Polaroid I-2 exposure - Testing precision and accuracy, do you get badly exposed photos?

Polaroid just recently released the Polaroid I-2 camera. In the previous episode we had some issues using the camera and exposing out images accurately as they came out overexposed. As such, Prashanna joins us again on Modern Midlife’s, to help and see if we can increase the the number of properly exposed images with this camera.
Since previously, we compared the i-2 camera to the Polaroid 680, this time we decided to bring along a Polaroid Now+ and Instax wide 300 and see if we can see any major difference. Also for the fun of it, we went ahead and checked the level of distortion on the new lens of the I-2 and the viewfinder coverage at close distances
Did this video help you expose your instant images better? Share with us your experience in the comments below! And remember to subscribe if you enjoyed our video!
0:00 intro
0:43 Testing methodology for the cameras
1:41 External display in sunlight
2:05 A wild Instax Wide 300 appears
2:34 I-2 exposure compensation test
3:23 I-2 lens distortion Test and viewfinder accuracy
4:00 Depth of field comparison
4:30 Instax wide 300 vs NOW+ vs I-2 sharpness images
5:07 Comparison of the different EV
6:40 I-2 Lens distortion and viewfinder coverage
7:20 Depth of field test images
8:58 Incidental findings on the DOF test
9:45 Back to the drawing board with another exposure test
10:50 Results of the exposure at the different aperture stops
13:10 Tips on how to increase exposure precision at different f-stops
13:54 Reveal of the Now+ and I-2 Sharpness target images
14:20 Outro
Prashanna also wanted to share a summary of his own thoughts below for those considering this new camera;
Hey, so it is me again with another wall of text. In the previous write up I mentioned that I had some issues with the exposures natively metered by the I-2 camera. If left at 0 EV the camera always tended to overexpose the images. Many of you who have bought the camera and tried it also corroborated similar findings of overexposure. However, the replies on my initial post seemed a little strange as none of us had any real consensus on the level of exposure compensation that fixes the imprecise metering done by the camera. I recommended -1 , some mentioned -2/3 and others -1/3 EV. So which is correct? So my friend and I decided to test and see if we could come up with a guide to help others expose your Polaroid images better on the Polaroid I-2. There will be some of you who may be wondering why my friend and I are doing all this and what is up with this weird compulsion to test the camera further. The simple answer is, we love instant photography and we have nothing else better to do with our free time. Really nothing better to do.
The TLDR (ATLEAST IN MY CAMERA) is, If you are exposing at the following stops:~ f8 / f11 use -1 EV
~ f16 / f22 / f32 use -2/3 EV
~ f45 / f64 use -1/3
This next part will sound a bit technical but I have tried my best to simplify it as best as I can. Therefore based on my results, I would advise you to underexpose by 1/3 a stop at the larger apertures (f8 and f11), keep at the externally metered value at the middle apertures (f16, f22, and f32) and overexpose the image by a third stop at the smaller apertures (f45 and f64). I suspect this lack of precision in exposure by the camera is causing a lot of us to have varying perspective on how much to compensate. I would love for those with the camera to pay attention to the aperture stops in the next few packs and see if their own findings corroborate with our tests or if we are just imagining. This is just a working theory, not sure what is causing this imprecision.
By the way, the lens in the Now + is also great, in an ideal situation and focus distance, it's a hard fight to decide which one is better.

[@areallyrealisticguyd4333]

Currently, f8 @ -2/3, f11-f22 @ -1/3, f32-f64 @ +1/3 for the best possible exposures. all of Polaroids cameras tend to lean towards overexposing for some reason but at least the I-2 gives you the best exposure comp

[@CollectedLight1]

I appreciate all the effort you put into this testing. Very useful, and also also somewhat reassuring that the exposure difficulties I've been having are not unique. Thank you.

[@the.midlifers]

Thank you!

[@greatwhite1958]

Don’t forget that variations in exposure could also be the film as the iso varies from batch to batch.

[@see.prash.87]

We made sure to use the same FRESH pack for all the f-stops and so we don't think the variation in f-stop could be explained by that. But I do agree with you that your initial default exposure compensation value could be affected by the different batches of film. I also suspect that the age of the film could also determine the initial default exposure compensation you require!

