New mini-Polaroid film format

If nothing else, it does bring the per-exposure cost down toward Instax territory.

The camera looks really cute. I've played with the Polaroid One Step Plus, and if that's any guide, the Go is going to be very easy and lots of fun to use.
 
jsrockit said:
It's kind of cute...and of course it's an instax competitor.
Click to expand...

+1.
After the huge success of instax - especially instax mini - Polaroid have had to react in some way.
Problem for Polaroid:
There is still a significant quality gap between instax and the current Polaroid films, in favour for instax.

Cheers, Jan
 
Tiny tiny picture. What would you do with such a small size. I know lomography is coming out with a Instax Wide back for 4x5 cameras. Of course that is some months away, if they can keep to schedule. That is the only instant picture size that would pique my interest.
 
Very Interesting!

Essentially 46x46 mm ... compared to Instax SQ at 62x62, and Polaroid SX-70/600 at 77x77 (focusing only on the square formats).

It will be cool to see what people come up with as satisfying photographs with the smaller format. I like shooting both Instax SQ and Polaroid SX-70 formats, and they are different in terms of composition and feel due to the size.

Quality differences ... Well, Fujifilm has an extremely mature product backed by vast resources, so yeah: given proper exposure, you know that Fuji photo will be consistently good. Polaroid has a less mature film product and is a relatively small company nowadays, so there are resource constraints; the result is less consistent output. The good news is that the Polaroid SX-70/600 format film has come a huge, long way and is far, far more consistent in recent production batches.

It might well be that going to a smaller format will itself net an advance in consistency of the finished prints as well since some of the variability comes from the handling of reagent across the film surface: less surface area should equal more consistent spreading/flow of reagent.

Certainly 46x46 mm prints aren't going to appeal to anyone looking to make detailed landscape images with a wide angle lens, but that's just common sense. :)

Sounds interesting, exciting to see a NEW instant film format being created in 2021! I'll be watching to see what comes of it.

G
 
Here's the issue: Instax is reliable from batch to batch. Nearly all the new Polaroid stuff I've tried has had issues with some or all the frames. Until Polaroid's QC is on par, I don't see why i'd want to use it for a similar size format as Instax. Whatever Instax's flaws are, it's very reliable.
 
I think the very compact camera size will have "sex appeal" to many Polaroid users and new instant film users.

And the very interesting question is:
Will Fujifilm reply to that with a very compact camera for the instax mini and / or square size(s).

Cheers, Jan
 
What I wish they'd all do is create a viable back for various MF cameras. The plastic lenses on these cameras leave much to be desired. Polaroid has an instant film printer now, which I'm certain can be used as the basis for such a device.

Several Kickstarter ventures on this very idea have all amounted to vaporware thus far.
 
agentlossing said:
Here's the issue: Instax is reliable from batch to batch. Nearly all the new Polaroid stuff I've tried has had issues with some or all the frames. Until Polaroid's QC is on par, I don't see why i'd want to use it for a similar size format as Instax. Whatever Instax's flaws are, it's very reliable.
Click to expand...

Well, I use Polaroid SX-70 cameras a lot. And if you want to use an SX-70, you have to buy SX-70 format film, which is only made by Polaroid.

I have the MiNT InstaKon RF-70 as well, which uses Instax Wide film. It's a lovely camera, but nowhere near as nice to use as the SX-70 for my use.

Polaroid's film quality has improved quite a lot. I'm getting 7 to 8 out of 8 excellent quality prints on recent packs of SX-70 and 600 speed film, both B&W and Color. Most of the misses are my fault, not the film or the camera.

G
 
f.hayek said:
What I wish they'd all do is create a viable back for various MF cameras. The plastic lenses on these cameras leave much to be desired. Polaroid has an instant film printer now, which I'm certain can be used as the basis for such a device.

Several Kickstarter ventures on this very idea have all amounted to vaporware thus far.
Click to expand...

I agree, but it's a hard problem because of the physical dimensions of the film pack assembly. Getting the film pack and focus plane in the right location is very difficult.

I have an Instax SQ processing unit that was supplied with another kickstarter (the "Instant Magny 35"). The SQ format is just a tiny bit larger than 6x6 and, to me, it seemed a natural to adapt the back attachment interface for my Hasselblad 6x6 cameras and use it directly as a film back. It's nearly the right size and shape. The problem is that the Hasselblad film back sites the focus plane ~2.5mm behind the back attachment flange, just enough space for the dark slide and supporting channel. The combination of the film processing unit structure, including dark slide, the film pack plastics, et al, puts the minimum back registration distance to something in the ~17.8mm range. And I don't see any way to reduce that with a customized processing unit structure to less than about 10mm.

So I'm going a different route: I'm adapting a Mamiya Press 23 lens mount and lens to the back, by using a Mamiya 23 parts body cut down to just the lens mount and supporting structure. I've been working on this off and on for the past couple of years ... I finally have a decent design in mind, and now just have to develop the plan for the small adaptation piece required.

All this just points out that it's not easy. Of course, it could be done ... but the costs of such developing such a device are high and the market infinitesimal.

G
 
Godfrey said:
Well, I use Polaroid SX-70 cameras a lot. And if you want to use an SX-70, you have to buy SX-70 format film, which is only made by Polaroid.

