I bought the Instax Mini 8, and 400 packs of film for an art

File: 1492901126494.jpg (44KB, 596x586px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 596x586px

>>3064403
>400 packs of film for an art project
What a waste.

>>3064403
Why on earth didn't you buy the camera and ONE pack of film, test it out, and then proceed?

>>3064403
how to be a retard 101, enjoy your "art"

File: jAK4scX.jpg (21KB, 720x405px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 720x405px

>>3064403
>shooting fast film in bright sunlight with flash
>blames equipment for badly exposed photos
>thinks a lens hood will help solve the problem

The problem isn't the equipment but the retard holding it.

>>3064403
>Buys a cheap shttty camera with a 12-17 year old female target audience
>"UMM, why doesn't it work??"
Delete this fucking thread

>>3064443
>>3064447
Because I was flying, and shipped the equipment over to my destination.
I played with the same camera indoors before, it worked fine.
>>3064453
Flash is always on. I didn't know this.
>>3064517
I needed a Polaroid. You have better suggestions?

>>3064403 (OP)
The Neo 90 is basically a re-skin with two more features (double exposure and maybe macro mode). It's otherwise the same spec-wise.

>Anyway, I still want a decent Polaroid camera, but not spend $1+ per shot.
Kill yourself and stick to Fujifilm, poorfag. Try the Instax 210 I guess. Based on your incompetence with the mini8 I would heartily recommend you stay away from an actual Polaroid camera. They're also $3 a shot

>>3064544
I wasn't incompetent. I cant help it when the fucking exposure setting does nothing.

Does the 90 give me the ability to turn off the flash?
Does it work well in super bright outside?

>>3064536
>I needed a Polaroid
Why didn't you buy one in the first place? a 600s series will cost you less than 20 bucks and will take better pictures.
>polaroid film is expensive
>waste money buying 400 packs of shit

>>3064597
sup kurwa

>>3064597
Because i need to take pictures, and give them out right then and there.

Will this thing end up being the best Instax Mini camera out there?

https://shop.lomography.com/en/lomo-instant-automat-glass-black-combo

File: 20170308_lia_glass_quarter_right_with_attachments.jpg (168KB, 1500x1000px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1500x1000px

>>3064655
>189.00 euro
>f4.5
>glass lens
>21mm equiv
I think I'm gonna buy one

Should I? It can't be worse than a instax

>>3064679
>lomo
>189€
Dunno. How's your trust fund doing? That thing will be barely worth 19€; you're better off getting a refurb'd polaroid and coupla packs of Impossible bullshit.

There are a lot of good Polaroid cameras out there, bust most have super expensive film.

No one seems to make decent cameras for the mini 8 format

>>3064923
>Impossible
$4 for a single print

>>3064679
>automat
Sounds cucked.

>>3065090
No worries, you'll have 20€ to find a Polaroid camera that works, and 169€ left over for about 40-ish shots of the ridiculously expensive shit. The Polaroid camera may have a proper lens and perhaps adequate autoexposure as well; lomoshit has neither. (and that's without figuring in how much 40-ish shots of Instax would cost; but honestly that's fairly negligible given the brute cost of instant photography.)

>>3065133
The polaroid print has double the size too and it's better IMO.

>400 packs of film and you're worried about cost
wut

>>3064403
>It overexposed every single outdoor shot
You realize it's a manual exposure camera right? It has a meter but you still have to set the aperture.

There's SOME exposure compensation available in that camera. If you didn't figure out to use that on the outdoor shots after the first few ones all came out overexposed you have only yourself to blame.

>>3065841
I'd love for you to tell me how to manually set aperture and shutter speed on the Instax 8. If you're letting the camera decide one of them it's obviously not manual exposure.

File: cba29ade7353b4e081aecd175464476f.jpg (35KB, 736x552px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 736x552px

>>3064679

You can also go with the InstantFlex from Mint. I'm happy with mine.

>>3066278
What the hell is this. Did someone finally make a somewaht proper Instax camera? Well, historical TLR standards proper, 4-in-3 single-coated glass Tessar at least. Your diagram suggests a f/5.6 lens, ground-glass focusing, manual mode, autoexposure w/ EC, and the gubbins for interfacing with Instax cartridges.

All of these are feasible, so I wonder: surely this is either fictional or well past 800€.

>>3066284

https://mint-camera.com/en/shop/cameras/instantflex-tl70-gen2/

Starts at 389 shekels.

>>3066286
Huh. I'm impressed by how it's not a fucking toy like the Leica Sofort and every other bloody excuse for Polaroid-oid we used to have.

Now if only I could afford this shit. Barely enough money to wet print these days.

>>3065841
>>3066274
>>3066276

shutter is fixed at 1/60.
Aperture has 4 settings: 12.7, 16, 22,32.
Meter led just advises you which it thinks is best, you set aperture.
film is iso 800.
Can confirm with my instax, f32 is sometimes not enough for bright scenes and shots are overexposed even without flash.
Try holding ND filter in front of lens?

>>3066294
That is better than I expected, though.
I could work with that if I had to.

>>3064679
>>3066278
These two look good. I'm glad someone else is making compatible cameras for the mini 8

>>3066278
>>3066286

So fucking hipster. No used market at all. Fucking $400

Someone is selling a leather cover for $150

Redunculouse.

>>3064679
Why does this look like nothing like the final product?

>>3064403
I just came to laught at your stupidity and waste of money

File: 1493267841699.jpg (27KB, 480x259px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 480x259px

>>3064517
Summed it up well, they don't put the two chickls on the box for no reason. It's pretty much just a toy