Instant cameras, often referred to as Picture Printing Cameras, offer a unique blend of nostalgia and instant gratification in today’s digital age. While the market boasts a variety of models, not all provide the same level of creative control, image quality, or user experience. This review delves into a selection of instant cameras, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses to help you choose the best picture printing camera for your needs. We’ve excluded discontinued models and those that don’t meet current standards to focus on readily available and relevant options.
The Fujifilm Instax Mini LiPlay and the FujiFilm Mini 99, while priced similarly to some higher-end options, offer a more basic instant photography experience. Compared to models like the Mini EVO, they present fewer avenues for creative expression and less precise control over exposure and the final printed picture. Although their compact size might be appealing, their plastic construction lacks the premium feel and vintage aesthetic that many enthusiasts appreciate in a picture printing camera. For those investing in a mid-range instant camera, prioritizing models with richer creative features, enhanced controls, and a more refined design is generally a better choice.
For photographers seeking to blend classic lens versatility with instant film, the Nons SL660 presents an intriguing option. This SLR-style picture printing camera utilizes Instax Square film and is compatible with vintage lenses, specifically Canon EF-mount. Nons also provides adapters for various other lens mounts including Nikon F, Pentax K, Contax/Yashica CY, and M42 screwmount, expanding lens compatibility significantly.
However, our testing revealed several drawbacks with the SL660. We encountered issues with a loose circuit board affecting the film eject button, requiring manual adjustment. Furthermore, the camera is notably bulky and heavy, even before attaching a lens. To put it in perspective, the iconic Nikon F2 film SLR weighs 730 grams, whereas the Nons SL660 weighs a substantial 850 grams. Carrying the SL660 with multiple lenses becomes a significant weight burden, making it less portable than other picture printing camera alternatives.
Considering its premium price point, considerable weight, and the necessity of owning or acquiring vintage lenses, the Nons SL660 is not a practical choice for most users looking for a picture printing camera. Its niche appeal is primarily for those deeply invested in vintage lenses and seeking a unique instant film experience.
The Polaroid I-2 Instant Camera stands out with its high-quality construction and enjoyable user experience, but our image results were inconsistent. We appreciated the ease of adjusting settings and the seamless transition between automatic and manual modes with just a few button presses. The integrated light meter in the viewfinder is designed to assist in achieving proper exposure, and we found it straightforward to adjust settings accordingly. However, despite these features, our test photos exhibited inconsistencies, with some images appearing overexposed even when the light meter indicated correct exposure. Other shots suffered from unexpected cropping or focus issues, even when employing the built-in parallax guide for close-ups or utilizing the half-press focus lock.
These inconsistencies extend to other new Polaroid picture printing cameras as well. Specifically, with the Polaroid Now, the occurrence of blurry and improperly exposed prints is particularly frustrating, especially considering the cost of approximately $2 per print. Furthermore, the latest Polaroid film necessitates shielding from light for 15 minutes during development, eliminating the iconic “shake it like a Polaroid picture” tradition. The camera dispenses a protective black plastic shield over the image as it ejects, which can be somewhat inconvenient when sharing photos, as there’s a constant worry of someone prematurely removing the shield and potentially ruining the expensive i-Type film. The 15-minute development time also means you won’t know the quality of your shot immediately, significantly reducing the chances of recapturing a fleeting moment if the initial print is unsatisfactory.
Vintage Polaroid cameras, such as the iconic SX-70, require original Polaroid film, the production of which ceased in 2008. While the revived Polaroid company now manufactures new versions of the film, feedback from photographers suggests that this new film can be unreliable, with concerns regarding long-term storage stability. For enthusiasts seeking the authentic vintage Polaroid experience, these film limitations are important considerations.
The Fujifilm Instax Mini 11 falls short of delivering the optimal balance of image quality, user-friendliness, and overall value compared to top-rated picture printing camera choices. While it’s a popular entry-level option, users seeking higher image quality and more consistent results may want to explore other models in the Instax range or consider alternatives.
Zink print technology has been a disqualifying factor for numerous picture printing cameras and printers in our evaluations. This has led us to dismiss Canon’s Ivy Cliq+ and Ivy Cliq cameras, which utilize Zink paper. While Zink offers the convenience of inkless printing, the image quality often lags behind traditional dye-sublimation or inkjet printing methods, and the longevity of Zink prints can be a concern.
Kodak has also experimented with 4Pass Photo Paper in models like the Kodak Photo Printer Mini 2 and Kodak Mini Shot 3 Retro. Although these credit-card-sized prints are sharp and vibrant, the printing process is slow. Furthermore, the final prints lack some of the nostalgic soft aesthetic that Instax prints, reminiscent of classic Polaroids, provide. The wide-angle lens on the Mini Shot camera also introduced distortion in our images, leading to less flattering results in some cases.
Lomography’s Lomo’Instant Automat series picture printing cameras possess a distinctive cool aesthetic and utilize Fujifilm’s widely available and reasonably priced Instax Mini film packs. Features like unlimited multiple exposures offer creative possibilities. However, the controls are marked with cryptic hieroglyphic symbols, making the camera less intuitive to use. Marketed towards advanced instant photographers, most cameras in this series are bundled with fisheye, wide-angle, and close-up lens attachments. In our experience, these attachments proved more cumbersome than genuinely useful for everyday picture printing.
Lomography’s Lomo’Instant Wide cameras are designed for Fujifilm’s Instax Wide film format. They share the same three shooting modes as the Lomo’Instant, along with a shutter remote integrated into the lens cap. Our primary concern with the Lomo’Instant series, including the Wide model, is their clunky controls and unconventional layout. The Lomo’Instant Wide largely inherits these drawbacks, making the entire series less appealing compared to more user-friendly picture printing camera options on the market.
In conclusion, selecting the ideal picture printing camera involves carefully considering factors such as image quality, ease of use, creative features, and film costs. While various models offer unique strengths, it’s crucial to weigh these against potential drawbacks to find a camera that aligns with your photography needs and preferences.
