Instant Camera General Thread

>>2927600
looks better than Fuji's blobs, but that's it really.

>>2927600
Seems pretty cool for a 2016 item. Not to mention backing saves you 35% off the top which is nice.

should you back up a format that already exists since years with cameras that you could buy today for less money producing the same exact image buying the same film you'll use for this 2016 hipster shitty version with apple marketing techniques on creating hype and selling something just because of the external looks of the machine, but not offering anything new inside of it in terms of evolution. Back it up if you are a Black Lives Matter supporter, but if you are one of us, one of 'the others', don't do it. Buy instead the new camera by Impossible, it's also a horrible looking overpriced camera marketed to hipsters and people in /film/

>>2927769
But the Instax films are cheaper compared to the Polaroid ones that the Impossible Project has.

I want to splurge on Leica's ridiculous instant camera and there's nothing anyone can say to convince me otherwise.

>>2927883
It's a 3x as expensive rebadge of Fuji's ordinary Instax camera, i.e. plastic dogshit for teenage girls.

File: don-draper-mad-men.jpg (22KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 640x360px

>>2927898
>plastic dogshit for teenage girls

This

>>2927898
rebranded fuji
they didn't even bother to put on some rangefinder mechanism for focusing, that would've been SOMETHING at least

Actually, they should bring back sonar focus, that was pretty badass