Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Classic Film RangeFinders & Other Classics > Polaroid & Fuji Instax

Polaroid & Fuji Instax All things Polaroid and Fuji Instax

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 03-12-2018   #41
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oren Grad View Post
I'm afraid that one thing that Gary Ho posted in Update #3 (Feb 26) raised a yellow flag for me:

There is one point I have to make clear: InstantKon RF70 will not be as good as the custom Polaroid conversions in terms of lens quality and image quality.

There's certainly plenty of room for the lens to be better than the ones on the Fuji 210/300 and the Lomo Wide while still not being so good as a 127mm Ysarex, let alone the late-model view camera lenses that end up on some conversions. But if it's not a lot closer to the Ysarex than to the plastic lenses on the low-end cameras, I think price starts to become an issue.

Here's hoping...
The "custom Polaroid conversions" lens he's referring to is the SX-70 lens: a premium quality 4-element 116 mm f/8 lens with manual focusing. It's a very good performer, on par with many high-end view camera lenses. He's not trying to compete with that, I suppose because it would make the RF too expensive.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2018   #42
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 33
Posts: 1,035
You can see on the youtube video and Mijonju's IG (https://www.instagram.com/mijonju_official/) that at f/5.6, the picture comes soft and glowy but at f/8 it is pretty good and sharp.

Did not know the camera came with a shutter dial too, nice bonus

I'm more concerned about ND filter, as the front filter thread looks to be 37.5mm, I wonder if they will supply a proprietary 3-stop ND-filter.
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2018   #43
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,745
Since Instax photos are not (usually) enlarged, would a lens for them need as much resolution as a regular lens for a 4x5? Not trying to cause trouble, just curious about that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2018   #44
Oren Grad
Registered User
 
Oren Grad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by zuiko85 View Post
Since Instax photos are not (usually) enlarged, would a lens for them need as much resolution as a regular lens for a 4x5? Not trying to cause trouble, just curious about that.
Even apart from enlargement, the Instax print material has relatively low inherent resolution. But even so, it's not hard to tell the difference between pictures made on Instax material with the cheap plastic lenses in the Fuji Wide 210/300 and Lomo Wide cameras, and pictures made on the same material with an adapted view camera lens. Part of the difference is the inherent quality of the lenses, part of the difference is that the crude zone-focus systems on the low-end cameras mean that much of the time you're not even getting the best of what their cheap lenses can deliver.

When you get lucky and the focus and exposure settings of the Fuji Wide cameras end up being a decent match to the subject and shooting conditions, then at least to my eye the result can be very pleasing in an impressionistic sort of way. (The only sample of the Lomo Wide that I've owned was a dog.) But a high-quality lens allows making pictures with a different flavor, and assuming full manual focus control with a well-calibrated helical, it can achieve technically good results much more consistently.

How much that matters is entirely up to you, and the kinds of pictures you want to make.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2018   #45
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,745
Thanks Oren,
Part of the reason I asked was I intend to disassemble my kickstarter Jollylook camera, (yes, a very tiny print I know). I want the developing unit to mate with a 75mm f6.3 Novar from a Nettar. I figure that little triplet will certainly be better than the single element plastic lens they come with, also a more useful angle of view than the supplied 110mm lens. If that doesn’t work out I’ve a 101mm f4.5 Anastar from a Kodak folder to try but I’d rather have the wider angle 75.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2018   #46
Oren Grad
Registered User
 
Oren Grad is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 251
Quote:
Originally Posted by zuiko85 View Post
Part of the reason I asked was I intend to disassemble my kickstarter Jollylook camera, (yes, a very tiny print I know). I want the developing unit to mate with a 75mm f6.3 Novar from a Nettar. I figure that little triplet will certainly be better than the single element plastic lens they come with, also a more useful angle of view than the supplied 110mm lens. If that doesn’t work out I’ve a 101mm f4.5 Anastar from a Kodak folder to try but I’d rather have the wider angle 75.
I have a Jollylook on the way too, and for the same reason - so I could get one of the boxes to play with.

Funny, I've got a Nettar too, with a 75/4.5 Novar. I like your idea - the Novar should be a very nice candidate for trying with Instax Mini, plenty sharp enough and maybe with an interesting character too. If you do cobble it together with the Jollylook, let us know how it works out!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-13-2018   #47
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oren Grad View Post
I have a Jollylook on the way too, and for the same reason - so I could get one of the boxes to play with.

