New LOMO MC-A

[Mos6502]

Looks quite interesting. I'm still holding onto the idea that Pentax will reveal a full frame version of the 17, given the film path is large enough to accommodate it, which is an odd design choice for a half frame camera.

Tangentially, it's been interesting to see the evolution of the Lomography brand, from a reseller/brander of existing products using advertising gimmickry to make sales to those who didn't know any better, to being practically the last company dedicated to keeping film photography "relevant" and film cameras on the market.

 

[TenEleven]

The lens is marked as a "Minitar II." Based on some of the sample images and the video, the sharpness (both center and corner) does seem to be improved. But maybe I could just never nail focus with the LC-A well enough to judge the lens.

The original Minitar definetly had some Lomography thing going on. I briefly tried the LTM version. At smaller apertures it was not too egregious but yeah ... I mean their name is Lomography!

(They have made some truly excellent LTM lenses though!)

That all said as you and others have said the Minitar II samples look to be more standard fare. I am going to guess it's going to be a so-so performance wide open (most compacts even the mythical T3 do not that great at full aperture) and then get pretty good at the kind of apertures you'd use for snapshots anyway.

Edit: Just realized that manual advance means that it will not do this dumb thing that almost every Japanese compact does - where it pulls out a ton of film before starting frame #1. Some of these cameras (Minolta TC-1!) are quite small and thus waste a lot of film. That was totally not collusion by the way, no siree!

 

[aw614]

Looks quite interesting. I'm still holding onto the idea that Pentax will reveal a full frame version of the 17, given the film path is large enough to accommodate it, which is an odd design choice for a half frame camera.

Tangentially, it's been interesting to see the evolution of the Lomography brand, from a reseller/brander of existing products using advertising gimmickry to make sales to those who didn't know any better, to being practically the last company dedicated to keeping film photography "relevant" and film cameras on the market.

After seeing some disassembly videos of the Pentax 17, I thought the same thing like the half frame was just a test run, but that the chassis was designed to eventually spawn other models including full frame.

 

[aw614]

The original Minitar definetly had some Lomography thing going on. I briefly tried the LTM version. At smaller apertures it was not too egregious but yeah ... I mean their name is Lomography!

(They have made some truly excellent LTM lenses though!)

That all said as you and others have said the Minitar II samples look to be more standard fare. I am going to guess it's going to be a so-so performance wide open (most compacts even the mythical T3 do not that great at full aperture) and then get pretty good at the kind of apertures you'd use for snapshots anyway.

Edit: Just realized that manual advance means that it will not do this dumb thing that almost every Japanese compact does - where it pulls out a ton of film before starting frame #1. Some of these cameras (Minolta TC-1!) are quite small and thus waste a lot of film. That was totally not collusion by the way, no siree!

Hopefully lomo doesn't do what Minolta did on the himatic af2 model, forcing you to wind the manual lever twice when film is inserted and the door is closed before you can shoot as normal!

 

[TenEleven]

Hopefully lomo doesn't do what Minolta did on the himatic af2 model, forcing you to wind the manual lever twice when film is inserted and the door is closed before you can shoot as normal!

I think this is where their stuff being usually quite bare-bones comes out in our favor.
Also shooting the partially exposed lead-in is Lomography as heck!

 

[valdas]

Edit: Just realized that manual advance means that it will not do this dumb thing that almost every Japanese compact does - where it pulls out a ton of film before starting frame #1. Some of these cameras (Minolta TC-1!) are quite small and thus waste a lot of film. That was totally not collusion by the way, no siree!

Unfortunately this waste of film stuff comes with all (?) auto-wind cameras...

 

[TenEleven]

Unfortunately this waste of film stuff comes with all (?) auto-wind cameras...

No, the Samsung AF Slim does not do it. You get 38/39 frames.
Now Samsung of Korea was not part of Japan National Photo.

I am sure these two pieces of information have no connection to each other...

 

[valdas]

No, the Samsung AF Slim does not do it. You get 38/39 frames.
Now Samsung of Korea was not part of Japan National Photo.

I am sure these two pieces of information have no connection to each other...