[@milesmonroe65]

Thanks for these tests. The most useful real world help channel for the i2 right now. I notice the framing was slightly off in those close shots. A video on getting more precise framing at different distances would be very useful. Perhaps also one using filters, ND, coloured etc would also be nice. Thanks again.

[@see.prash.87]

Thank you for your kind words! Now that you mention it, yea there seems to be slight variations in the framing. We actually used the Bluetooth function to take all the photos to reduce camera shake and keep framing consistent. but perhaps when we removed the frames from the camera, it might have move the camera a little here and there. Another possibility is that the frames within the cartridge don't have tight tolerances, but this is more of a guess. WIll try to keep an eye on how we can reduce framing inaccuracies in the next few videos! Thanks for highlighting it to us!

[@TheLeiPol]

Thank you very much for these comprehensive tests. Much more useful than what has been seen so far on other (sponsored) channels. Until now, I only used a double pack 600 film and made some indoor flash shots with the I-2 in automatic mode and my SLR-680, both without exposure compensation. The photos looked identical and I saw no difference in sharpness. It was too hot for outdoor testing and hope soon to be able continuing comparing the I-2 vs SLR-680.

[@see.prash.87]

So far it seems like exposure with flash is on point. Its only without flash that people recommend exposure compensation. Feel free to test our working hypothesis and please do share whatever results work for you too!

[@robindastallion]

Excellent review, glad you did more in depth testing

[@see.prash.87]

Glad you enjoyed it this time! we prob continue to do a few more tests in the next few weeks and release more info as we learn more about the camera

[@Genshi]

A very nice and thorough test of the I-2... unfortunately it doesn't help with my issue which I posted about in the I-2 Facebook group. In my case, when in full Auto mode, the I-2 is overexposing the images so much that the entire image is completely blowout! This occurs 100% of the time. So there is obviously something wrong with my camera, and I've already contacted Polaroid support for a replacement. Very disappointing...

[@nikolavonfulton5195]

Super new to my i-2 but when it comes to Polaroids what is the best way to realize that your photo is over exposed? Some of my photos have come out to bright on auto mode when I was at the lake with my family. But I just thought it was because I did not reduce the exposure myself. Should the i-2 be doing it itself?

[@marius7933]

@@nikolavonfulton5195 Yes, the I-2 should be able to take correctly exposed pictures in auto mode. Thats what the auto mode is for. But the light meter on the I-2 seems a little bit off, because in my case I always have to have the exposure compensation on -1 for it to be the right exposure. So, when in auto, try putting the exposure selection on top of the camera to -1 or -2/3 and see what works best for you. From what I've seen online, every I-2 has sligtly different exposure problems, for some the pictures come out great on 0 or -1/3, and some need to put it to -1 or even -2 to get the correct exposure.

[@see.prash.87]

I would suggest you shoot at -2/3 exposure compensation and see if it helps?@@nikolavonfulton5195 For more precise shooting I recommend the following ~ f8 / f11 use -1 EV ~ f16 / f22 / f32 use -2/3 EV ~ f45 / f64 use -1/3”

[@EugeniaLoli]

The overexposure is because the camera doesn't have enough range on the shutter speed. 1/250th is not enough to exposure correctly in all lit situations. So it's not the fault of the meter, but rather the capabilities of the camera. You need to always expose with your phone app, and use the right ND filter each time to get consistent exposures.

[@sweat100]

The reviewer has taken into account of this and stated in the video that the shutter and aperture combinations are within the range of the shutter speeds the camera can provide. The test shots taken in the house started with f22, 1/15. With this, it translates to f8, 1/125 for the same EV light value, which by right is within the shutter speed range.

