Lubitel reborn!

M

Mark Wood

Well-known
Local time
3:52 AM
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
456
Location
Devon, UK
View My Gallery
Well, I'm sure we'll all be lining up to pay £259.65 for a brand new Lubitel.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...e_on_New_Lubitel_TLR_arrives_news_273811.html

At least it's going to have interchangeable backs so you won't need to buy one for each film type. Perhaps the near impossible focussing, vignetting and light leaks will be offered as optional extras in a kind of "a la carte" service to rival Leica?

So, another triumph for the LOMO brigade and their "emperor's new clothes" marketing or perhaps I'm missing the point? (Hopefully that's a rhetorical question!!)
 
Anyone who buys one with that price is an idiot.

I wonder what was the street price for a new Lubitel when they were sold in Russia or Soviet Union. Theres plenty in Finland used and 50 euros is way too much for one.
 
funny how that works... sell it in a dollar store for $10 and it's overpriced... put it in the window of a camera store and throw around words like "vintage" and "retro" and all of a sudden its selling in the triple digits. It's like that for all the Lomo products in Canada. There's no way to get them in the country without paying ridiculous shipping, exchange and customs fees, so most Holga and Lomo products start around $120 for even the basic models, the 4 and 9 lens types are all more. Its funny, can still go to a dollar store and pick up a plastic kids camera for $5... unfortunately their lens's are way too sharp 🙂

Don't get me wrong.. I love my Holga.. but I wouldn't have paid for than the $20 I did for it, I was just lucky one of my trendy friends picked one up and didn't realize it didn't take 35mm film.
 
I bought my Lubitel for about 5 quid, and sold it for nearly 20.

I took some really great photos with it, actually. Horrible 'ground class', terrible ergonomics, etc, but with a lens shade [I made one] and the lens stopped down a bit, the negs were pretty good. I certainly wouldn't be embarrassed by the photos I took with it.

But that sort of money? Wow. You could buy a decent Rolleiflex.
 
mcgrattan said:
But that sort of money? Wow. You could buy a decent Rolleiflex.
Click to expand...
and then some....
last week i was watching a rollei go on evilbay for exactly that kind of money
with the 35mm adapter,with hoods,with close up lenses and filters, all in original leather cases, and the camera was also packeed in a big leather carry case.
the whole lot was in pristine condition.
far better value than the lubitel
it makes you wonder what kind of people are prepared to spend that kind of money...errr....on second thoughts.....no it don't😀
 
I remember after having a good look at the Lubitel when I bought one and figuring that they were actually pretty godawful ... I bought a 1933 Voigtlander Brilliant which is a lovely little camera and has a suberb lens. It's only scale focus ... but to me those Lubitels may as well be! 😛

I'm stunned that that place has the gall to ask that sort of money for something like a 166B ... I wonder if it comes with a bottle of complimentary snake oil? 🙄

VoigtlanderBrilliant_2.jpg
 
Last edited:
The Lomography people are really despicable. The Russian manufacturers SHOULD fit nicely between the more expensive Japanese cameras and the lower quality Chinese ones (e.g. Holga). Sure, these cameras don't have the fit and finish of a Leica or even a really good Fuji, but they're still useful tools that represent a real step up for someone on a budget. Let's remember, for a large portion of the world, for the better half of a century, these were the cameras professionals used.

In short, Lomography is killing a perfect price/performance niche before it even has a chance to grow and develop. And what's more, these Lomography people are parasites! I highly doubt they're reinvesting their massive profits back into R&D for the Russian companies. All it would take is for a quality minded Chinese manufacturer to step in and realize that there's a "Buick" market for cameras between the "Cadillac" Leicas and the "Geo Metro" Holgas, and the Russian advantage will disappear.

As much as I love my Fed 5C, I would abandon it in a heartbeat for a sub-$300 RF with a more 21st century design.

BTW, according to their website, you can still buy a non-35mm-capable Lubitel for less than $90 at Kiev USA.
 
I'm intrigued by this "endless panorama" mode where you can take 16 continuous shots on a 120 roll. Fine if you want a "vertical panorama" but has anyone ever tried to use a TLR (with a left-right reversed view!) on its side which you'd need for a normal, horizontal one...?!?

You have to hand it to this "Lomography" lot. At least if the business fails, they'll make excellent estate agents (no offence intended to the many perfectly respectable estate agents out there of course...).
 
Hmmm, I'm torn on this one.

On one hand I'm glad that someone out there is still making analog cameras and encouraging people to burn film. The more art students shoot Lomo, the better for Kodak/ilford/ Fuji and the rest of us.

On the other hand asking £260 for a plastic camera is pretty ballsy. You can find a nice Rolleicord and have it fully overhauled by Harry Fleenor for that sort of money and the Tessar will look plenty 'artsy'.
 
Despite my apparent cynicism, I'm actually delighted to see this camera reappear. You can get technically very good photographs with them as stopped down, the lens is pretty sharp, even at the edges. In it's day, it offered a remarkably good performance for £20-30 but a £250 camera it isn't, unless the UK pound plummeted in value even more yesterday.

Mind you, from real and bitter experience, I'd sooner pay £250 for a Lubitel than £5 for a Lomo LC-A...
 
Mark Wood said:
I'm intrigued by this "endless panorama" mode where you can take 16 continuous shots on a 120 roll. Fine if you want a "vertical panorama" but has anyone ever tried to use a TLR (with a left-right reversed view!) on its side which you'd need for a normal, horizontal one...?!?
Click to expand...

"Endless panorama" it's just shooting 6x4.5 with the 6x6 mask... nothing new in calling possible errors a "feature"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom