Lomography Instant Wide Glass: The Instax Wide Camera for Creativity

[@oliverdecker1930]

Looking forward to part 2 of this review with Jordan exploring the video features of this camera.

[@falxonPSN]

I mean, if this thing can take a picture once every 5 seconds you would have a movie, it's just that your frame rate would be 0.2 FPS. Still no waveform display though.

[@NotEvenRealBob]

can you do a review on portable printers ?

[@Hotrob_J]

FINALLY. I was going crazy for why they never released it with the glass lens

[@SebastienBarrau]

Looking forward to the Instax Wide EVO review!

[@83442handle]

finally a camera that my Pentax can beat in AF and video

[@MusabTahaTarik]

😂

[@tomperry9034]

It is weird that the shots never seem really sharp with these, even with a glass lens that can stop down.

[@MusabTahaTarik]

it is not a goal of instant cameras

[@jw48335]

I got away from the fully manual instant cameras - the film is just too expensive. I do still use an SQ10 hybrid, which is fantastic during the holidays.

[@AnalogFramecraft]

Happy new year from Poland !!

[@erickbarron530]

I know. This is a longshot, but do you think you’ll ever review cameras of yester year again? Really enjoyed that one in particular. One of your first videos you ever made was on the Pentax Q, one of my favorite cameras, and one that I have collected several different versions throughout the years. If you’re ever interested in doing review on it again, I have all the models and versions. Thank you again for creating incredible content. Have a happy new year.

[@marcp.1752]

Looking forward to Part III - Battle at F-Stop Ridge, Chris!

[@TheRealMarxz]

nice... still wishing for a rangefinder coupled version

[@seantomlinson3320]

What a fun camera. I like it!

[@charliewaterman816]

These have always been fun cameras.. and fyi while I was in Portland last week I joined the bessa club 😎 picked up the r2 in Olive Green

[@Christian_from_Copenhagen]

I got into photography with a Lomography instax mini camera, and the options were nice (nearly identical features), but it was extremely unreliable and very difficult to get good results with. I found the Fujifilm SQ6 to be the perfect sweet spot for me, but I hope they put out a more fully-featured wide camera one day! Competition is good for us regardless.

[@LucianObsidian]

Chris should do a video on his hair styling routine.

[@TimGreig]

As a very happy user of a mini z99 I would just like a 99 Wide.

[@gavinthomas214]

I can't get past the fact that, in my opinion, all the photos look terrible.

[@falxonPSN]

If you want high quality instant photos, the only real option is to get one of the instant printers.

[@whateverjustposting]

yeah, the actual use case of this camera does not lend itself to testing it in a “street” style. instant cameras have always been meant for a social/party setting, where you take a quick shot and can give to photo to a friend, where the image quality really doesnt matter as long as you can tell who is in the photo/what theyre doing

[@MasterOfBasses]

To quote The Great Lebowski: “Yeah? Well, you know, that’s just like uh, your opinion, man.”

[@gavinthomas214]

@@whateverjustposting I totally agree. An Instax camera at a party is one of the most fun things to see, until the film runs out.

[@niccollsvideo]

The fact is Instax just doesn’t digitize well. It’s meant to be viewed at a very small size and not blown up on a larger screen. Also instant film does still look yucky regardless. It’s just not a high quality media and exposure is very easy to blow out. I agree with you and don’t ever really enjoy the esthetic myself. Doesn’t mean it’s not fun to do though.

[@heiner71]

How did you get Jordan and Gordon to agree being in the same frame?

[@f.kieranfinney457]

So many great old cameras that can take a Polaroid back, it would be terrific if they’d make Polaroid film for them so we could take GOOD Polaroids.

[@antzpantz]

THANK YOU for covering this! I got a Link Wide Printer to go with my Fujifilm mirrorlesses hoping that a new Instax Wide would come out... which it did, but I really did not like the look of it and its simplicity. Then the Lomo Wide Glass was announced and I realised they've had this range for a while! I like the look of it but was waiting to see if the glass lens was going to be worth it. Though, your photos look a bit warm for my liking? Might have to put a cooler filter on it? Anyway, I love the customisability of it so I'm seriously going to consider! (Also, for MONTHS I've wanted to comment about my move from X-series to GFX-series and how the megapixel count is overrated... that Speakpipe has been brewing for a while...) Also... no photo comparison of the plastic vs glass on the test chart?

[@kinlee2110]

please do a follow up review after 20 packs of films. Hope it ejects film properly

[@TMM6900]

Almost bought this because of Northrup. Im happy i got instax square instead. It's easy to use and the results are consistent

[@mrmeowmeow69]

I love me some instax wide photos had the lomo wide for a while but the eject mechanism broke, had it replaced, it broke again. looks like they're still using the same mechanism which is unfortunate

[@henrylee8366]

A bit downside is that the PC port won't output the signal if the body think the light is enough. I get it with the built in flash. But why the PC port, isn't it meant to be output the signal everytime I hit the shutter?