Funny, I've got a Nettar too, with a 75/4.5 Novar. I like your idea - the Novar should be a very nice candidate for trying with Instax Mini, plenty sharp enough and maybe with an interesting character too. If you do cobble it together with the Jollylook, let us know how it works out!
Thanks, I will. I’ve also asked the Jollylook creators if they would do a run of just the developing unit with crank for the DIY crowd. They said they might consider it after their current Kickstarter is complete.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-19-2018   #48
GarageBoy
Registered User
 
GarageBoy is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 734
I like the mamiya 7ish top deck. The price is a hard pill to swallow, though
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-25-2018   #49
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,389
https://photorumors.com/2018/03/24/c...r-instax-wide/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-29-2018   #50
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 33
Posts: 1,035
Gary replied to a question I had about the RF70 on Instagram regarding when this will be available and his reply was
Quote:
probably ready by mid-2018!
Really hoping to have it in my hands before my trip late October.
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #51
Fjäll
Registered User
 
Fjäll's Avatar
 
Fjäll is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Age: 28
Posts: 209
Pre-orders open.

https://mint-camera.com/about-instantkon-rf70
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #52
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 33
Posts: 1,035
I'm pre-ordering but I'm confused on the difference between the RF70 and RF70 package.

I'm assuming both options comes with the lens set, so the package is the one that comes with a neck strap and a pack of WIDE film?
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #53
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by taemo View Post
I'm assuming both options comes with the lens set, so the package is the one that comes with a neck strap and a pack of WIDE film?
I understand that this is the case.

I'm tempted but can't really afford it right now. Please, folks, pre-order all the available cameras so the temptation goes away...
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #54
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 33
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
I understand that this is the case.

I'm tempted but can't really afford it right now. Please, folks, pre-order all the available cameras so the temptation goes away...
I messaged them on facebook and they confirmed that the RF70 package is indeed the one that comes with strap and film.
Not worth it IMO so I ordered just the RF70.
Now time for the waiting game but as long as it gets here before end of October, I'm happy
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #55
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,572
Ordered.

I know they've done a good job of it and look forward to having one to work with.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #56
mich rassena
Registered User
 
mich rassena is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 239
I have a perfectly good rangefinder that took large photos on Fuji instant film, the Polaroid 250. It cost me about $20. Worked ok until Fuji discontinued their film. I wouldn't risk $1000 on a film format that might become obsolete at Fuji's whim.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #57
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by mich rassena View Post
I have a perfectly good rangefinder that took large photos on Fuji instant film, the Polaroid 250. It cost me about $20. Worked ok until Fuji discontinued their film. I wouldn't risk $1000 on a film format that might become obsolete at Fuji's whim.
I agree, that is a risk. But ...

Rumor has it that the Instax film and camera sales is most of what's making profit for Fuji these days, and a good bit of that profit goes to funding the development of their digital camera line. Seems the Instax is a runaway hit in many markets. So I felt the risk was acceptable, same reason I went for the Lomo Instant Square camera.

Dare I say it: if the instant film packs went away, I guess someone could convert the camera to film... LOL!!!

If you want to be perfectly safe these days, buy a good, high end digital camera and use it until it's completely worn out. Based on my experience with my Olympus E-1 (manufactured in 2003 and priced at $2200 for the body; bought it in 2008 for $400; 25,000 exposures and a decade later it's still working perfectly...), that may take longer than my expected lifetime.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #58
mich rassena
Registered User
 
mich rassena is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
I agree, that is a risk. But ...

Rumor has it that the Instax film and camera sales is most of what's making profit for Fuji these days, and a good bit of that profit goes to funding the development of their digital camera line. Seems the Instax is a runaway hit in many markets. So I felt the risk was acceptable, same reason I went for the Lomo Instant Square camera.

Dare I say it: if the instant film packs went away, I guess someone could convert the camera to film... LOL!!!

If you want to be perfectly safe these days, buy a good, high end digital camera and use it until it's completely worn out. Based on my experience with my Olympus E-1 (manufactured in 2003 and priced at $2200 for the body; bought it in 2008 for $400; 25,000 exposures and a decade later it's still working perfectly...), that may take longer than my expected lifetime.

