Who Wants To Test The Lomo LC-A 120 ???????????

raid said:
If you had taken the same shots with a SWC, they may come out better looking.
Well done.
Click to expand...

No 'may' about it!! Definitely better.

I want to put this into perspective. I took this shot with a $5 Argus RF camera:

ArgusLilliesS-1_zps99c3aa93.jpg


It uses 35mm film. The point of 120 film is that, all things equal, it way outperforms 35. So when I get much much better results from a 50 year old $5 camera than a new $430 120 film camera, well, something is not right.
 
Huss said:
No 'may' about it!! Definitely better.

I want to put this into perspective. I took this shot with a $5 Argus RF camera:


It uses 35mm film. The point of 120 film is that, all things equal, it way outperforms 35. So when I get much much better results from a 50 year old $5 camera than a new $430 120 film camera, well, something is not right.
Click to expand...


This one looks relatively still as shake goes. (some but not hiding the lens ability completely).

I just don't believe the lens is very good. The shutter is claro bad but the lens is also bad.
Remind me of my saying... I may be stupid but I'm slow.. 😛
Lomo20120-11_zpsmg4ka6w8.jpg
 
f16sunshine said:
I just don't believe the lens is very good. The shutter is claro bad but the lens is also bad.
Click to expand...

It's not. Even the sharpest of my shots, when I view the full rez scan shows distinct softness and lack of contrast.

Funny thing is I just went back and re-read the phoblographer's review. You know, the one saying this is the best street camera ever.

To put it mildly, they are 100% full o ....

they wrote in part:

"The Lomography LCA 120 is an absolute marvel of a camera when it comes to image quality. The camera has an actual glass lens as opposed to Lomography’s typical plastic lenses, and so the images you get will be comparable to a modern camera.
Read more at http://www.thephoblographer.com/2014/12/19/review-lomography-lca-120/#tlZScgwCRGm0IBRx.99"

Anyway....
😉
 
I have the Holga 120 with glass lens (GFN model) and it looks a bit sharper than this. Pity, as I was hoping to see Lomography up their game, but alas, no.

~Joe
 
Personally I can't imagine anyone in their right mind buying this camera expecting a sharp lens.

its a LOMO - that means soft images

Its all about the LOMO experience and shooting an ultra wide 120 camera that does not cost $2000 - like the the Hassy SWC

I suspect the reverse is also true,
that a true LOMO fanatic would complain
about the damned reality bending sharpness of the latest ASPH Leica lens.
 
CameraQuest said:
Personally I can't imagine anyone in their right mind buying this camera expecting a sharp lens.

its a LOMO - that means soft images

Its all about the LOMO experience and shooting an ultra wide 120 camera that does not cost $2000 - like the the Hassy SWC

I suspect the reverse is also true,
that a true LOMO fanatic would complain
about the damned reality bending sharpness of the latest ASPH Leica lens.
Click to expand...

You have a good point. I bought the camera because I like the lomo look and was hoping for a different and more versatile alternative to using my Holga.

The images that Huss posted are pretty much like I figured they would look. Maybe slightly softer than I would prefer.

I'm not opposed to sharp cameras either. As a hobbyist I like to shoot different types of cameras.
 
When it comes to toy cameras and image aesthetics, there's good bad and there's bad bad.

These look just plain bad.
 
CameraQuest said:
Personally I can't imagine anyone in their right mind buying this camera expecting a sharp lens.

its a LOMO - that means soft images

Its all about the LOMO experience and shooting an ultra wide 120 camera that does not cost $2000 - like the the Hassy SWC

I suspect the reverse is also true,
that a true LOMO fanatic would complain
about the damned reality bending sharpness of the latest ASPH Leica lens.
Click to expand...

The problem is that it's not just the lens, but the whole package that is so disappointing given the price tag. The world's worst shutter release. The leatherette that is peeling off. The flash sync that is about 1 second off. The disposable camera build quality.
Thing is my other two Lomo products - the Minitar lens that I used on the Leica and the Horizon Perfekt - are really decent and fun to use. I'm looking forward to posting results from those to hopefully prove that not all their products are stinkers. I already know the Minitar lens is 'good' as I have used that before. The Perfekt I will have to wait and see. But for now I know it's a blast to use, which is something I cannot say about the LCA 120.
 