[@areallyrealisticguyd4333]

1/250th is more than enough to expose for different lighting situations. you know most large format lenses only have a top speed of 1/125th and slower, never have any issues exposing film

[@EugeniaLoli]

@@areallyrealisticguyd4333 depends how open your aperture is

[@areallyrealisticguyd4333]

@@EugeniaLoli the sx-70 again, without any modifications only has a top shutter speed of 1/175th. the I-2 nearly has a full stop higher of shutter speed than the sx-70. The i-2 surpasses it in almost every way so if you keep blaming the hardware then you've clearly done no research

[@EugeniaLoli]

@@areallyrealisticguyd4333 It is all of you who haven't done their research. The SX70 uses ISO ~100 film, not 600, so you're comparing a camera that's not as sensitive. Under full sunlight (which is what I'm talking about), if you want to shoot wide open, you need 1/2400th shutter speed with ISO 600 film. There is a rule in photography that's called sunny16 (google it), where under sunlight at f16 aperture, the sensitivity and shutter speed are the same. At f8, you need 2 stops more of shutter speed to compensate. Neither the i-2, nor the SX-70 are anywhere near that. The i-2 is worse, in fact. You need an ND filter to shoot with that camera under full sunlight wide open.

[@hedazahgasahos]

Thank you for your methodical testing! Now I can happily keep my Now+ and App combo and be assured that I'm not missing any major benefit of the i-2.

[@see.prash.87]

Actually the major benefit of the i-2 i would say is sharpness and almost full manual control! But if these are not so critical, then the NOW+ should more than suffice!

[@who_is_there]

Really like the testing and the methodology you used. I saw that some of your photos had a greenish tint to them. Meaning that they got abit to cold on the stonefloor you used, maybe have with you a spot thermometer, just so you can check the temp of the film. I used vintage and i-type cameras, and what you are saying here allso ring true for them also. Looking forward for more inn debt testing 😃.

[@see.prash.87]

Thanks for watching and liking the video! yea maybe we can refine how we store the film better, though the floor is cold, I do believe it should remain withing the working range of Polaroid film as we live in the tropics and things don't really get so cold here, even with air-condition and cooling. Nonetheless we will see if we can get a thermometer to reliable give better results next and I truly appreciate your recommendation!

[@jiangxiayu4082]

Thank you so much for the great in-depth testing video! Could you please also do similar tests on NOW+ cameras as well? Thank you❤

[@the.midlifers]

yes we will somewhere in the future !

[@andreidoanca4262]

wow...congrats on the thorough test! this is a proper showcase of what this camera can do, with it's good and bad parts. Loved that part where you mentioned it's a toy camera, LOL ;)

[@the.midlifers]

it’s a toy made for passion , not work 😬

[@andreidoanca4262]

of course..it's just to have some fun :)@@the.midlifers

[@nordmende73]

Thank you!

[@the.midlifers]

You're welcome!

[@scottbrennan3262]

Excellent tests. I have a Now + and the exposure variation is as you described. I tend to think the exposure inconsistency is due to the limits of the film itself and the temperature of the chemistry. Your advice is good: underexpose with wide apertures. Overexpose with small apertures. And try to photograph in even light. The film also is not very reactive to light. Hence Polaroid saying "instant film loves light."

[@see.prash.87]

Hey thanks for liking and watching the video! I agree with you that there might be some variation at play from the film - that's why I briefly mentioned possibility of reciprocity. Without the actually data sheet from Polaroid, it is a bit hard to rule out completely. Well I hope Polaroid can iron out the exposure inconsistencies with an app update or firmware update on the cameras

[@narmstrong69]

Firstly thanks for the work/videos. Awaiting the I-2 delivery next week and watching what I can to avoid burning through too much experimental exposure shots (why not learn from what you’ve kindly done). However I’m a bit confused. In the TLDR paragraph you say “If you are exposing at the following stops:~ f8 / f11 use -1 EV ~ f16 / f22 / f32 use -2/3 EV ~ f45 / f64 use -1/3” Then a little later “underexpose by 1/3 a stop at the larger apertures (f8 and f11), keep at the externally metered value at the middle apertures (f16, f22, and f32) and overexpose the image by a third stop at the smaller apertures (f45 and f64)” Possible it’s how I’m reading it but could you clarify if you’re recommending the TLDR paragraph or the one following it Just for one example at f22 are you suggesting -2/3 or 0 (metered value). I understand my camera or even the firmware version or my film pack may cause my results to differ but I’m just keen to understand a jumping off point with my own experiments.