G
I think you're right on about how to buy digital cameras. I may never buy a new camera again simply because the used stuff is so much cheaper a few years down after release.

As far as instant goes, the world is littered with instant cameras, many of which never shot more than one pack of film. I don't see why this camera wouldn't meet the same fate.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #59
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 3,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by mich rassena View Post
.......As far as instant goes, the world is littered with instant cameras, many of which never shot more than one pack of film. I don't see why this camera wouldn't meet the same fate.
At $900.00 USD, this is an expensive camera aimed at the more serious photographer. The person who buys one will use it.

The cheapo Fuji Instax cameras are meant for the more casual photographer. Buy one for $55.00, shoot the occasion pack of Instax Mini film, then forget about it.

Two totally different type of photographers.

Jim B.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:
http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #60
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mackinaw View Post
At $900.00 USD, this is an expensive camera aimed at the more serious photographer. The person who buys one will use it.
But are the results serious (or only in theory)? Genuinely curious...
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #61
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,382
The lens may be better, but the limitation is the format and film. I'm not sure I get what else the camera brings to the table.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #62
mich rassena
Registered User
 
mich rassena is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
The lens may be better, but the limitation is the format and film. I'm not sure I get what else the camera brings to the table.
I'd like to see the work of a professional using this camera and film. If this truly is aimed at professionals, then they should be able to use it to great effect. What I've seen so far are more in the realm of snapshots, which is a look already obtainable on the cheapest Instax bodies.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #63
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
But are the results serious (or only in theory)? Genuinely curious...
That depends on what you consider "serious", the reason to use the camera. I don't know what "serious" results are. For sure, it's not a professional camera going to be used to do assignments... unless they are very unusual assignments.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #64
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 33
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by mich rassena View Post
I have a perfectly good rangefinder that took large photos on Fuji instant film, the Polaroid 250. It cost me about $20. Worked ok until Fuji discontinued their film. I wouldn't risk $1000 on a film format that might become obsolete at Fuji's whim.
Can't really blame Fuji alone for killing instant film, as over a decade ago the demand for instant cameras and Polaroid was dying due to digital cameras.
From what I read, Instax Wide was available either late 90s or early 2000s but couldnt sell them outside of Japan due to legal restriction from Polaroid.
Polaroid going bankrupt may have opened the way for Fuji to make Instax Wide and Instax available to the rest.

On a YT interviews with Gary Ho (found of Mint), he was asked why he decided to go with Fujifilm Instax Wide and the reason was because he felt Fuji Instax had more longevity than Polaroid/Impossible Project.
Take note that MINT also made a Instax TLR and Polaroid P&S

Average price in CAD$ seems to be as follow
Fuji FP-100c (10 prints) - $39.99
Polaroid 600 B&W (8 prints) - $27.99
Fuji Instax Wide (20 prints) - $19.99
Fuji Instax (10 prints) - $9.99

Main reason I never got into Instant Film was because they are really expensive.
I currently have a Instax Neo Classic that I use to document our little one and long-exposure landscape, great little camera but I find the print to be small hence why I want an Instax Wide camera with manual controls (shutter speed and aperture changeable, Bulb mode).

A roll of Ektar 100 120 is $10 here, then another $10 to get it developed will yield me 12 6x6 shots.

A box of Instax Wide is $20 and will yield me 20 prints.

So shooting instax wide will be cheaper than 120 in the long run
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #65
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
That depends on what you consider "serious", the reason to use the camera. I don't know what "serious" results are. For sure, it's not a professional camera going to be used to do assignments... unless they are very unusual assignments.
I get what you are saying, but the price tag is very steep for a camera with toy camera results. We are wondering if there is a true improvement vs. other cameras. I would think so...

That said, of course the original consumer polaroids were used by artists and if those artworks sell, then they are serious. Who knows...
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #66
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 6,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by mich rassena View Post
I wouldn't risk $1000 on a film format that might become obsolete at Fuji's whim.
Fuji's Instax products a by far and away their most profitable. It is what is keeping their digital camera division afloat.
Far more likely for them to pull the plug (!) on their digital division and it is not making money.