It could be. I used to have that Samsung model, but sold it. Anyways - 38-39 is quite uncommon with auto-wind cameras. Another thing is that with todays film there are no 38-39 frames anymore. they just make it shorter. I had some weeks ago several films drying in my bathroom - Ultramax from today was something like 2 or even 3 frames shorter than Fuji Reala from early 2000. I had 41 frame on it (shot with Contax T).

 

[TenEleven]

I got 39 frames with the Samsung just last week on new T-Max 400. This 39th frame has glue smears on it so it's not going to be really (wet) printable without a lot of salvage work, but it's technically 39 frames.

And yes film has been shortened. I have observed similar. I used to get 40 or 41 frames on my Rollei 35. In one case I somehow managed 42 on a store-bought roll.
Nowadays, if I get 40 clean ones from the Rollei, I consider myself lucky.

Edit: Anyway this is getting off topic and is just something that irked me - especially in extreme cases such as the Minolta TC-1 - which is smaller than a Rollei 35 and should - with no trouble - get 40 frames. Even today. But you get 37. As compacts are not my main way of shooting it's more an irritation than a legit issue.

 

[stevierose]

I received my new Lomography MC-A point and shoot camera today. It is way too soon to give a useful review, but my initial impressions are that it is a nicely built camera made primarily of metal with some plastic. It has pretty much all the features you would want in such a camera including AF and MF, AE and complete manual exposure control, a zone focus mode, a multicoated 32mm lens, and feels good in the hand. I have owned many point and shoots including "luxury" models like the Contax T series, Nikon 35ti, as well as classics like the Olympus mju ii/Stylus Epic and the Yashica T4 Super. The one thing that I don't think will work for me is the viewfinder which is quite small and nearly impossible for me to align with my eye and my (necessary glasses) on and get a clear view. There is no diopter adjustment. All of the cameras I have just mentioned have better viewfinders at least for me. So I will end up returning this camera.

 

[bensyverson]

I received my MC-A yesterday as well. I echo a lot of Stevie's observations. Here are some random notes:

• The viewfinder is indeed on the small and dim side. It's roughly equivalent to the VF on the Nikon AF600. But the Nikon's VF is a little clearer, perhaps because they use simple black frame lines rather than bright lines. It's not a dealbreaker for the way I shoot, but it's definitely not a camera for careful composition, despite the "pro" features.
• I haven't seen it mentioned, but the placement of the dials (particularly the shutter speed dial) is very ergonomic. They jut out just a little, making them easy to grab with your thumb as you look through the VF. This makes it much easier to adjust than my Zeiss ZM or a Leica M! The dial configuration seems to be inspired by the Sony A7 series, which is a positive in my mind. The protruding dials mean I would not toss this in a bag with another camera—the knurling will scratch up the other camera.
• Despite the manual film advance, this is not a stealth camera! When I first turned it on, my 7 year daughter squealed "Now I'll know when you're taking a picture!" The startup sound is a high-pitched "WEEE-WE" as the lens extends. Then when taking a photo, the lens makes a birdlike "Chee, Cha-Chee!" as it moves to the focus position and back. Turning it off makes a single "WEEE." It's definitely the loudest focusing action of any P&S I've owned, and it does bother me a bit, as I shoot candids.
• I see what people mean about the film advance. In contrast to a classic SLR, it doesn't feel smooth and confident. After advancing a frame, I sometimes need to pull the lever slightly to do the last 2%. I'll have to see what the film looks like once I develop it.
• In an odd choice, the focus selection lever covers the current MF selection. That is, if you select 0.8, the lever will cover the label reading "0.8." Not a big deal once you know the options, but this is an aspect of the LC-A they should have improved rather than copied.
• The bottom of the camera is not flush. It sits on three protruding screw housings, and the film rewind lever, which sticks out ever so slightly. I wonder if the screw housings were raised after they realized the rewind lever wouldn't go completely flush. It's hardly noticeable, but it takes away some of the polished feel from the rest of the body.

 

[Mos6502]

I would suspect the raised screw housings are intended to prevent scuffing and scratching of the baseplate.

