Sharpness of Instax with Lomograflok back

[LenB]

Hi there Instant enthusiasts.

I decided to test a couple of lenses using a Lomograflok back on a Sinar 4x5.

I like the look of Instax. My results were pretty good at first glance.

I've never put a loupe on them before to evaluate the sharpness. Oh my, it appears to be "sub optimal".

I had a quick look through here but did not find anything referring to the "sharpness" of the Instax product.

I wasn't expecting to do an involved test of the lenses with Instax but I hadn't expected it to be so soft looking.

Is it kind of expected that this is very soft looking material?

Has anyone put a loupe on it and been surprised at how it looks?

It still is a material I might use from time to time. I had thought about buying an Instax Wide camera but really wonder about that now. Again, I like it for certain subjects and by no means am I dumping on it.

Cheers!

Len

 

[thinkbrown]

Fuji claims a resolution of 12lp/mm, which is plenty for normal viewing but I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't stand up well to a loupe.

 

[blee1996]

Instax film is never sharp, it is a consumer product for fun. It is not sharp, has low resolution, not accurate colors, and have very limited dynamic range. No matter how good the lens and accurate focus/exposure you throw on it, it still looks soft and unsharp. The good news is that Instax film is still readily available and quite affordable.

If you are looking for better quality instant film, you have to roll your dice on expired Fuji FP-100 or FP-4000B peel-apart pack films. Or even older Polaroid Type 51. And each pack of 10 will cost more than the Instax Wide camera or the Lomo Graflok itself.

We are still waiting for entrepreneurs to make instant film great again.

 

[LenB]

Thank you for the replies. That confirms what I thought, and hoped. I'm not disappointed with my results. At normal viewing distance, it looks great.

Indeed, it is a fun film.
I didn't expect it to match Polaroid of old.

Thanks again.

 

[retina_restoration]

IIRC, Instax exposes through the back of the material, which would explain the lack of sharpness.

 

[xya]

IIRC, Instax exposes through the back of the material, which would explain the lack of sharpness.

AFAIK modern Polaroid isn't any better although exposed from the front (via a mirror)...

 

[_T_]

The positive layer of new Polaroid is similarly soft, but the negative layer beneath it is very sharp if you’re willing to remove the top layers with diluted household bleach

 

[blee1996]

The positive layer of new Polaroid is similarly soft, but the negative layer beneath it is very sharp if you’re willing to remove the top layers with diluted household bleach

Can you elaborate which type of "new Polaroid"? Thanks.

I thought you can only recover negative from Fuji FP-100C.

 

[_T_]

I’m talking about the new Polaroid B&W i-type or 600 film. Those are the ones I’ve done it with, anyway. You have to cut open the film and peel it apart destroying the image and then soak the remaining layers in diluted household bleach to reveal the negative.

It also kinda works with the color film but the negative layers are very delicate so I was never able to get a full color image out of them that way. Or I got a color image but parts of the top color negative layer were ruined so the colors were all messed up.

 

[hsandler]

Despite the 12lp/mm, it isn't too bad when properly focused. One problem is that the focusing spacer for the Lomograflok is plastic and perhaps not high precision. I usually stop down to at least f16 to get a little depth of focus. Results with a Lomograflok and any old view camera lens will be much better than any of the consumer Fuji Instax cameras with their zone focus plastic lenses. Here is a reflective scan at about 900ppi of an image shot with a 240mm Sironar.
Rogers Majestic vintage radio by Howard Sandler, on Flickr

 

[MsLing]

Here's a datasheet of Instax