[@see.prash.87]

Hey thanks for watching the video and I am happy that some of the information was usefully. Its great that you are learning how to use the camera well before it arrives (sometimes I just don't even have the patience to read camera manuals!). Short answer is -2/3. If you want the logic /clarification read below; So I think I should clarify something. Internally metered VS externally metered. When I say "internally metered" I am referring to how the camera's own meter is exposing for the scene. When I say "externally metered" I am referring to using a separate external lightmeter to expose the scene. I think with this clarification the above statements would be clearer. In case its not, I hope this adds further context. 1. My i-2 camera's "internal meter" tends to over-expose by the same amount for every lighting scenario I have encountered. It tends to exposure +2/3 EV compared with any "external lightmeter" I have used. So the only way to correct for this error within my camera was to switch it to -2/3EV compensation and as consequence, for any given scene the internal lightmeter would now match the same exposure (shutter speed and f-stop) as an external lightmeter. This is an error in the accuracy (as they would say in physics) of the camera's ability to expose. 2. After doing the above -2/3 compensation, our testing showed that despite the camera showing the correct exposure value (shutter and f-stop) for a given scene, there was still differences in exposure at the different f-stops. This error is an error in the precision (as they would say in physics) of the camera's ability to expose. The way we managed to fix this was to (additionally) underexpose by a third stop at larger apertures and (additionally) overexpose by a third stop at the smaller apertures. 3. So for i recommend for MY camera (the default setting for it is -2/3 EV when compared with it being externally metered): ~for F8 and F11 I use -1 EV (if you noticed i have under-exposed by 1/3 additionally to my original -2/3EV) ~for F16/F22/F32 I would use -2/3 EV ~for f45 and 64 I would use -1/3 (if you noticed i have over-exposed by 1/3 additionally to my original -2/3EV) My final advice to you is actually first to figure out whether your original camera's internal lightmeter is off and by how much (like i did in paragraph 1) . If its the same as mine (off by 2/3) and requiring you to use -2/3EV , then you can follow the above values i have prescribed (as in paragraph 3). However, if your camera is say off by anything other than 2/3 a stop then apply the principles that i have outlined in paragraph 2. So let me use an example: Lets say i get a new I-2 camera. i let it expose for the scene and it consistently overexposed by 1 stop at each scene (when compared with an external lightmeter). Then to get my lightmeter accurate i need to put it at -1 all the time .And then only factor in additional adjustments depending on the aperture being employed by the camera For -1: ~When i shoot at f8/11, i would expose at -1.33 ~at f16/22/32 i would expose at -1 ~and at f45/54 i would expose at -2/3. I know i seem to have made it very pedentic, but i do hope it clarifies things. Even though i feel it should be clearer, sometimes, these sort of concepts don't really get understood well over text. So should you require additional information, just feel free to follow up on this k! I really hope this has helped

[@narmstrong69]

@@see.prash.87thanks for taking the time to give a further reply. Really appreciate it. You’re right I didn’t note the distinction between your measurements/adjustments based on the I-2’s metering v external metering. I’ll have a detailed read. My camera is due on Tuesday so looking forward to trying it out and seeing how it handles. I think you’ve done some really valuable work and I wonder if your channel/the community would benefit from it being condensed into a ‘this is I-2 exposure compensation in a nutshell’ short? I’m sure it would be well received.

[@narmstrong69]

⁠​⁠@@see.prash.87I wonder if that last bullet point should read ~for f45 and 64 **I use -1/3** (if you noticed i have overexposed by 1/3 additionally to my original -2/3EV) My addition within the ** marks

[@see.prash.87]

ah yes you are right. for some reason when I bold the text it disappears on youtube. thanks for the suggestions also , maybe ian and I will try to make the exposure comp video soon!@@narmstrong69

[@Tjenias]

Hey there, first of all thank you very much for that very interesting video. I am thinking about upgrading my onestep 2 to the i-2. But after watching thise video I just have the feeling that the i-2 would have needed more development time. Did you use the i-2 till then? If so, did they updated the firmware so that those issues are fixed? I mean right now I am not certain whether to buy the i-2 or just wait for the nex illitariation. What would you suggest me, because after watching many videos the onestep 2 tends to be the most reliable camera of the new company? Ty in advance. :)

[@the.midlifers]

Hey, thanks for watching our video and finding it interesting! Unfortunately, there has been no firmware update yet that I know of that fixed the exposure issues on the i-2. Notwithstanding this, I still use my i-2 routinely. I normally shuttle between the i-2 camera if I wish to shoot i-type film and sx70 (modified for 600 film) when shooting 600 films. I think the better question to ask is what is the sort of instant photography you like to do and which camera can help you achieve it. If you want the best i-type camera then the i-2 is the only "compact" option. Actually knowing, what sort of photos you like to take would probably allow me to recommend something. Or if you considering between several cameras, perhaps u can let me know and I will probably state which option I personally prefer (which honestly, may not necessarily be the camera you might like). The Impossible i-1 was released in 2016. The Polaroid i-2 was released in 2023. If this is any indicator (which it isn't), then the i-3 should arrive in 2030. Can you afford to wait that long? Just something to ponder about if you are really waiting for the next iteration. Someone once told me, there are no badly made cameras. There are only badly priced cameras. And I feel the i-2 falls into this category. But generally speaking, if you have to keep asking yourself whether this camera is worthwhile then this camera might not be for you. Of course, if money is no object, then there is no harm in purchasing it and definitely will be an upgrade from the onestep2. Let me know if I can help you further along and I will try my best to assist! Though I didn't give a direct yes or no, I hope this helps you a little let me know if you need further clarification -Prash

[@fiver-hoo]

good work. you'd think Polaroid could have done this kind of testing themselves, you know, like, in their lab or something when they developed the damn thing.

[@the.midlifers]

Thanks for watching the video! and yea I feel exactly the same about this as you. Kinda wished they had done the technical testing for their own product

[@milesmonroe65]

Would you say that F22 gives the most reliable exposure using the internal meter?

[@see.prash.87]

Perhaps the video was a bit technical so it wasn't clear. The camera's internal meter over-exposes at all f-stops when exposure compensation is set to 0. But I wouldn't say that f22 gives the most reliable exposure. f22 only gives the most reliable exposure at -2/3 EV (that basically means we calibrated f22 by reducing using -2/3 exposure compensation to match the digital camera's values). Conversely, you can also reliable calibrate f8 by moving exposure compensation to -1 and also you can also reliable get exposures at f64 by setting exposure compensation to -1/3. Basically you can calibrate it to be reliable at each f-stop. For reliable exposures I recommend the following: ~ f8 / f11 use -1 EV ~ f16 / f22 / f32 use -2/3 EV ~ f45 / f64 use -1/3 But of course if you don't mind too much and want one value to follow, I would suggest just put it to -2/3 exposure compensation and it should expose reasonably reliable at all f-stops. BTW we just picked f22 as it was one of the middle apertures (so we could see the effect on exposure by raising and lowering the f-stops equally) and digital cameras rarely go to high apertures such as f64. I would say the meter is always reliable (in physics terms it would be akin to saying that this meter is precise, just not accurate)

[@CorvusHyperion]

Also getting overexposed images from the i-2. Disappointing. Can the software be upgraded on this camera at some point?

[@see.prash.87]

I am hoping they update it. i noticed the following exposure compensation works for me [ ~ f8 / f11 use -1 EV ], [ ~ f16 / f22 / f32 use -2/3 EV], [~ f45 / f64 use -1/3], if in doubt u can just leave it at -2/3?

[@CorvusHyperion]

@@see.prash.87 Thanks, will try this. I much prefer to expose for the highlights. I don't care about a loss of shadow detail.

[@bilonggrisimmeri]

In my test, 2 weeks ago, Polaroid 600 was loaded into an adapted 5X4 inch darkslide, exposed with a Rodenstock 65mm f4 Grandagon lens, returned to the film pack and "processed" with the SX-70. Exposure, measured with a Quantum Calculight cds meter, was near perfect. From this I discovered the film isn't that sharp, viewed with e X10 hand lens, due to dye migration/ diffusion. My digital camera was then used to calculate correct electronic flash exposure, with translucent umbrella. These give softer light than silvered umbrellas, more like a soft box effect. Exposure was spot-on and the soft lighting very pleasing. To obtain maximum depth of field, in your test, focus 1/3 of the way in, not on the object at the front, then you will not need f45, which tends to give less sharp images, due to light being diffracted at the diaphragm's edge. There are reciprocity failure tables, which vary with film types.

[@the.midlifers]

Wow this is just amazing methodology. would love to see your results if you dont mind sharing them visually!

[@bilonggrisimmeri]

@@the.midlifers Thanks for your kind comment. This was to test my SX-70, prior to giving it to a relative, so just a bit of fun. They have my test Polariods - sorry. I highly recommend umbrella flash, to get really soft, low contrast, 5000K lighting. Polaroid contrast range is 5:1 which is tiny, compared to digital cameras. By all means be "creative", but unfortunately people despise being technical as well!!

[@Bogaloo1232]

I found out too that the film is inherently not the sharpest because of the dye migration years ago when doing something similar (I made a custom SLR large format camera with a custom back for integral Polaroid film). When properly exposed the integral film can be very beautiful and even sharper than with an SX-70 or probably this I-2 camera. I wish everyone would be able to shoot this way, maybe then they would stop blaming the film so much and start blaming the cameras Polaroid is making nowdays.

[@bilonggrisimmeri]

@@Bogaloo1232 Not sure if you mean you exposed SX70 film with a modified Mamiya or Hasselblad? There is a back available for under £200, that attaches to any 5X4 camera with an international back. It's like the rollfilm backs we used to use. It would be better than my method with the darkslide, because it processes immediately. Obviously the image is laterally inverted, like a Daguerotype. This is just an interest for me, as I'm no longer doing professional work. My Polaroid SX70 camera was good enough for the film. There's no virtue making things complicated, unless results are significantly better or pay more!

[@Bogaloo1232]

@@bilonggrisimmeri I’ve made some backs for Mamiya RB67 but I was talking about a 4x5 SLR from the 20’s (Houghton Ensign Special) I restored and heavily modified exclusively for shooting instant formats. I like it more than the RB67 back because it allows me to mount any weird lens I find (it has a focal plane shutter so I can use shutter-less lenses) and it covers full frame for Instax Wide. I’ve used it as a test bench to compare instant film formats, some portraits and general tomfoolery, I’m not really doing professional work with it either, I just love tinkering with cameras and specially instant film stuff. I really love it but for most things I also use my SX-70, I’m not always in the mood for carrying a big camera, backs and lenses. 😅

[@th1649]

How come at 14:05 the boards have different letters visible? I'm not going crazy right?

[@the.midlifers]

Actually now that you point it out, thats right! I hadn't even noticed that! Now it has me wondering what could have happened to have that happen? thats so strange and amazing you noticed that - Prash

[@th1649]

That's the benefit of sitting too close in front of the TV! 👍@@the.midlifers

[@WhoIsSerafin]

Did Polaroid do no testing of this camera?!?! It’s like they produced it and just shipped it out. Just baffling!

[@the.midlifers]

Sometimes we do wonder about that as well, especially given the history of issues with the polaroid now+ as well as this being considered their most premium model!

[@paulrho1526]

Can you test new black and white polaroid film?

[@the.midlifers]

Is there anything in particular you would like to know about it ? Or any particular tests you are keen to know about ?

[@1987productions]

Woohoo

[@greatwhite1958]

The I2 is hardly a ‘toy camera’!

[@see.prash.87]

You are completely right, my bad!

[@feronous8207]

Thanks for spending money on film for this!!. camera is fun but it does have jank metering.

[@see.prash.87]

Yea it does have jank metering. But the tests from here also show that , even when you account for the poor metering AND use an external meter, F8 tends to overexpose by a third and f64 underexposes by a third We probably went overkill here with the tests but I am glad the film wasted will benefit others!

[@the.midlifers]

and i’ll do an instax film test soon too! 🤭

[@ghostoflazlo]

Wow the kid from Friday Night Dinner really grew up

[@the.midlifers]

😂😂

[@genernator]

The perfect camera for people who hate money!!

[@the.midlifers]

all of us who shoot analog films just like to find ways to make our lives a little more difficult and throw away more money! lol

[@genernator]

My first camera was a Polaroid Swinger in 1969. I have been in love with photography ever since!@@the.midlifers

[@michaeltuffin8147]

I wish this was in English.

[@the.midlifers]

hey if there is any parts that you don't understand I will try my best to explain simpler! feel free to reach out k! - Prash