 

[agentlossing]

I had my suspicions that the viewfinder would not be "all that." I also found the Pentax 17 finder to be poor. I'll look through one when I get the opportunity.

 

[TenEleven]

I am two rolls in - I will hopefully have some pictures and thoughts on the optics (& real world focus performance) soon.

Just briefly and not really ordered:

• The auto focus is stunning - it's the most accurate and unerring auto focus I have ever seen on a film compact. Edging out even the Contax T3. It's also quite fast. How do I know without having the film developed yet? Well I compared the distance reading the top OLED gave in some very difficult scenarios with the distance scale on a "proper" rangefinder I had as the other camera. It does stuff where even the T3 flounders - like oblique shots through dirty glass windows of small semi transparent objects. Unless the glass surface is in different sunlight it will "see through" it and focus on what's behind - which is likely what the user will want in 95% of all scenarios. The other 5% gets me to my next point.
• The auto focus ranges from 0.4m to 5.3m (that was the furthest I have seen it display) after that it will be infinity. The granularity is quite fine with 10cm intervals (4") displayed even for distances larger than 2meters (6 feet) - this should be well enough for a 32mm 2.8 lens.
• The camera refuses to shoot if it fails to acquire a distance in AF mode. Luckily this never happened in my real world shooting. I only found out by purposefully pointing the camera at something that was too close. With Manual focus you can of course overcome this.
• The five (A/S/Focus/Exp. Comp/Multi Ex.) physical(!) controls are an absolute god-send for any semi-serious photographer. As is the top display. You can intervene within a split second - no mode dials to deal with - just set your choice of aperture/shutter-speed/focus point/exp. comp and go. All controls are placed very appropriately and you can feel them out without having to look down at the camera. Only minor gripe is that with the camera of you will not be changing the aperture since the lens retracts.
• It is a bit noisy, but not too bad in my opinion. Turning the camera on causes the lens to extend which is the noisiest operation. The auto-focus makes a bit of a scree-scree noise but again normal road/street noise will easily cover it. There is obviously no wind noise. The shutter is a quiet but satisfying click.
• The wind (and re-wind) felt a bit off - but after 10 exposures the mechanism broke in and now it feels completely fine. I first felt that the rewind lever was oddly dinky - but it is actually quite satisfying and speedy in use - as is the wind lever.
• The camera will tell you exactly the focused distance, the exact (down to 1/3rds) shutter speed and aperture it chooses. Which again especially in the beginning when I did not fully trust it is great to have. It will also tell you your manual settings - both the set focus distance as well as aperture/shutter speed or exposure comp. It will display two arrows pointing up or down (or both) depending on where the exposure is VS what the camera "thinks".
• Flash defaults to off when the camera is powered up. Thank you lomography!
• The DX code of the film can be overridden but is still visible in the ISO menu by the moniker "DX" it would be nice if it spelled out the ISO, but I guess if you are familiar with the ISO sequence this is a non-issue. (Or just look at the peep window.)
• The finder as other people have already remarked on is a bit disappointing. The eye point is quite deep - and the van-albada frame-lines are quite bad to be honest. However there is very little distortion and the view is clear. Also the "target" reticle for the auto focus is quite small and matches the AF point perfectly - near or far. I assume they are correcting for parallax in software.
• The camera does not stop you from shooting the lead-in if you want to economize on film. It counts up to 40 - maybe even higher but that's when my film ran out. Start frames are displayed as negative numbers.
• The camera displays a cute icon when it "wants" to be wound on and you press the shutter.
• The aperture is comprised of two blades - like most compacts. This may mean "weird" bokeh but with a 32mm f2.8 lens you will not care.
• The shutter button is a bit mushy for my taste - not too bad. Despite the mushiness it is still easily possible to get a reading of a scene (distance/exposure) without having to worry about accidentally tripping the shutter - there is enough travel. It just does not feel amazing.
• Pushing the also physical "MX" switch lets you trip the shutter again on the same frame. This might be useful for lens-cap pictures you might take.
• Ah the lens cap - now that thing is a true piece of cr.... I will replace it as soon as possible! For whatever reason they made the pinching part flush with the rest of the cap. So it can be an absolute nightmare if you want to get it off in a hurry. I now just use the provided screw-in UV filter (30.5mm thread) to protect against fingers and dust.
• Screw in filters! On a compact! And the lens retracts safely with them on. No hassle screwing and unscrewing every time you power down. yay!
• Other than the film peep-window there is no moltoprene! The back is made from some light metal alloy and uses some sort of light labyrinth. Really nice. I wish the back opened a bit wider to make film insertion a bit easier - but if that was the trade-off for no moltoprene that will turn into goo in 10 years time - I'll take it.
• The build quality is really nice and there is no creaking or movement even if I grip the camera hard. It feels very very solid. Everything you touch is made from metal. The exposure comp and aperture dials felt a bit "eh" out of box but wore in nicely after 2 rolls.
• The size and shape feels very comfortable in hand for my average size hands. I like the protrusion of the battery creating the molded grip space. A nice touch.
• In auto mode shutter speed seems to extend down to 16 seconds. Maybe it will do more but this is the longest I have seen.
• In a mock-battery swap experiment the camera retained the electronically stored frame count for at least 5 minutes. Maybe it would have done so longer but did not bother to find out. So unless you forget what you were doing mid-swap, you will not lose your frame count.
• The cameras program exposure mode is a fairly typical compact affair - it will stay at f2.8 far longer than most togs would prefer f/2.8 1/250 before it goes to f/4; most likely to prevent camera shake or maximize the lomo look of the lens. I am not sure. Luckily you can just set the aperture and go.
• Most important of all - it's fun to shoot!

