This is not an exhaustive list of all instant cameras we’ve evaluated. We have excluded any models that are no longer available or do not meet our current standards.
While priced similarly to our top recommended instant cameras, the Fujifilm Instax Mini LiPlay and the FujiFilm Mini 99 offer fewer creative possibilities and less command over exposure and the final image. Although more compact than the Mini EVO, they feel less substantial due to their plastic construction and lack the appealing retro aesthetics of the EVO. If you’re investing in an instant camera at this price point, it’s wiser to opt for one that provides more creative features, better control, and a more premium look and feel.
The Nons SL660 stands out as an SLR-style instant camera utilizing Instax Square film. A unique feature of the SL660 is its compatibility with vintage lenses, specifically Canon EF-mount. Adapters are also available from Nons for lenses with Nikon F-mount, Pentax K-mount, Contax/Yashica CY-mount, and M42 screwmount.
However, during our tests, we encountered several issues with the SL660. A loose circuit board for the film eject button required manual adjustment. The camera is also notably large and heavy, even before attaching a lens. To illustrate, the iconic and robust Nikon F2 film SLR weighs 730 grams, whereas the Nons SL660 weighs 850 grams. Carrying the SL660 with multiple lenses becomes quite cumbersome due to the added weight.
Considering its high cost, substantial weight, and the necessity for a collection of vintage lenses, the Nons SL660 is not a practical choice for most individuals seeking an instant print camera.
The Polaroid I-2 Instant Camera boasts a premium design and is enjoyable to operate, yet our results were inconsistent. We appreciated the ease of adjusting settings, with a simple button press enabling switching between full auto and manual modes. A built-in light meter in the viewfinder aims to assist in achieving proper exposure, and adjusting settings was straightforward. However, image quality in our tests was unreliable. Some photos were overexposed despite the meter indicating correct exposure. Other images were strangely cropped or out of focus, even when utilizing the parallax guide for close-ups or the half-press focus lock.
These same concerns extend to Polaroid’s other recent instant print camera releases. Specifically, with the Polaroid Now, the issue of blurry and improperly exposed prints becomes particularly frustrating given the cost of approximately $2 per print. Furthermore, the new Polaroid film requires shielding from light for 15 minutes during development, eliminating the traditional “shake it like a Polaroid picture” practice. The camera dispenses a protective black plastic shield over the image as it ejects, a design that can be somewhat anxiety-inducing when sharing photos, as there’s a constant worry someone might prematurely remove the shield and ruin the expensive i-Type film. Additionally, the 15-minute development time means you won’t know the quality of your shot immediately, significantly reducing the chance of capturing a fleeting moment again if the initial print is unsatisfactory.
Vintage Polaroid cameras, including the iconic SX-70, necessitate the use of original Polaroid film. Unfortunately, production of genuine Polaroid film ceased in 2008. While new versions are now manufactured by the current Polaroid company, photographers we consulted have reported that this film remains unreliable, with questionable long-term storage stability. This makes vintage Polaroid Instant Print Cameras less appealing for consistent use.
The Fujifilm Instax Mini 11 instant camera does not achieve the optimal balance of image quality, ease of use, and overall value compared to our recommended instant print camera choices.
Zink print technology has been a limiting factor for numerous instant cameras and printers previously tested in this category. This is a key reason for our negative assessment of Canon’s Ivy Cliq+ and Ivy Cliq instant print cameras; the print quality simply isn’t up to par.
Kodak has also employed its 4Pass Photo Paper in models such as the Kodak Photo Printer Mini 2 and Kodak Mini Shot 3 Retro. Although the credit-card-sized prints from these Kodak models are sharp and vibrant, the printing process is slow. Furthermore, the final prints lack some of the nostalgic soft aesthetic characteristic of Instax prints, which evoke the classic Polaroid look. The wide-angle lens on the Mini Shot camera also caused distortion in our images, leading to less flattering results in some cases.
Lomography’s Lomo’Instant Automat series of instant cameras have an appealingly quirky design and utilize Fujifilm’s widely available and reasonably priced Instax Mini film packs. Features like unlimited multiple exposures are interesting for creative photography. However, the camera controls are marked with cryptic hieroglyphic symbols that are difficult to understand. Primarily aimed at more experienced instant photography enthusiasts, many cameras in this series are packaged with fisheye, wide-angle, and close-up lens attachments, which we found more cumbersome and less practical than genuinely useful for everyday instant printing.
Lomography’s Lomo’Instant Wide instant print cameras are designed for Fujifilm’s Instax Wide film format. They offer the same three shooting modes as the Lomo’Instant Automat, along with a shutter remote integrated into the lens cap. Our primary concern with the entire Lomo’Instant series is their confusing controls and unconventional layout. The Lomo’Instant Wide unfortunately continues this trend, making this series easy to dismiss for those seeking user-friendly instant print cameras.
This article was edited by Phil Ryan and Erica Ogg.
Advertisement
