expose the darn thing and get it over with...

This-is-damion · « **Reply #9 on:** September 05, 2017, 09:41:18 PM »

Can't lie, however much I'm sceptical about lomo, I'm a sucker for instant. I didn't like instead at first but it quickly took hold.

I have grown to love the impossible 600 film now it's pretty reliable so I'll probably just spend my money on that and feed my slr680, but who knows what I might ask for at Christmas.

Cadha13 · « **Reply #10 on:** September 07, 2017, 07:03:58 AM »

After getting the Instax Mini back for my Holga, I am looking forward as I am backing this to fruition. As Impossible film isn't available in NM at all, and Instax is just about at every Wally World for cheaper. (I just want to buy it and forget it, no shipping film please!)

I am going to go both ways, with my Impulse AF with creative filters and the Lomo camera. I shouldn't be without my instant option. As I love my SLR680, and my two SX-70 cameras, I just want the film all the time.

(I lament the loss of New55, as I finally got my 4x5 rig set...)

Ed Wenn · « **Reply #11 on:** September 07, 2017, 11:32:25 AM »

Quote from: Cadha13 on September 07, 2017, 07:03:58 AM

(I lament the loss of New55, as I finally got my 4x5 rig set...)

What happened with New55?

Francois · « **Reply #12 on:** September 07, 2017, 01:20:21 PM »

I don't know... Apart from them having had problems with quality a while back, having problems satisfying the demand and being expensive, I don't know what's wrong.

This-is-damion · « **Reply #13 on:** September 07, 2017, 02:09:40 PM »

Quote from: Francois on September 07, 2017, 01:20:21 PM

I don't know... Apart from them having had problems with quality a while back, having problems satisfying the demand and being expensive, I don't know what's wrong.

It is very expensive, and difficult to use - the only time I ever tried it didn't work

Bryan · « **Reply #14 on:** September 07, 2017, 03:21:15 PM »

They recently had a failed Kickstarter to make improvements to the print and negative. I participated in the original and shot a box, it was a bit difficult to use. If you wanted to save the negative you had to fix and rinse it, plus the prints had problems. I don't think they have completely given up yet. They still sell the film on their web site but $75 for 5 shots is pretty expensive.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/892575418/new55-pn-quality-improvements/comments?cursor=17069502

Chalky · « **Reply #15 on:** September 07, 2017, 03:26:12 PM »

they used to get pods from the 20x24 studio, who will no longer supply them, so they are looking for a new pod machine but from what they have said that looks unlikely. Very disappointing.

although the pop up here is intriguing... http://www.polaroid.com/

Cheers

Kai-san · « **Reply #16 on:** September 07, 2017, 07:45:05 PM »

So, something is happening on the 13th. The impossible website will be closed down on the 10th and reopen on the 13th, now there's a coincidence. As Impossible now owns Polaroid, maybe they will re-brand their film as Polaroid?

Francois · « **Reply #17 on:** September 07, 2017, 09:17:39 PM »

There's definitely a possibility there.
Polaroid is one of those names with instant brand recognition. If more sales mean lower price, I'm all for it.

Bryan · « **Reply #18 on:** September 07, 2017, 11:41:22 PM »

It's got to be more than just a re-branding of the IP film.

rattymouse · « **Reply #19 on:** September 17, 2017, 02:23:41 AM »

Quote from: Francois on August 29, 2017, 02:54:13 PM

Reminds me a lot of the old rigid body Kodak instant cameras...
Too bad Instax film is so darn expensive....

Instax is waaaaaay cheaper than Impossible film and 10 times the quality.