But... I'm talking about the Instax Mini. Not sure how much of a seller the wide is, especially seeing how incredibly ugly Fuji's Wide camera offering is. The Minis are cute, in many colours and include the retro one that Leica uses as a basis for the Sofort.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #67
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 6,011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fjäll View Post

"Just enter your email to go inside."

I'm out.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-01-2018   #68
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 33
Posts: 1,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
But... I'm talking about the Instax Mini. Not sure how much of a seller the wide is, especially seeing how incredibly ugly Fuji's Wide camera offering is. The Minis are cute, in many colours and include the retro one that Leica uses as a basis for the Sofort.
This was my main issue with Instax Wide too as there was no advanced Wide camera unlike the Neo Classic which could do Bulb mode or double exposure.
I even tried using Instax Wide on 4x5 but there;s no easy way on doing it nor a company interested on creating a holder (although Rezivot tried but it was just vaporware)
So really, I'm hoping that the RF70 will give this film some exposure as it is twice the size of the Instax mini
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-06-2018   #69
RLG
Registered User
 
RLG is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 63
There is one, the Lomo'Instant Wide has advanced features but the main issue with that camera is exposure. You do not have control, the camera decides itself between f8 or f22 and that leads many times to overexposure in certain situations and the EV compensation does not always help. The use of ND filter(s) also does not give the required result. With the MiNT InstantkonRF70 you can shoot in automatic mode or in fully manual control over f-stop and shutter speed.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-06-2018   #70
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,572
The Lomo Instant Square seems similar to the Instant Wide model and has the same issues ... exposure control is limited. At least you have B mode for time exposures, and focus control.

The most manually controllable instant film camera currently available is MiNT's own SLR670s model, which is built on a refurbished SX-70: Manually settable shutter times from 1s to 1/2000s plus B and T, as well as auto modes for both 600 and 100 (SX-70) speed films. When in manual setting mode, it locks the aperture to f/8. (I have the SLR670m model, which lacks the auto mode for ISO 600 film.)

My testing with the PO B&W 600 film lead me to believe it has another half a stop or so worth of latitude compared to the older Impossible emulsion. This will make it more capable of being used with the SLR670m successfully ... I found in the past that that high contrast of the 600 film was a problem with the manual settings since the shutter speed settings are at 1 stop intervals and the film had only about half to three-quarter stop worth of latitude at best.

Lots more testing ... and some pictures! ... to come.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-06-2018   #71
RLG
Registered User
 
RLG is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 63
I also have the Lomo’Instant Square. Upto now used 4 packs of film. Have to say the exposure is much more consistent when compared to the Wide version. Out of approx 40 photos 1 was underexposed and 1 overexposed. With the wide only 50-60% is a keeper. The Fuji mini 90 neo classic however does a better job with exposures outdoors during day.
The MiNT SLR 670m is from what I’ve seen and read fabulous with the Time Machine. I’m was a pioneer at Impossible and since the film became Polaroid Originals I only used two packs of color 600 in my SLR 680. I obtained mixed results and contacted Polaroid Originals. They gave good advise, further testing to be continued. Still find the SX-70 or SLR 680 a joy to use and if I compare a photo of the same subject taken with the Lomo Square and the SLR680, color fidelity of the Instax is better but the picture looks small next to the Polaroid.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-06-2018   #72
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,801
I have to agree that $900 is a small boat load o cash, sadly well out side of any thing I can think about for several moons.

BUT, if you can afford the outlay, longer term you can get free film is you share 4 of your shots from the pack via Instagram. My guess is they want rights to use them. So keep your GREAT stuff and share the OK stuff.

I have to say, I need to find a rich father to adopt me and give me a small loan of $1M USD........

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-08-2018   #73
Fjäll
Registered User
 
Fjäll's Avatar
 
Fjäll is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Age: 28
Posts: 209
In case anyone manage to resist the GAS - here is another 75 available:

https://mint-camera.com/about-instan...592f72a5c2496e
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-08-2018   #74
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillBingham2 View Post
BUT, if you can afford the outlay, longer term you can get free film is you share 4 of your shots from the pack via Instagram. My guess is they want rights to use them. So keep your GREAT stuff and share the OK stuff.
How to get the free films:
...
3. As a token of appreciation, we will send you a pack of free film for every 4 qualifying photos.
...
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 06-08-2018   #75
mich rassena
Registered User
 
mich rassena is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by taemo View Post
Can't really blame Fuji alone for killing instant film, as over a decade ago the demand for instant cameras and Polaroid was dying due to digital cameras.
From what I read, Instax Wide was available either late 90s or early 2000s but couldnt sell them outside of Japan due to legal restriction from Polaroid.
Polaroid going bankrupt may have opened the way for Fuji to make Instax Wide and Instax available to the rest.

