Lomography LC-A 120

[Archlich]

Lens is only fixed f/4.5 - no other smaller f stops like f8 etc. even automatically right?

Film type: standard 120 roll film
Lens: 38mm f/4.5 Minigon XL Multi-coated glass (21mm equivalent)
Lens Construction: 5 elements 4 groups
Effective Focal Length: 38mm
Exposure Area: 56mmx56mm
Angle of View: 92º
Minimum focusing distance: 0.6m
Focusing Zones: 0.6m, 1m, 2.5m, infinity
Auto Exposure: Programmatic
Auto Exposure Range: unlimited to EV17
Aperture range: f/4.5- f/16 (programmatic)
Speed range: unlimited to 1/500
Film Sensitivity Range: ISO 100-1600
Film Counter Mechanism: auto reset film stopping
Tripod socket: standard 1/4" tripod socket
Multiple Exposure: yes
Dimension: 134.5mm(w) x 108mm(h) x 62.5mm(d)


Let's face it. I think it's an impressive camera, something that had never been done before, while everyone else are retreating (if not long gone already), even Fuji. Sample photos looks OK too - again, compared to a SWC, you're paying only 1/4 for the 38/4.5.

Lomo surely has the balls to go further, in a right direction. Regardless any labels people would apply upon, cameras are cameras.

 

[btgc]

It's a bridge camera leading to $50 folder or $500+ TLR or other MF rig.

 

[Spicy]

Would be interesting if it were $200 of camera and $200 of year-long, unlimited, mail-in film dev+scan with FTP file hosting subscription.

But yeah, that being said, this does a whole lot more for analogue photography than Leica's "new" M-A... Good on them -- just wish they would reign in the lifestyle/overcharging a bit.

 

[Sid836]

At that price tag I'd rather get a rolleicord or a rolleiflex. They must be kidding (and they have a very poor sense of humor).

 

[bucs]

This camera might actually bring newfound interest in other medium format cameras and also bring up interest in 120 film.

Those two aside, it is still an overpriced camera...

 

[Jaime M]

I don't care about the lomo marketing and the hipster stuff.
I would like to try some rolls through it because that wide lens and compactness kind of camera.

 

[thegman]

I don't get the overpriced comments, where is the other tiny ultrawide medium format camera for $430? Seriously, what camera am I missing? I'm looking to downsize my camera kit into much smaller items, so where is the alternative to this Lomo?

 

[jsrockit]

I'm puzzled why someone wouldn't just buy a used GA645w, but I guess that's not the lomo life?

Square vs. 645? Some people like the Lomo look, etc.

 

[jsrockit]

I don't get the overpriced comments, where is the other tiny ultrawide medium format camera for $430? Seriously, what camera am I missing? I'm looking to downsize my camera kit into much smaller items, so where is the alternative to this Lomo?

http://www.cleanimages.com/Article-MediumFormatInYourPocket.asp

Not sure of prices though... and of course, they are different animals.

 

[Sid836]

It is not ridiculous at all. It is all about comparing different things that do the same job. In this case, the used ones also perform better too. Do not forget, the used ones latter can be sold at the same or even higher price while those scrappy cameras from lomo would cost as much as a toy camera.

Cmon! Don't be surprised for the critical point of views. This is what this thread has been asking for. It is a conversation after all and not all share the same opinion.

advertising and consumerism wasn't invented by lomo.

Yes but they try to take advantage of it to the point of abuse...

 

[Sid836]

Nobody got angry with anyone. Yes, sure, they cannot hold up with prices of used market, but again this cannot justify the price of this. For people that just want some expensive fun, that I doubt if will last long, it could be o.k.
Just saying, nothing against nobody, not angry with anyone.

 

[crispy12]

You could always buy this camera used, surely some pseudo hipsters would sell theirs off for $200.

 

[B-9]

If these do start popping up used in the 200$ range, I'll definitely try one.
We might be waiting a few years (enough time to forget this exists).

Lomo says they only have 500 available for preorder (for the Christmas season)
When that number reaches 10k sold, we might grab a deal on fleabay.

I'll be more excited if they upgrade some of those old LC-A accessories.
Most specifically, a 120 sized Krab underwater housing!

I have to agree however, where else will you get a 21mm equiv. on 6x6 for under 500$?
Sure a Hasselblad 500 body is only around 150-250$ but the equiv. lens would cost 4 times that. Old 6x6 folders already get a ton of love here, but again, none of them come close to this wide.

Final thoughts? It's ugly... But I want one!

 

[Sid836]

Lomography's problem is that it does not innovate any more. They just take old ideas, brush them up and try to make money out of it.