I have the MiNT InstaKon RF-70 as well, which uses Instax Wide film. It's a lovely camera, but nowhere near as nice to use as the SX-70 for my use.

Polaroid's film quality has improved quite a lot. I'm getting 7 to 8 out of 8 excellent quality prints on recent packs of SX-70 and 600 speed film, both B&W and Color. Most of the misses are my fault, not the film or the camera.

G
Click to expand...

I have the OneStep 2, the films I have run through it have had irregularities, the color film was worse than the B&W. I have a few packs of B&W and I am slowly using those. We'll see how the other two packs of B&W behave once I work my way into them.

On the flip side, my wife has had a Mini 90 Classic for years and the Instax Mini film is consistent every time. I think she's ready to move to a larger format, though. The mini is disappointingly small.
 
Godfrey said:
I agree, but it's a hard problem because of the physical dimensions of the film pack assembly. Getting the film pack and focus plane in the right location is very difficult.

I have an Instax SQ processing unit that was supplied with another kickstarter (the "Instant Magny 35"). The SQ format is just a tiny bit larger than 6x6 and, to me, it seemed a natural to adapt the back attachment interface for my Hasselblad 6x6 cameras and use it directly as a film back. It's nearly the right size and shape. The problem is that the Hasselblad film back sites the focus plane ~2.5mm behind the back attachment flange, just enough space for the dark slide and supporting channel. The combination of the film processing unit structure, including dark slide, the film pack plastics, et al, puts the minimum back registration distance to something in the ~17.8mm range. And I don't see any way to reduce that with a customized processing unit structure to less than about 10mm.

So I'm going a different route: I'm adapting a Mamiya Press 23 lens mount and lens to the back, by using a Mamiya 23 parts body cut down to just the lens mount and supporting structure. I've been working on this off and on for the past couple of years ... I finally have a decent design in mind, and now just have to develop the plan for the small adaptation piece required.

All this just points out that it's not easy. Of course, it could be done ... but the costs of such developing such a device are high and the market infinitesimal.

G
Click to expand...

I am also in the process of converting a lubitel camera to support instax square.

One of the problems as you mention is the large flange distance between the focal point of the lens and the instax film.
The second is actually that this distance is hard to predict and variable with instax cartridges: https://hackaday.io/project/174394-l2-camera/log/183724-a-sneaky-secret-about-instax-film

So I have just accepted the fact that 1. my focal point is going to be slightly closer than what I can see from the viewfinder 2. These are never going to be sharp enough. But i guess that's the whole point of making the camera so I don't mind it that much.
 
agentlossing said:
I have the OneStep 2, the films I have run through it have had irregularities, the color film was worse than the B&W. I have a few packs of B&W and I am slowly using those. We'll see how the other two packs of B&W behave once I work my way into them.

On the flip side, my wife has had a Mini 90 Classic for years and the Instax Mini film is consistent every time. I think she's ready to move to a larger format, though. The mini is disappointingly small.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Polaroid SX-70/600 B&W film is definitely more consistent than the color film, or has been at the least. One of the issues is that the film has a limited shelf life too, never mind that newer batches continue to perform better and more consistently: I've found it best to buy in small quantities and use it up relatively quickly: within three to six months, max, for best consistency and performance. Refrigerating it for storage helps a little.

The Polaroid Go film is brand new in production, however, so it might or might not be the same as the larger format film. Time will tell.

On the Instax front, the Instax Wide film is just as good as the mini and SQ formats and has all the same benefits of consistency and quality.

Personally, I have no problem with tiny prints. They just mean a different kind of photograph for me to make, from an aesthetic point of view. If I want wall sized beautiful prints, I shoot larger format film or high resolution digital... :)

G
 
olakiril said:
I am also in the process of converting a lubitel camera to support instax square.

One of the problems as you mention is the large flange distance between the focal point of the lens and the instax film.
The second is actually that this distance is hard to predict and variable with instax cartridges: https://hackaday.io/project/174394-l2-camera/log/183724-a-sneaky-secret-about-instax-film

So I have just accepted the fact that 1. my focal point is going to be slightly closer than what I can see from the viewfinder 2. These are never going to be sharp enough. But i guess that's the whole point of making the camera so I don't mind it that much.
Click to expand...

That website verifies my own measurements, and I think in similar terms: small aperture lenses work best on these films due to focal plane positioning error on a film unit by unit basis. And that's why Fuji (and other make) Instax camera typically have rather slow seeming lenses. I see the same variability playing out with the Instax Magny 35 fitted to my Leica M ... I have gotten some lovely results, but there's variability between frames contingent upon the lens opening.

Polaroid SX-70/600 film packs seem to be a bit tighter on unit by unit variability in my measurements. This might be why the SX-70 cameras with their f/8 lens seem to produce somewhat better results on average, plus the notion that they're being manually focused for each frame to my eye's precision.

G
 
zuiko85 said:
Tiny tiny picture. What would you do with such a small size. I know lomography is coming out with a Instax Wide back for 4x5 cameras. Of course that is some months away, if they can keep to schedule. That is the only instant picture size that would pique my interest.
Click to expand...

I have Instax pictures mounted centered in the 4x5 inch window of an 8x10 8-ply mat, raised from the backing board on a small square of matboard, giving them a 3D look that is quite pleasant.

The only limit to a small print is your creativity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top