Lomo Panorama

Daire Quinlan · Oct 21, 2020

This could have potential for hackery and modification https://shop.lomography.com/en/hydro-chrome-suttons-panoramic-belair-camera nice short focal length, hotshoe.

Devil might be in the details though. If it's sprockets all the time it might not have a proper mask / pressure plate. It would be interesting to see the internals.

Donald Qualls · Oct 21, 2020

The one review I've seen of that camera, it failed after a single roll of film. And who knows what the lens does in terms of focus and aberration changes with various liquids (or no liquid) in the chamber.

This is a little too "artistic" for me...

Daire Quinlan · Oct 21, 2020

Donald Qualls said:
The one review I've seen of that camera, it failed after a single roll of film. And who knows what the lens does in terms of focus and aberration changes with various liquids (or no liquid) in the chamber.

This is a little too "artistic" for me...

:-D Yes it's a little too ... stochastic ... in its current form. It does seem to be just built on the chassis of the existing belair 6x12 so I guess if the build quality of that is crap then this one is likely to be the same. I'm thinking more of adaptation, i.e. people have been using Holga Wides and WPCs as the basis for decent panoramas for years, it's difficult to find something similar for 35mm without hacking away at some stereo body or milling out the inside of specific 35mm bodies.

Donald Qualls · Oct 21, 2020

My suggestion is to get a cheap folder and a set of 35mm to 120 adapters. Easy, works well, and you can still shoot 120 if you want to. Start with a 6x9, and you'll get 24x87 if you crop off the sprockets...

4season · Oct 21, 2020

I think Donald Qualls is referring to the cardboard LomoMod camera: So far as I can see, no one has reviewed this new plastic offering. My brief experience with the Belair as semi-toy was pretty positive, but that was a medium format camera whereas this one seems designed strictly for 35mm, so how one counts frames or rewinds film back into the cassette are unknowns. I'd be surprised if it's "pressure plate" was more than a set of ridges molded into the back of camera.

Donald Qualls · Oct 21, 2020

It might have been the 120 version that I saw reviewed, but the same shutter (which was the failure point) and liquid-core lens.

foc · Oct 21, 2020

Liquid filled lens?
What is there not to like about that?
Gimmick or arty?
Not my cup of tea but who cares?

Everything that I didn't want, when I started photography many years ago, is now the norm, (Large grain, light leaks, chromatic aberration, barrel distortion, etc.......)
I must admit that Lomography do try to make interesting cameras and films. They may be controversial but they do sell a lot of film and that has to be good.

Regarding the OP question, I know nothing about the camera or reviews (except what Donald said) but if you want to experiment then the investment of €79 may be worth it. If it was me, I would go for it.

Daire Quinlan · Oct 21, 2020

Donald Qualls said:
My suggestion is to get a cheap folder and a set of 35mm to 120 adapters. Easy, works well, and you can still shoot 120 if you want to. Start with a 6x9, and you'll get 24x87 if you crop off the sprockets...

Yeah I have a Fuji 690 with those adapters and even a machined mask, but there's something neat about a small 24x60 or 25x70 35mm panoramic camera.

Huss · Oct 26, 2020

How fun! I can't even imagine the brain storming session to come up with this product!

"Cough cough...how about we make a lens out of air.. cough cough, no liquid!"
"Cough... yeah and we should make that liquid coloured for psychedelic effects! cough cough.."
"Cough.. yeah and stick it on a pano camera! cough cough.."
'AWESOME!! cough cough"

$79. I recently had a really awful dinner that was $120. I'd take this liquid pleasure + $40 of film over that any day.

grat · Oct 27, 2020

About 10 years ago, I remember reading an article on a prototype oil-filled lens that used the refractive properties of an oil, in a precisely controlled shape, to function as a lens. The performance was supposedly very good, and was destined to replace the standard lenses on all cell phone cameras within a couple years.

Ah. My memory is both superb, and terrible. It was 2004, and was a French company called Varioptic. Apparently they've been bought by Corning.

https://www.corning.com/worldwide/e...ng-varioptic-lenses/varioptic-technology.html

So a liquid lens isn't COMPLETELY bonkers. But the Lomo Panorama is close.

Donald Qualls · Oct 28, 2020

grat said:
It was 2004, and was a French company called Varioptic. Apparently they've been bought by Corning.

https://www.corning.com/worldwide/e...ng-varioptic-lenses/varioptic-technology.html

I wonder if this is the same company who proposed (don't know if they ever delivered) a spectacle lens that changed focal length (i.e. reading glasses without separate readers) by moving a slider on the temple to push liquid into the lens? That's a much older proposal, though; I think I read about it in one of the little stub articles in Popular Science in the early 1970s.

grat · Oct 28, 2020

Donald Qualls said:
I wonder if this is the same company who proposed (don't know if they ever delivered) a spectacle lens that changed focal length (i.e. reading glasses without separate readers) by moving a slider on the temple to push liquid into the lens? That's a much older proposal, though; I think I read about it in one of the little stub articles in Popular Science in the early 1970s.

While I was trying to find the article from 2004, I ran across an article about "Adspecs" which are low-cost glasses for developing countries, where you can adjust the fluid yourself with included syringes.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/302550

Donald Qualls · Oct 28, 2020

I guess I misremembered the date -- that's exactly what I recall. More fluid in the lens = less negative or more positive correction. Astigmatism you can live with, to a (pretty large) point, but if you can't see the chalkboard, it's hard to learn even if you can go to school.

Jeremy Mudd · Oct 30, 2020

Daire Quinlan said:
:-D Yes it's a little too ... stochastic ... in its current form. It does seem to be just built on the chassis of the existing belair 6x12 so I guess if the build quality of that is crap then this one is likely to be the same. I'm thinking more of adaptation, i.e. people have been using Holga Wides and WPCs as the basis for decent panoramas for years, it's difficult to find something similar for 35mm without hacking away at some stereo body or milling out the inside of specific 35mm bodies.

Have you looked at their Sprocket Rocket? It's decent enough - does a nice job of keeping count of exposures and has a mask option where you can choose to have sprockets or no sprockets.

I've shot several rolls with mine and its fun. It's sharp in the center with lots of distortion at the edges. My only real gripe about it is that I wish it had actual strap lugs on the sides instead of a small wrist strap that screws into the 1/4-20 tripod socket in the bottom.

An example of with the Sprocket Rocket on Tri-X from a group walk-about earlier this year.

Jeremy

Lomo Panorama

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency