• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

A new 120 camera: the Lomo LC-A 120

I emailed Lomography to ask if 220 film would work and about the vingetting....

They said no on the 220 but stated there is never post processing on sample images. The vignetting is dependent on lighting, blah blah. It was a bit more flowery than that.
 
I for one look forward to using this camera. I love the LCA cameras and their look. And I love that this camera is a new camera in a world where new film cameras are not that common.

Its priced very similarly to the old, unsupported Fuji 645 PNS cameras, and it's small enough to stuff into a bag and carry around for shooting.

Yes, I dig Lomography's stuff. Yes much of it is way over priced, but that's how things work people.

I find it ironic that some people are willing to pay so much for some kinds of cameras because they have a "cool vibe" attached, but when Lomography makes something new, all the hate comes out.

Just a little something to think about. Lomography, whether you like them or not, is helping keep film alive to their best ability. They are exposing many people to film who'd never shoot, and their website gives me great pleasure to see photos taken by others around the world. So I give them some slack. I appreciate that they are here, making new product, selling film, and keeping the film love going.

Don't like the new LCA 120? Don't buy one. Easy solution.

Me, i've got one on order and that GA645 will have to wait for another time.

Oh and the Belair, it's a fun camera. I'd bet if you put the Belairgon 90mm lens on it and the 6x6 mask and shot it against the new LCA 120, many people would not know which was which when looking at the shots.
 
Richard Sintchak (rich815) said:
The best part is you can take selfies with it.
Click to expand...

I know you were being snarky with that comment, but I personally think that the selfies thing is important. It tells me how close the focus distance is and that it will work really well for portraits, taken of myself or of others. I like selfies too, they put me in my photos and remind me that I was there since I don't show up in them usually otherwise.

And I love selfies or "self-portraits" as the old fogies call them. They let me document me and how I look and feel at that moment. They have helped me over the years as a photographer studing the light and how my face looks/works in diff angles and as a human who wants to see himself grow and change.
 
It is be possible that LC-A 120 version has wide angle lens not only because of uniques on the market and popularity of LC-A wide (35mm film) - but also because of popularity of making selfies. I don't do selfies - but this is actually good market approach - adopt to new rules and trends, or even better - create trends.
 
alienmeatsack said:
I find it ironic that some people are willing to pay so much for some kinds of cameras because they have a "cool vibe" attached, but when Lomography makes something new, all the hate comes out.
Click to expand...

Well, it's more fun to complain than to shrug disinterestedly. To be fair, the "cool vibe" cameras get their share of contrarian dissing too, most obviously in the stereotype of Leica owners with more money than sense.

No one looks down on a Rolleiflex though. It would be like disliking a friendly dog, if your friendly dog could resolve 100 lines per millimeter. But I digress.

All kiddin' aside, I'm glad this camera exists. I wish the lens were targeted more at conventional technical quality, but if it's got a market that doesn't mind how it renders, there it is---and while the price sounds high at first blush, how much would a person *expect* to pay for a medium format superwide?

The closest 35mm equivalent of this camera, outside Lomo-land, might be a Bessa-L with a 15mm, and that'll run you a fair bit more than $429. OK, it's a much sharper lens, but the little tiny negatives will eat up a lot of the gains...

-NT
 

I would have thought that going with a wide angle lens, they could make the body more compact, have sharper images (even if shot wide open, though I dont think this camera has a very fast lens aperture), and the general trend of people wanting wider and wider angles.
 
I am pretty interested in this camera but the price does seem a bit steep. I think I might be better off getting that Fuji GA645 I've been wanting. But I would miss the 6x6 negatives.
 
Richard Sintchak (rich815) said:
New: if Fuji can price this at $130 then this Lomo should be a lot cheaper than it is.
http://gizmodo.com/fujifilm-instax-300-wide-1632840512
And yeah, yeah there's differences like the metering and such but still...
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, but then, Lomography can ask what it wants too and there seem to be a market for it so why shouldn't they? I guess much of their new clients never held/shot an analogue camera before and don't know what they could get for that kind of money in "old" APUG style cameras
 
Initially I was a bit shocked by the price tag. But I think there are a couple things that need to be considered.

First, it is a very wide lens. Uncommon in this format without having a camera that uses interchangeable lenses.

Second, it is a limited edition of 500 cameras right now. It may become a regular product but you will still own one of the 1st 500 of these. Whether or not that is your "thing" is immaterial. Exclusivity is a BIG selling point in a lot of circles.

After that the other things come into play. It is a Lomo, it is a glass lens, it is a compact 6x6 camera, it is an auto exposure camera, it is basically auto focus.

