tannie has decided I have wanted a Lomo <a href="http://shop.lomography.com/lca+/specs.html">LCA+</a> for quite a while now, but I already have a regular LCA.
Asked 2 years ago
Should I just go for it and spend the money on a non-digital camera with some more features than the LCA I already have.
- jtu
-
Unless there's something better the money would go towards?
- burlroad
-
I'd go for it if you can afford it. Two of the features make the improved version extremely flexible. The multiple exposure function means that the LCA+ can produce some very sophisticated impressionistic images, while the second curtain/flash will be very useful.
- photon
-
Dude, Lomo. Get it.
- djdrue
-
Nothing looks like a lomo... if you really want that look, there's no other way to get it.
trs, quince, kevinr, jesse, gen_witt, paigep, shadow, raloxifiend, sky, HoodOrnament
My choice: Should I just save the money for other purposes?
- mstevens
-
What's the difference between the LC-A and and the LC-A+?
- lakmiseiru
-
Unless you're very financially stable right now, I'd wait and just get it when the old one wears out. (which is to say never given that it's not digital...)
- kyrandil
-
So, having read the website, I still don't understand what makes the LCA so awesome. It sounds like a point-and-shoot format camera with a few nice features of old film SLRs. Or really old point-and-shoots without interlocks.
- seph
-
Would you use the new features enough?
- pfig
-
screw it, the lca+ is just marketing.
Kake, aletta, Ian, Alex, peggusus, sauergeek, tibbetts, Mark, crschmidt, yDNA, mcm69, ragendem, sterngeboren, nurey, mramberg, Lattyware, Lex, Richie, erin, ManWorkingHere, Yoyo, eisenbud, mitsa17, Mycroft
Copyright © 2006–2007 Best Practical Solutions, LLC • Contact us
If you make a stupid choice because a website tells you to, it's your own damn fault.