Comments on: Polaroid I-2 Long Term Review

By: Leo T

Leo T — Sun, 03 Mar 2024 03:14:22 +0000

The non user replaceable battery is so annoying. It’s one thing if it’s an item you use everything and expect to be “obsoleted” like a phone, but a camera should have a long service life.

Now we need a “nicer” Instax camera. At least AF, and exposure compensation. Oh, a viewfinder that’s better than just shooting at the hip would be great…

By: James Tocchio

James Tocchio — Thu, 29 Feb 2024 13:00:43 +0000

In reply to Jonas Ny.

Yep! There was a section of this review that mentioned Mint, Nons, and other cameras that have used Instax Wide film and Polaroid film throughout the years, which also offered some level of user control. But at almost 3,000 words, I had to make some cuts.

I really don’t see that there’s any other camera comparable to the Polaroid I-2. All of its would-be competitors are either refurbished old cameras with less elegant user experience, or use smaller film types, or (as you mentioned) cost double what the I-2 costs (and this thing is already an expensive camera).

I agree with you that Mint does make a very cool camera though.

By: Jonas Ny

Jonas Ny — Thu, 29 Feb 2024 08:31:34 +0000

You don’t mention the MINT SLR-670(i-Type); it’s a SX-70 but totally rebuilt with that solid feel of a new camera. They have changed the electronics so it has 1/2000 sec as the fastest shutter speed, and its latest version also has a built-in battery so it can use I-type film. When not using their accessory Time Machine, the camera defaults to aperture priority mode for i-Type och 600 film.

It’s more expensive at US $1,149, but the ability to have 1/2000 sec instead of 1/250 sec on a sunny day with 600 ISO film, I think, is a selling point. The old SX-70 had 1/175 sec as the fastest shutter time, and 1/250 sec of I-2 is just 1/2 stop faster; that’s not much. But the I-2 is a nice camera, even if I think a foldable SLR is more sexy.