Holga hypocrisy?

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by RichA, May 25, 2011.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    RichA, May 25, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    It is a great camera for learning the basics of art photography,
    including composition. It is inexpensive.
    If you don't like it don't buy one. Nobody expects you to learn
    anything, anyway.
    PeterN, May 25, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    otter Guest

    Did you look at the second link? It is a little funny.
    otter, May 25, 2011
  4. RichA

    RichA Guest

    It's not about the camera, fool. Which you would know if you actually
    read it.
    RichA, May 25, 2011
  5. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    Paul Furman, May 25, 2011
  6. RichA

    Peter Chant Guest

    But there are approximately 70 years worth of second hand cameras out there
    that are light tight and generally focus better and are inexpensive. As far
    as just concentrating on composition - the basic compacts do that - you have
    a shutter release button to press and not much else. They must be cheap in
    the flea markets if you can't just scrounge one off of someone.

    Peter Chant, May 25, 2011
  7. RichA

    Peter Chant Guest

    RichA wrote:

    <troll>Are you BA Baracus</troll> ;-)
    Peter Chant, May 25, 2011
  8. RichA

    bugbear Guest

    I'm surprised someone hasn't extended CHDK to implement
    the Lomo effect as a built in on Canon cameras...

    bugbear, May 25, 2011
  9. RichA

    Whisky-dave Guest

    That's OK for the individual but what if you're running a class or
    teaching photography
    to more than one person at a time it's nice to have identical
    i.e you buy 30 cameras one for each student and at those prices you
    can have spares
    and being able to hold up one camera and show how to load film in it
    is far easier
    than going around to 30 different cameras showing each student
    individually how to
    load the film or any other aspect of photography.
    I'd also buy the ugliest the blue/yellow makes them less likely to
    from the classroom.
    I'd also avoid hello kitty cameras and Nikes etc.. for the above
    Whisky-dave, May 25, 2011
  10. RichA

    Peter Chant Guest

    bugbear wrote:

    Better done in the digital darkroom as post processing as it is reversable?
    Peter Chant, May 25, 2011
  11. RichA

    Peter Chant Guest

    Fair point, was not thinking about that situation.
    Peter Chant, May 25, 2011
  12. RichA

    bugbear Guest

    That's completely against the Lomo philosophy.

    Which is to be absurd, 'cos that's "art".

    And they can charge big bucks for it.

    bugbear, May 25, 2011
  13. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Gimmicks like using intentionally crappy lenses are good for about 10
    minutes. But do you really want to stare at something like that on
    your wall for months?
    RichA, May 25, 2011
  14. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    A camera with a decent lens can easily be degraded to Holga
    "standards" by using a glass filter and Vaseline. Using a Holga
    camera always gives low standards without any hope of improvement.

    What is the point?

    I feel the same way about LensBaby. The LensBaby lenses are much
    better than the Holga lens but they are still optically very poor. And
    they cost more. We don't sell many.

    Again, what is the point?

    I cannot see the attraction of a camera or lens that always gives bad
    results. Where is the "fun" in that?
    Bruce, May 25, 2011
  15. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    I know. The Holga though, is used as a teaching camera because it is a
    equalizer. If I am teaching basic composition and visualization it is
    easier to keep the emphasis on those topics, rather than features. Of
    course there are much better cameras out there, many of which have more
    features and cost less.
    PeterN, May 25, 2011
  16. Nikon sells a couple of "DC" lenses which, for a thousand dollars or
    so, let you
    introduce small amounts of controlled...coma, I think? Some "bad"
    optical effect, anyway.
    They're used to make portraits look better.

    Which is to say that many photographers think in artistic rather than
    technical terms; what's "good" artistically may come from something
    that is "bad" technically.
    David Dyer-Bennet, May 25, 2011
  17. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    I know - I owned one for a couple of years and used it professionally.
    It was a superlative lens. There was definitely no "bad" optical
    effect involved.

    Lenses that produce smooth background bokeh are in great demand for
    portraiture because defocused areas behind the subject do not detract
    from the subject. However, these lenses tend to display harsh
    foreground bokeh.

    Nikon's defocus control (DC) lenses allow you to choose where the
    smooth bokeh goes - either behind the subject, in front of the
    subject, or some value of both. You simply turn the DC ring then
    refocus. It works beautifully and the optical performance of the lens
    remains very good regardless of where you choose to "put the bokeh".

    I sold the lens for two reasons. First, I found that I rarely wanted
    anything other than smooth background bokeh, so the added complication
    didn't suit my work. Second, the focal length of the lens I used is,
    at 135mm, unsuited for classic studio portraiture (unless you and/or
    your subject happen to be Japanese*).

    There was also a 105mm version of the DC lens which would have been
    better suited to the job, but I couldn't get hold of a used example at
    the time. By the time I decided to sell the 135mm, I realised that I
    simply didn't need the DC feature. The 105mm f/2.5 AI-S Nikkor was a
    much better choice.

    You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some
    of the people all of the time ... ;-)

    * For some reason, the Japanese strongly prefer 135mm for "classic"
    portraiture whereas focal lengths between 85mm and 105mm are preferred
    in Europe and the USA. Tastes differ.

    (all focal lengths quoted are for full frame digital or 35mm film)
    Bruce, May 25, 2011
  18. RichA

    shiva das Guest

    Apparently not everyone in the world shares your opinion. Obviously
    enough people think there is a point that the Holga hasn't been
    Indeed. So ... you probably shouldn't buy a Holga or a Lens Baby, as you
    most definitely won't enjoy them. It's safe to say that not everyone
    defines "bad results" the way you do.
    shiva das, May 26, 2011
  19. RichA

    Mike Guest

    Doesn't Holga make the SD-1 for Sigma ;)

    Mike, May 26, 2011
  20. RichA

    bugbear Guest

    Perhaps I should have been explicit (but it spoils the wit).

    I don't think it's a good idea.

    I'm just surprised someone hasn't done it.

    bugbear, May 26, 2011
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.