[@pixelkay2004]

thanks!!

[@AWAShowme]

@pixelkay2004 Viewers often overlook this simple comment.

[@virtualfilmer]

Very fun video! The quality of the pictures are so bad 😂 Reminds me of the frustration of point and click photos in the 90s when I’d get back a roll of film prints and be so disappointed in the results

[@FilmBritt]

Yes, disastrous image quality....🙈

[@jlwilliams]

I'm acquainted with quite a few Instax users. They're mostly pre-teen and teen girls, and they use their cameras to take commemorative group photos at parties, nights out, dance and music recitals, etc. The prints have a charm about them and the image quality looks a lot better IRL than the examples do in this video. The users really seem to enjoy those photos, value them, save and trade them, etc. The downside with respect to this particular product: I can't imagine ANY of those girls wanting to lug around a 2-lb camera to make them!

[@dng88]

Need evo wide with both Sd and a printer.

[@Way_Out]

That thing is comically big.

[@NoSuRReNDeR001]

........that's what she said!!!...

[@michaelbell75]

You do realize it shoots large format positive film right?

[@simonrockstream]

@@michaelbell75 Yeah, still looks wonk af

[@MusabTahaTarik]

This camera says hey i’m here look at to me

[@erichramone7812]

Thanks Chris. That looks like a great instant camera 📸.

[@HyperAI-x]

I like the idea of these cameras though I can't get over the strong vignette and low DR so its not for me.

[@curtis.strange]

Say yes to more instant film content 🎉

[@AWAShowme]

@curtis.strange For sure, I recently started shooting with film and am eager to learn more.

[@11.Pierre]

Hmmm maybe I'll upgrade from my original version of this with the plastic lens

[@MrChomiq]

Who the hell is Chris NBiccolls?

[@hammarbytp]

Still prefer the Mini EVO as a concept. I want to check my images if I am going to waste money printing them out, however more control, multi exposure mode and film simulations would not go amiss. Not having autofocus on the Lomography is a bit of a mystery. Without any way to check focus other then priniting it, it feels like there will be a lot of wasted film. Liked the glass lens however

[@JamesClark1991]

Agree. The Mini Evo concept is a winner.

[@crhuynh8]

Why are the photos so dark? Is it the camera quality or user's error?

[@antzpantz]

I thought was odd too, but the article says that he underexposes because Instax apparently tends to blow out highlights. I'd prefer that over deep shadows though

[@niccollsvideo]

Yah I underexpose a lot of it because the highlight blowout in an ugly way. In the end though instant film never looks “good”.

[@yawningmarmot]

​@@niccollsvideoThe original Polaroid did. I recently specifically compared my old Polaroid photos with the new Fuji Instax ones, and unfortunately the difference is night and day. I wonder if the Polaroid instant film formula is really that difficult to replicate (they said the recipe is lost?) or if it used chemicals that are now considered toxic and banned for consumer products.

[@mutley3136]

It's a collectable for sure but u would be better with a phone and a portable mini. Printer

[@AWAShowme]

@@mutley3136 😄😄

[@MusabTahaTarik]

I bought a mini 99 instax, now your idea is my next goal

[@CallMeRabbitzUSVI]

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD! Please make an instant camera with interchangeable lenses! These lens shenanigans have to stop. Also better quality instant film. We had them in the 80s and 90s why is instant film so shite now?

[@raze3297]

There never has been and never will be an instant camera with interchangeable lenses. The amount of R&D and resulting price versus image quality wouldn't make the slightest bit of sense, practically or financially. Plus, there's no reason to reinvent the wheel when plenty of instant backs for existing medium format cameras already exist.

[@CallMeRabbitzUSVI]

@@raze3297 Are you aware that the Nons Sl660 is an interchangeable lens Instax Camera that currently exists? So you completely pulled that impossible R&D nonsense out of nowhere. As well as the popularity for Camera like the Binstax and Zinstax instant backs. The problem is that Instant film is still being produced as poor quality film when Kodak has a patent on high quality instant film transfers or from Fujifilm with their legendary FP-100c high quality instant color fim. *Edited for spelling and brevity

[@CallMeRabbitzUSVI]

@@raze3297 Are you aware that the Nons S1660 is an interchangeable lens Instax Camera that currently exists? So you completely pulled that impossible R&D nonsense out of nowhere. As well as the popularity for Camera like the Binstax and Zinstax instant backs. The problem is that Instant film is still being produced as poor quality film when Kodak has a patent on high quality instant film transfers or from Fujifim with their legendary FP-100c high quality instant color fim. *Edited for spelling and brevity

[@HR-wd6cw]

The Lomo version looks a bit better too. The Instax 400 wide looks a little too industrial and perhaps childish in my opinion. The Lomo at least tries to look like a semi-retro camera.