On a YT interviews with Gary Ho (found of Mint), he was asked why he decided to go with Fujifilm Instax Wide and the reason was because he felt Fuji Instax had more longevity than Polaroid/Impossible Project.
Take note that MINT also made a Instax TLR and Polaroid P&S

Average price in CAD$ seems to be as follow
Fuji FP-100c (10 prints) - $39.99
Polaroid 600 B&W (8 prints) - $27.99
Fuji Instax Wide (20 prints) - $19.99
Fuji Instax (10 prints) - $9.99

Main reason I never got into Instant Film was because they are really expensive.
I currently have a Instax Neo Classic that I use to document our little one and long-exposure landscape, great little camera but I find the print to be small hence why I want an Instax Wide camera with manual controls (shutter speed and aperture changeable, Bulb mode).

A roll of Ektar 100 120 is $10 here, then another $10 to get it developed will yield me 12 6x6 shots.

A box of Instax Wide is $20 and will yield me 20 prints.

So shooting instax wide will be cheaper than 120 in the long run
I don't think FP-100C belongs on this list. It's discontinued, so quite a bit more expensive than when it was in production, almost 2x. It would definitely be foolish to build a new camera system on this format.

Instax wide is in my opinion a very reasonable platform to build on versus Polaroid/Impossible. But it's still at the mercy of a single manufacturer and thus a single point of failure. Relying on proprietary film in a $900 camera makes me nervous.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-08-2018   #76
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,030
I think it's technically possible to make very good instant film. Once had a little bitty i-Zone instant camera that took beautiful photos. But they were also very small.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-09-2018   #77
RLG
Registered User
 
RLG is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by mich rassena View Post
I don't think FP-100C belongs on this list. It's discontinued, so quite a bit more expensive than when it was in production, almost 2x. It would definitely be foolish to build a new camera system on this format.

Instax wide is in my opinion a very reasonable platform to build on versus Polaroid/Impossible. But it's still at the mercy of a single manufacturer and thus a single point of failure. Relying on proprietary film in a $900 camera makes me nervous.
Fujifilm released the Instax Wide and the mini in Europe somewhere in 1999-2000. At that time in the wide format there was the Instax 100 and the 500AF. The latter can now be found online, second hand at a premium price. Compared to the current Instax wide 300 the 500AF has a 3 element lens, flash off mode and is autofocus from 60 cm. Max. shutter speed is 1/125 but it handles bright light good. I suppose the aperture changes.
Instax cameras and film were that time not available in the USA. From 1999 unto now there has been Instax film, recently also the Instax Square film was released.
For Fujifilm Instax is a big cashcow. I don't think it will disappear quickly. When other manufacturers also make cameras (Lomography, MiNT, etc) it means they sell even more Instax film. Just my two cents.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-11-2018   #78
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 33
Posts: 1,035
Bumping this as I finally received an email from MINT stating that my RF70 is on its way.
Has anyone received theirs? How long did the shipping take, I'm hoping to receive mine by end of the week but most likely not until next week.

Very excited, I bought 5 packages of Instax Wide in preparation.
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-11-2018   #79
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,030
I wonder why they didn't make a version of the RF70 that shot 120 roll film? I might have bought something like that. In fact, I suspect a lot of people would buy it if it was priced right. Imagine, a brand new folder that shot 120 and was reasonably priced! The plastic wouldn't have bothered me a bit.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-12-2018   #80
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve M. View Post
Imagine, a brand new folder that shot 120 and was reasonably priced! The plastic wouldn't have bothered me a bit.
I can imagine liking a Seagull folder (or something similar) just as much as something new with plastic lens. And I can buy 10 of them for the price and still have money left for film.

Not to mention that once you are in the $1000 price range you can start looking for a 120 rangefinder folder that is in an entirely different class than RF70.

RF70 (as it is) makes perfect sense for instant film only, IMHO.
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 00:41.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.