As for the praise of its wide angle lens, it does not mean much when all you get is a medium format point and shoot camera at a sky high price. I'd rather go all manual and 135 that get an expensive medium format point and shoot with a lens (don't you dare compare it with a haselblad's lens) of no documented quality (not to mention that I could buy some additional decent lens for my existing cameras, or even more film 135/120).

It would be interesting though to listen to others first impressions. I'd like to know how durable that toy would be, to see some other than lompgraphy's peoples' photos, how long that iso selection switch will last and what does that metering range infinity-12EV proves to be.
It will take a hell lot more to persuade me about that price tag.

 

[thegman]

http://www.cleanimages.com/Article-MediumFormatInYourPocket.asp

Not sure of prices though... and of course, they are different animals.

Yes, with bells on, I had an old Zeiss Super Ikonta IV, 75mm lens I think, and it was outstanding, $100 less than the Lomo too. It's not wide angle though. I've got a Horseman SW612 for my wide angle requirements now, but of course, it's big, and 6x12/6x9, which is both a pro and a con.

I was thinking about trading it all in for a GF670 for my normal lens, and something else for wide, but that's hard to come by for a price I want to pay, except the Lomo, which has a price which is fine by me.

 

[thegman]

Lomography's problem is that it does not innovate any more. They just take old ideas, brush them up and try to make money out of it.

As for the praise of its wide angle lens, it does not mean much when all you get is a medium format point and shoot camera at a sky high price. I'd rather go all manual and 135 that get an expensive medium format point and shoot with a lens (don't you dare compare it with a haselblad's lens) of no documented quality (not to mention that I could buy some additional decent lens for my existing cameras, or even more film 135/120).

It would be interesting though to listen to others first impressions. I'd like to know how durable that toy would be, to see some other than lompgraphy's peoples' photos, how long that iso selection switch will last and what does that metering range infinity-12EV proves to be.
It will take a hell lot more to persuade me about that price tag.

Honestly, I think Lomography may not innovate too much, but they do make more 'different' cameras than anybody else. I can't think of another camera maker which makes such accessible and interesting cameras, maybe Walker LF cameras, maybe Fotoman (dMini looks very interesting), but the rest of the industry is basically adding numbers to MP,ISO,DR,and AF speed specs and calling it a new camera. That's fine, but there is no innovation that I can see, no changes which change the way we use, or think about their products.

Sky high price? Where is the medium format point and shoot with a wide angle lens and a low price? Serious question.

I've had a LC-A. Yes, build quality is bad, but on a trip it kept shooting when my brand new Fujifilm Klasse S failed. I don't blame Fujifilm, I'd buy one again, and they honoured the warranty, even though it was a grey import, impeccable service. These things happen, but despite the 'low quality' of Lomo and the comparatively high quality of Fuji, it was the Lomo that kept on working.

Anecdotal evidence, only my own experience, however, when it comes to reliability, I guess you can rely on an internet rumor-mill or your own experience.

If the meter on the LC-A 120 is the same as the LC-A 35mm, then for me, it worked perfectly every time, but I only ever shot C41 and cross processed slide film, never slide film to process as E6, so maybe the meter's weaknesses would become apparent then.

Durability? Again, if it's like the LC-A 35mm, it'll keep on taking photos, but feel fairly rattly doing it.

 

[zuiko85]

On thing a person could do, if you really want the Lomography look to your pictures but cannot afford the price of this camera. Right now, for $66 shipped (in the US anyway) you can order a Lomo Diana F 6X6 and a Lomo 38mm supplementary lens for it from B&H. Very limited exposure options and really crappy corners but isn't that what lomography is about.

Also I think the Diana negative is actually 52X52 mm where real 6X6 is normally 56X56 mm.

 

[aizan]

ridiculous...there are so many better options at that price point.

 

[zuiko85]

ridiculous...there are so many better options at that price point.

If you mean my post, well I was only comparing the $66 price with the Lomo 120 LC-a price of $429
True, I would not spend my money on either but some folks like that type of stuff and will pay for it. No problem with that, it's their money, they can spend it anyway they like.

As I mentioned before, for a compact 6X6 I have a little Zeiss Nettar. It only has the f6.3 lens and a 3 speed + B Vario shutter so somewhat limited but it was only $25 in fine condition and will fit in a cargo or jacket pocket.

 

[aeturnum]

For all those throwing stones, show me the medium format camera that's the size of 1.5 x100's stacked on top of each other, does fully automatic exposures, and only costs $430 (new!).

A 40mm f/4 Distagon will run you $430 alone, without buying the meter or the camera body or the film back. I don't want to buy the camera one bit but I'm not going to complain about the package. It's more than the sum of its parts. Cheaper too.