Huss said:
Yeah, but the cable release would need use of a tripod. These were mostly daytime active shots at an event .And it would be interesting to see if using the cable release would cause the camera to shake, as it still has to fight through that same shutter release.

p.s. I would be very interested to see the results from the 800 film, as that would facilitate the use of higher shutter speeds.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing your results. I like the color results.. They kind of remind me of the old Kodak instamatics 🙂

In the old days there use to be pistol grips w/ built in cable release.. Maybe something like that would help..

Gary
 
CameraQuest said:
Personally I can't imagine anyone in their right mind buying this camera expecting a sharp lens.

its a LOMO - that means soft images

Its all about the LOMO experience and shooting an ultra wide 120 camera that does not cost $2000 - like the the Hassy SWC

I suspect the reverse is also true,
that a true LOMO fanatic would complain
about the damned reality bending sharpness of the latest ASPH Leica lens.
Click to expand...

Of course, but why using a 120 film then, which is intended to achieve maximum detail and sharpness?
I have a Lomo L-CA myself, very fun camera, but can't imagine owning one in 120 format.
 
13Promet said:
Of course, but why using a 120 film then, which is intended to achieve maximum detail and sharpness?
Click to expand...

Because if the buyer pays for more film surface the camera producer can save on camera quality and the final result will still be somewhat acceptable.
 
Well it's on its way to Colton. Colton, you should get it on Tuesday.
My take away - use at least iso 400 film. This camera does not do well with slower film unless you happen to have a tripod and cable release handy. Plus the faster film will help get smaller apertures where the lens performs less badly.
I'm going to post to this thread the other shots that I took at the same time with my other Lomo products - the Minitar 32mm lens and the Horizon Perfekt pano camera. And see if I am happy with the results of any of these products. As I mentioned earlier, I enjoyed using the two latter, but did not like using the LCA 120 at all. An unfortunate haptic experience combined with unsatisfying results.

I will re-iterate that I am not anti- Lomo. They have with out doubt furthered the cause of film photography. All you need for proof of this is check their website and online magazine. They promote film photography no matter what gear you use. No-one else does that, no-one.

Good luck Colton!
 
Huss said:
Well it's on its way to Colton. Colton, you should get it on Tuesday.
My take away - use at least iso 400 film. This camera does not do well with slower film unless you happen to have a tripod and cable release handy. Plus the faster film will help get smaller apertures where the lens performs less badly.
I'm going to post to this thread the other shots that I took at the same time with my other Lomo products - the Minitar 32mm lens and the Horizon Perfekt pano camera. And see if I am happy with the results of any of these products. As I mentioned earlier, I enjoyed using the two latter, but did not like using the LCA 120 at all. An unfortunate haptic experience combined with unsatisfying results.

I will re-iterate that I am not anti- Lomo. They have with out doubt furthered the cause of film photography. All you need for proof of this is check their website and online magazine. They promote film photography no matter what gear you use. No-one else does that, no-one.

Good luck Colton!
Click to expand...

Thanks Huss, and Stephen.
I'm looking forward to trying it out.
I'll do my best to shoot it and share my experience with it here.
 
My 2 cents: the poor shutter is why they included a cable release with the camera. I highly recommend using it. I can't really hold the camera that still without using the cable release.

I'm hoping to get my rolls developed this week. Off to use it at a festival today so I should have 3 or 4 rolls to develop.

Looking forward to seeing what Colton can do with it.
 
dwojr said:
My 2 cents: the poor shutter is why they included a cable release with the camera. I highly recommend using it. I can't really hold the camera that still without using the cable release.
Click to expand...


From the Lomo website:

"The LC-A 120 is perfect size to take with you anywhere, making it the epitome of Lomography’s 10 Golden Rules for unbridled shooting in the moment."

Needing to use the cable release pretty much nullifies that.
 
Interesting input so far on this interesting new product ... I sincerely wish Lomo all the best (I've bought a couple Lomo cameras in the past for fun) but the IQ and handling of this 120 LC-A make me somewhat wary. $400+ is a big chunk of change for that 'Lomo look'. I have a 1940's Bilora box camera that has a simple meniscus lens -- the images look better (to me) than the new LC-A 120. Here's a shot I took using expired Kodak Vericolor film from 1988. Not bad for a simple box camera.

4565399035_b46294c6e4_z.jpg
 
Just got my snaps back from the other Lomo products that I took along at the same time.
Completely different experience, I love these!
Taken with the Horizon Perfekt pano camera.

Filling our pie holes at the Pie Hole:

110115s-4_zpsbuc9kpfj.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom