Your opinion of Lensbaby lens?

[kxl]

Thinking about getting one. What has been your experience? Post some images!

 

[Bill Clark]

Don't have one & don't intend to buy one.

PS works for me.

 

[hamradio]

They honestly seemed like kind of a waste of money, to me...

 

[YYV_146]

While I must admit it is easier to get the effect before I open Photoshop, I don't think it's worth $50 easier...

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Had one for a while.
Then I got a 4x5.
Sold the lens baby.

Phil Forrest

 

[bsdunek]

Bought mine used off eBay so I didn't pay a lot. I don't use it a lot, but find it is fun to use.

 

[nikon_sam]

When they first came out I thought they were a neat idea...I know I can do the same thing with my 4x5...I still think they're a neat idea but I'm not going to pay what they want for them now...if I could find one used at a great price I might consider buying it...it's not currently on my ebay search list so it's not a priority...

 

[Roger Hicks]

I have a couple (different generations). I don't use them often but they give effects you can't really get any other way (and yes, I have LF cameras with movements too).

Worth having? Yes. For me, anyway.

Worth the money? Only you can decide.

Worth slagging off when you've never tried them? Not really.

Cheers,

R.

 

[j.scooter]

The lensbaby is fun and can give some good results, this was at f4 IIRC

 

[BillBingham2]

Sadly I could not vote..... an unusual feeling for someone who lived so long in Chicago.

I think they would be fun, priced so that if you don't like it you have not taken a 2nd on your home.

Anything that makes/helps you look at subjects in a different way and priced that way is IMHO a great thing. It may not be THE THING for you, but if you learn from it's a good thing.

B2

 

[Gumby]

Since slagging off something never personally used is verboten, let me alter my initial response to read as follows: I haven't and wouldn't... but if one can create an image as nice as j.scooter did then maybe they should.

 

[filmtwit]

Gimmick photography at it's best/worst.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Gimmick photography at it's best/worst.

What sort of photography isn't a gimmick?

Cheers,

R.

 

[DominikDUK]

+1 For Roger

 

[filmtwit]

Hmm, interesting take. But Lensbaby when actually used tends to be let's take a normal shot, add an optical effect to it, for it's own sake, then call it cool.

Or is that being too obtuse?
😎

What sort of photography isn't a gimmick?

Cheers,

R.

 

[rbsinto]

Know people who have them, but it never appealed to me as they just don't go with the kind of photography I do.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hmm, interesting take. But Lensbaby when actually used tends to be let's take a normal shot, add an optical effect to it, for it's own sake, then call it cool.. .)

It can be. But so can anything else. B+W? Saturated colour? Desaturated colour? Shallow depth of field?

Like anything else, a Lensbaby can be used as a gimmick. But it can also be used to create unique, desired and deliberate effects. I find it hard to see how "creativity" can be excluded by the choice of any tool or technique, no matter how much it is over-used by the unimaginative and incompetent.

Cheers,

R.

 

[kxl]

Like anything else, a Lensbaby can be used as a gimmick. But it can also be used to create unique, desired and deliberate effects. I find it hard to see how "creativity" can be excluded by the choice of any tool or technique, no matter how much it is over-used by the unimaginative and incompetent.

This is exactly how I feel about Lensbaby. I am tool-agnostic when it comes to expressing creativity, and to that end, I believe this tool will be of some use. I am sure that a lot of my Lensbaby images will be gimmicky, but I am hoping for a few that will shine, and I am willing to go through a ton of cliched garbage to find those few nuggets.

 

[alienmeatsack]

None of the poll options really fit what I feel about their products.

Some of their gear is overpriced IMHO. But, some of it is affordable and fun.

I have the Spark which is big and ugly but takes fun photos. It can be kind of annoying to use since it requires two hands to focus (or one if you are really good at holding your camera in one hand and holding the lens still to get a shot).

I started with their Scout with the fisheye and it is hands down the best fisheye I've used and I can recommend it for those who love the fisheye look. I think the outer edge of the shots it takes are what makes it special and it has their own unique glow to it that no one else really has replicated. Add a few cheap optics to that from their plastic and single glass lens optics and you have yourself a pretty nice "Lomography" and alternative photo lens.

Their new fisheye, on film, seems to use very little of the frame which is a turn off to me. Maybe it works better on a digital but I've not used it so I can't tell.

If you shoot film and like to end up with a shot that doesn't need digital filters to get unique looks, it's a fun bunch of products.

But if you came to me and asked me what lens to buy with your $300 USD, I'd probably point you to something else. Esp since you can get Lomography's Diana and Holga lenses for the Canon/Nikon via an adapter and get nearly the same effect (minus the fisheye).

I'm meh about some of their products but I dig the fisheye, esp on a digital Nikon/Canon.