All in all I am very impressed - especially given the very aggressive price point. It is cheaper both than the Pentax 17 and Rollei 35AF and bests both easily in my view. As for how the lens does? We will see.

 

[TenEleven]

The size is not tiny but not what I would call large - either. Here it is in between a Kyocera Contax T3 and a Kyocera TD (which I customized).

 

[bucs]

I read a few posts reporting about frame spacing issues. Would be curious to see your results.

 

[TenEleven]

It uses a single sprocket wheel like some other compacts (which are auto loading to be fair).
I can imagine it being sensitive to the film being loaded right (not at an angle, not askew) - we will see once I develop it. Need one more roll to fill up the tank.

 

[TenEleven]

So the first two rolls are in. Some more thoughts and then - pictures!

• The lens is a step up from the earlier Minitar judging from pictures found on the web
• At full open the corners blur only slightly and there is no absurd vignette, the center is sharp
• There is very little distortion except in the extreme corners where I see a tiny bit of barrel distortion
• Light hitting the lens obliquely can cause strange flare - it seems unique to this camera it reminds me a bit of the flare you get on a Rolleiflex
• The auto-focus is indeed very accurate with only 2 misses in as many rolls - one time I was likely asking too much expecting it to focus through dense steam
• Frame spacing is good the first roll and a wobbly on the second roll; there are no overlapped frames in either. At worst the frames "kiss"
• Exposure is accurate if a bit on the dark side, akin to the Minolta TC-1, if you want to print B&W maybe dial in +.5 a stop or even a full stop

Note: The canister for the BW film was scratched and the camera thought it was DX ISO800 (ISO400 actual) until I caught it 2/3rd through the roll - that's why the BW is a bit underexposed. I inserted the same canister into my Hexar RF/T3 and they also thought it was ISO800. So the LC-A is not to blame and the canister was the culprit.



Color (only five because of the attachment limit)

 

[Archlich]

Playing with mine and suspecting it to have some sort of averaging metering. Definitely not center weighted (like most in the class had) as the result is susceptible to change by presence of light source/shadow spot anywhere in the frame.

Got 41 frames out of my first roll of Fomapan. They definitely had thought the digital frame counter through.

The film chamber, curiously, uses zero foam to seal the light except around the window.

The very short advance stroke/small gear ratio might be the culprit causing the occasional uneven/overlapping frames.

 

[agentlossing]

The very short advance stroke/small gear ratio might be the culprit causing the occasional uneven/overlapping frames.

If that's the case, could it be improved by careful technique, or is it pretty much up to the gear and placement of the sprockets?