new 6x12 camera to come by Lomography

[Andy K]

I'm wondering if Lomo's going to continue their tradition of build quality with this camera...or sadly, the lack thereof. I've bought a number of their cameras & products over the years and most of them either quickly broke or under-performed in a major way. While I love the Diana+'s pictures, it's so flimsy I would fear for its' life if I ever accidentally dropped it. The Diana Mini I bought regularly freezes up in the middle of the roll. Ditto the Lomo 35mm back for the Diana. I like the fact that the Bel Air has a bellows--which makes it a lot more convenient than the very bulky Holga 120 Pano that shoots 6x12cm--but why do I get the feeling that the bellows is going to be the first thing on the Bel Air that's going to come apart? This is a big reason why on the whole I prefer Holga gear over Lomo--the Holgas are in general much sturdier.

The Diana, the Holga, all the novelty multi-lensed cameras they sell… none are Lomo cameras. The only true Lomo cameras made in the St Petersburg factory are LC-As manufactured before the introduction of the LC-a+, the Smena, and the Lubitel.

 

[narsuitus]

I like the concept of this new camera but am unimpressed with the quality of its gallery images.

 

[Arctic amateur]

While I love the Diana+'s pictures, it's so flimsy I would fear for its' life if I ever accidentally dropped it.

The only one of my cameras that I would not fear for if I dropped it is my cardboard pinhole camera. My Nikon SLRs aren't concrete-proof.

 

[snaggs]

15% off for pre-order. $250 for 6x12 is great news for medium format. Be interesting to see "normal" photos taken with the camera.

Daniel.

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

15% off for pre-order. $250 for 6x12 is great news for medium format. Be interesting to see "normal" photos taken with the camera.

Daniel.

It was 30% off when the pre-ordering started. I am also looking forward to some more sample shots, reviews, and tech info. and hopefully a strip down to the chassis.

 

[AgX]

There is now a 35mm back available:

http://shop.lomography.com/gb/cameras/belair-cameras/belair-accessories/belair-35mm-back

 

[ChuckP]

Anyone here own this camera? What do you think of it?

 

[PtJudeRI]

There was one detailed review that I read so far. The lenses really stunk, and the focus dropped off very quickly after a 6x6 square. Even at $250, it's still a plastic toy, an expensive one.

 

[PaulMD]

Lomo is supposedly releasing real glass lenses soon. Hopefully the coverage and resolution will be a bit better.

 

[bsdunek]

I see there is now a Lomography "Tipster" article on how to stuff cardboard into the camera to prevent "fat" rolls. I would think a new design would at least not have that problem - like an old Holga.

 

[AgX]

What is a "fat" roll?

 

[erikg]

What is a "fat" roll?

When a roll of 120 doesn't spool tightly. It seems "fat" and much worse will get light struck at the edges. I'm surprised this camera is that crude, although some people like light leaks so maybe it's a "feature".

 

[AgX]

I assume that would mean either an angular misplacement (spool axix vs. film plane) or a lateral shift of the spool with reference to the film guides (in there are).

 

[mrred]

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2417296,00.asp
http://www.flickr.com/groups/2147131@N22/

 

[mrred]

The flickr images separate the real shooters and the hipsters. Over all, from what I saw, it's a toy that's a bit more expensive but no worse than my seagull.

 

[filmamigo]

Anyone here own this camera? What do you think of it?

I've got one. The camera itself is pretty good for the price. The included plastic lenses are not so good. I have ordered the two new "Russian" glass lenses that have been designed for the camera, but haven't received them yet.

If you are curious, I've written more about the camera at my blog (in three parts):

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

 

[ChuckP]

Thanks for the links to the review and blog posts. Sounds like a work still in progress. Or maybe that's the whole point of Lomo cameras. The glass lens at $199 does seem a little steep. Does the glass lens have more fstop choices? Guess focus, unknown shutter speeds and two fstop choices. A good camera to use if trying to avoid rigid techical control.

 

[AgX]

Instax Wide Back available

http://shop.lomography.com/de/belair-instant-back

(in German, as Lomography does not give me access to the english description)

www.lomography.com

 

[Regular Rod]

These cameras are very expensive for what you get and the results leave a lot to be desired...

Here's a much better and less expensive alternative that produces better results.

Here's how to make your own.

http://freepdfhosting.com/b316cbe2ff.pdf

RR

 

[Steve Smith]

Here's how to make your own.

http://freepdfhosting.com/b316cbe2ff.pdf

Excellent.

Sometimes people comment on my DIY 6x12 camera and ask for advice. I often suggest the option of using the 6x12 Holga or the 6x12 pinhole version as a donor body.


Steve.

 

[michaelbsc]

Excellent.

Sometimes people comment on my DIY 6x12 camera and ask for advice. I often suggest the option of using the 6x12 Holga or the 6x12 pinhole version as a donor body.


Steve.

I have maintained for years that there's a perfectly good 6X12 hiding in every 4X5. Some folks have responded that they want to print the film rebate. Ok. Point taken. In that case my method doesn't work.

I'll grant you that the converted Holga looks a boatload smaller than my converted Polaroid. So convenience can be a big determining factor, too.