I personally don't want one of these. My plain vanilla, $15 Lomo is adequate for my needs in this category. I am not real big on lenses this wide, and if I want to shoot with one I have a very nice Pentax 35mm for my 645Nii.

However, it will be interesting to see how fast these sell out.
 
I blew nearly 400 bucks on an LC-A half frame. It works, except it eats the film, the frame spacing is widely erratic, and the lens is fuzzy (well, what was I thinking?), right from the very first roll. It is now an expensive paperweight. For 50 bucks on ebay I got a big ugly vintage Fujica half frame in perfect mechanical order (except for a broken meter) judging by consistent density from frame to frame and roll to roll (using a trusted handheld meter), perfect frame spacing, and sharp focus. The lens? If I could get one for my full frame 35's I could get rid of my medium format gear! And if I want the Lomo look I suppose I could throw it against the pavement a few times, and still be $300 richer. The other two Lomo cameras I have are just more cute monuments to me not taking a hint the first time! I actually like the Lomographic Society. I don't know why they would commit customer service suicide by selling disposable cameras at Hasselblad prices. I would think they'd turn a greater profit over the long run selling, let's say, tested vintage film gear. Vintage gear should have the same sex appeal for film aficionados, and you might even finish the first roll.
 

Crap. Now I want one.
 
37th Exposure said:
It works, except it eats the film, the frame spacing is widely erratic, and the lens is fuzzy (well, what was I thinking?), right from the very first roll.
(...)
Click to expand...
Sounds like they delivered everything they promised...

37th Exposure said:
And if I want the Lomo look I suppose I could throw it against the pavement a few times, and still be $300 richer.
Click to expand...


37th Exposure said:
disposable cameras at Hasselblad prices
Click to expand...


Thank you for making me laugh today!!
 

I think you've got something there. Sound like (there was a url link here which no longer exists) in an other thread recently. We APUG-ers aren't the first market to target for Lomography, I guess. They found other selling points for an other group of buyers with success it seems.
 
So far I've bought one camera from them, the Horizon Perfect. Doesn't feel very solid, but results are quite amazing. Lens is very sharp, I mean VERY sharp. Got some really huge prints from it and love them. So, so far so good. Let's hope this new thing from them is as good so I can get one.
 
Anybody bought one of the LCA 120s yet? I saw a review on the phoblographer that was good.
 
Resurrecting this old thread! Does anybody have a lomo Lc-a 120? How do you find it? Is it basically identical in the quality of photos it takes when compared to the regular lc-a+ (other than being medium format that is)? Much distortion in the lens? Do you regret buying it or do you use it regularly? Appreciate the input. Was thinking about buying one as it's medium format, new, and comes with a warranty but I'm not sure about the wide focal length. I kinda prefer an 80mm focal length.
 
It's a Lomo Superwide! Despite size difference it weighs next to nothing and still feels like the LCA you love. Be patient and when loading and unloading film, at least until you get the hang of it. Expensive for what it is, but it's probably super limited production.

 
I don't yet have results from mine, but I did just get it this week... it does seem pricey, and there is falloff in the corners (not so much you can't work with it), but the next closest option to this is a Hassy Superwide which will run you 4-5x the money for one in working condition, weigh four times as much, be 2x larger, and still have no internal meter. Oh, and no hot shoe. Thinking of which, I'm pairing mine up with a little Contax TLA 20 flash for fill purposes. When I have examples to post, I will.
 
I wonder what the sales figures have been since the announcement? I note that one of the posters is called rich815. Maybe that is shorthand for being the 815th richest person in the U.S. Based on what has been said I think I'd need to be the 816th richest to buy it.

pentaxuser
 
At first glance the price does look high.....but take the price of a typical 1940s folding 6x6 or 1950s collapsing lens 6x6 and adjust for inflation......then remember this is a production run of just 500 in an age when mechanical devices cost a lot more to produce than purely electronic....if it's any good (and I do realise that being a "Lomography" product that definition is loose) then it's not a bad price.

Even compared to a good 80s 35mm electronic point and shoot the price isn't so bad.
 

I'll stick with my SWC, which will give you perfection. I know that's not important to everyone.
 

DWO said:
I am pretty interested in this camera but the price does seem a bit steep. I think I might be better off getting that Fuji GA645 I've been wanting. But I would miss the 6x6 negatives.
Click to expand...

I currently own an LC-A 120 and have previously owned a GA645.

Both cameras have serious quirks, but my personal preference is for the LC-A 120. It's incredibly easy to carry around, while it's generally easier to use and more reliable than the Fuji.

I also don't see anywhere else that you are going to get a brand new medium format camera with an ultra wide lens for £300.

Performance is solid enough for me. I usually use it as a second camera.




 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register