[@JamesClark1991]

I desperately want a X100VI style Instax mini hybrid camera.

[@vekofoto]

With a maximum shutter speed of 1/250, this camera is most likely to hardly ever shoot at f/8, and when it will, the results are likely to be blurry due to zone focusing. Add the horrible viewfinder, and what this camera seems to be is a gimmick. I would like to try it out and prove myself wrong 😁

[@subtletherapy]

but why f8?? 😭

[@tomislavkorinek3222]

The best option is to buy just the Instax printer for those few photos you wanna stick to your fridge

[@Femchan]

My experiences with those printers is that you have to spend quite a bit of time tweaking the app settings to get proper contrast (they tend to print with higher brightness, images easily look faded); whereas most of the cameras with some manual control give you defined black and white and decent colours. You're better off with a classic photo printer at that format imo.

[@unn4medfeel1ng]

If I wanted better quality Instax I'd probably look towards polaroid backs for medium format. Being able to focus properly is, well, kind of important.

[@pdp11]

Good god, I want a camera with *ACTUAL* manual mode, or least aperture priority, why, just why, I can only choose between f/22 or f/8? And *WHY* can't I choose any shutter speed other than 1/30s. Any why is flash on by default... Fffs. My Polaroid I-2 can do all these things and it produces bigger photos with a smaller and lighter camera. Expose compensation only +/- 1 stop? Really?

[@antzpantz]

The article mentions the more manual "Mint InstantKon RF70 Instant Camera". It looks like a Speed Graphic! But also VERY pricey!

[@pdp11]

@@antzpantz It also has an f/5.6 lens!

[@Pixel_400_Photography]

Love this camera, but I can see why Fuji doesn’t make one themselves - too niche and unnecessary features for standard holiday snaps. Great review as always! 👍

[@RealCelticGamer]

It could have been improved with a removable li-ion battery pack, and USB-C charging.

[@MusabTahaTarik]

Like Fujifilm Instax Mini99

[@kristoffergo6294]

Damn, was looking forward to this. The photos look awful man:-/

[@AWAShowme]

@@kristoffergo6294 Yeah, they do. For such a big camera.

[@alienhatz3265]

almost a freaking kilo

[@ShakurTheAshier]

I don't get why Fuji doesn't make an instant camera that's compatible with their GFX lens lineup.

[@AWAShowme]

Thanks for the content. I don't understand who would buy this and why they persist with these cameras.

[@raze3297]

It may come as a shock, but different people often like different things.

[@AWAShowme]

@raze3297 Let's try to have a discussion without the aggression. Would you buy this camera? Do you know anyone who would?

[@JamesClark1991]

@@AWAShowme I almost bought one. The poor build quality and viewfinder were the dealbreakers for me. I want to pay more for something decent but the Instax film camera market has a huge price gap between these 'toy' cameras and rare expensive medium format film cameras.

[@yawningmarmot]

​@@AWAShowmeWell, I bought a Fuji Instax Square because I loved Polaroid but you can't get film for them anymore. It's fun to get photos taken and printed at the same time. I'll admit though that compared to the original Polaroid of old the quality is severely lacking (and the prints are smaller too)

[@isthsm]

@@AWAShowme Don't think I'd actually buy it, looks huge. But believe it or not it's one of the more affordable options for what it offers. Brands like mint charge a lot and I wouldn't go whole hog adapting medium format or something. So there's definitely a part of me that's tempted. When I learned about the impossible project years ago, I asked my grandparents if I could have their Polaroid land 600, got a few packs and had a blast even though the film SUCKED. Still have them in a photobook. Recently I got a few more packs, and while it's improved a lot it's still a bit more temperamental with how it comes out, and a LOT more expensive than instax. Enter a few months ago and I get a mini 9 off Craigslist for like 50 bucks. Has the same problem of only getting good results in full or clouded sun, but colors are much more natural, if cool for my liking. However, instax mini is... very mini. About half the size of a Polaroid even? The lighting problem is a camera one though, these are >400 ISO films. Give them a 5.6 or 8 lens and they're perfectly usable indoors. But nah, I have the same plastic camera with plastic lens and a flash you can't disable that fuji's been making for 26 years. It's not sense, it's sentiment. For certain kinds of nerds, including some photographers, there's also a mad fun to extreme limitations like these and seeing how much you can squeeze out of a limited format. You ever heard of demoscene? It's people using old computers to the fullest extend possible with clever tricks to use every last bit of power they can to make cool animations or such, often to music.

