At which point, why even bother with an SWC...
I'll play devil's advocate. I bought my SWC/M new in 1997 and have never used the viewfinder.
I always use the camera on a tripod with the ground glass adapter.
Indeed, perhaps one should save several thousand dollars and buy a Lomography LC-A 120 at $449.00, which gives you a 6x6 negative and has a 38mm lens plus auto exposure. True, it will probably vignette more than an SWC, but it's got a built-in viewfinder.
And for $449.00 you will loose the rectilinear lens, the whole reason to buy the SWC. That is like cutting ones head off because they do not like having their haircut. If you are going to post a viable alternative it needs to be comparable to be viable.
When it comes to Hasselblads and Sirius, you really can't jokeErrr... That was a joke.
The joke never came out as a joke. There are numerous examples of seriously comparing Lomoboxes to something they are not, nor could ever be.
When it comes to Hasselblads and Sirius, you really can't joke.
One of the joys of the SWC besides the angle of view is the ease and speed that it can be used. If I want to shoot with a tripod and ground glass viewfinder upside down, I'll haul out a view camera.I'll play devil's advocate. I bought my SWC/M new in 1997 and have never used the viewfinder.
I always use the camera on a tripod with the ground glass adapter.
Of course, he's Sirius.
Very serious stuff.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?