[@S14N9LS]

These things are cartoon-level size and shape at this point. Seeing the amount of motion blur in Chris' photos makes me wonder how someone who doesn't have decades of experience would ever get a sharp shot. Sure, it could be "fun" and the photos could be "good" but how long would the average consumer spend trying to get results before they just give up? Looks like hundreds of dollars worth of frustration and blurry images.

[@apaul9776]

A rather manic presentation which kept talking about the camera being 'fun' and having manual control (which it did, but only a bit). It gave the impression of a hard sell of something which didn't justify either its cost or bulk. How could it, when the photos were so poor?

[@ValiRossi]

A camera that doesn't focus. Now that is novel.

[@hayios0]

your missing the point down the whirl hole

[@johnmilner0859]

The prints are awful.

[@yawningmarmot]

How is it that 20 years later these companies still can't replicate the quality of Polaroid instant film? The photo quality is still as terrible as Fuji Instax and nothing like the old Polaroids.

[@MusabTahaTarik]

Instant camera users do not want to reach the most quality photo in their cameras.

[@Cm-ni6wv]

Hard to get excited for any Instax cameras knowing the quality (both resolution and dynamic range) of instax film is abysmal vs. what they used to make in FP-100C. I don't see the point of manual control when you're getting a crunchy potato of an image regardless. Instax will only deserve a mostly toy camera.

[@B9scrambler]

Totally unsuitable for my wedding and professional macro work. What a shame.

[@thomasa.243]

The resolution of the Instax film is actually surprisingly high. I have the back for the Mamiya RB67 that accepts Instax Square. I was surprised at how good this can look. Of course, the dynamic range is „meh“ and compared to the FP100C, it is no comparison, but I am happy that we at least get something :/

[@Cm-ni6wv]

@@B9scrambler You can still like Instax while admitting it's a step backwards. Be less of a fanboy.

[@Cm-ni6wv]

@@thomasa.243 Agreed, it's better than nothing. And if I worked at Lomography I'd probably make the same camera (what else are they to do?). Just a bummer Fuji doesn't see the need to make a better instant film.

[@thomasa.243]

@@Cm-ni6wv of course. But people buy the current Instax. Packfilm may be too complex for the audience that Fujifilm is targeting. And Instax is as simple as it can be 😅. But part of the problem is not only the film but also the cameras. Fujifilm is dumbing down their cameras from iteration to iteration. Less features, less options…

[@josecolon8143]

That camera Sucks!

[@rockmusicvideoreviewer896]

this video came out 3 months, 4 days too early.

[@patrickbarnes2707]

Glass isn't worth the extra 80 dollars. I got better results with my old 210.

[@Booclap]

that shit is comically oversized

[@germanpoweractivated]

it's not worth it's price.. it's a toy

[@timothykieper]

Looks like the film cost about $1 per shot.

[@christopherbonis]

Thanks but I’ll pass.

[@TheFlyingDogFish]

This looks ridiculously large and takes horrible photos. It's like gluing a mini printer to a 10-year old compact camera.

[@kelalamusic9258]

I’m sorry, but what is the point. The images are crap. Just so you can get a picture right away. Total waste of money.

[@davidfrisken1617]

Can't you just use computer processing to make crap photos?

[@KD-lb9bg]

Lmao 😂, that thing looks 👀 comically large in Chris’s hands. Almost no one in Fuji’s Instax target market is going to lug this gigantic thing around.

[@deejayiwan7]

Any Nikon / Canon with kit lens will make infinetelly better pictures than this Photozzila 😅

[@KlausSN]

What's one way to waste the earth ressources.

[@Blackbirddc]

Allllll of those photos are dark and blurry. It's just not good at all IMHO. Why would I spend that money to take bad photos? I like a retro look but this is just to far from hitting the mark that makes retro look cool.

[@SantaAri]

Bulb only 30 sec? If so its useless

[@MusabTahaTarik]

I have 10 sec in Instax mini99

[@SantaAri]

@ For star trails u want full control. Basically as long as the button is pressed for

[@MusabTahaTarik]

@@SantaAri then this is not made for star trails

[@theonlyredspecial]

Ugliest thing I’ve seen. The Etsy Leica.

[@crsantin]

Ugly gigantic camera that takes crappy photos, no thanks 😂.

[@martysender5539]

awful. looks like a camera from 1865, daguerrotype. yikes

[@yawningmarmot]

Daguerreotypes were way sharper than this :D

[@bertagriese8282]

Who buys that cr..?