The popularity of toy cameras has risen and fallen over the decades. The element of novelty to plastic cameras like the Diana and Holga often conflicts with reliability and overall image quality, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. In an age of corner-to-corner perfection, light leaks or textures can give photographers a way to stand out from the crowd.
My relationship with toy cameras has always been a bit strained. I have a few things that I enjoy working with. For the last few Space Shuttle launches, I’ve carried my panoramic Holga with me, and I’ve had good results with my standard Holga and Diana bodies. While the images are nothing to write home about, they are still fun to take. But they can also be bulky, unreliable, and relatively fragile, and for every camera with interesting “quirks,” there are dozens of bad cameras.
A few weeks ago, Lomography launched their new Lomo Movement and I have to admit it caught my attention. It’s 35mm focal length and shot with a 21mm f/10 lens and built-in flash. They were kind enough to provide me with a prototype for testing for a few weeks and I was able to put it to the test.
It wouldn’t be fair to call this a toy camera. It’s more complex and better built than the Holga, though it’s also not quite a point and shoot more advanced. It’s somewhere in the middle: the body is made of plastic and has no manual controls, but it has an interesting built-in flash system with various color filters and a tripod. There’s also a bulb function if you want to try pulling the shutter or taking a longer exposure. What really caught my attention was the lens: to the best of my knowledge, there aren’t many cameras of this type with such a wide lens. 
During testing, I carried it around the city, playing with it in a variety of lighting conditions. I also take it with me on business trips, photographing the Veterans Day Parade in New York. My initial impressions were generally favorable: the camera performed well in the rain and there was no overexposure in any of my shots. I didn’t notice any lens flare, and although the image isn’t sharp from corner to corner, it’s still quite impressive. 
However, I should note that under gray skies the camera struggled to properly expose the image. At a fixed shutter speed of 1/100 second suitable for an f/10 lens, my image on a rainy day was extremely underexposed. This problem can be easily solved if I use higher speed movies, but for my tests I seriously shoot Ilford HP5. In brighter lighting conditions, the image displays well; they are so adorable, even. However, in the future, I will use higher speed film or push negative film in development. 
Another problem I discovered was with flash: the camera uses a series of colored gels in a movable frame that you can control with a tab on the side of the body. It’s a great idea, but I find the gel tends to come loose if you’re not careful. 
However, this is not a matter of stopping the game. There’s a lot to like about this camera: for a lo-fi shooter, it certainly has a lot to offer. I can see myself using it for certain tasks, but really, it’s something you pull out at a party when your drunk friend is about to do something dramatic but it doesn’t work out. encourage. This lens is sharper than I expected and it has some features that other cameras in its class lack. The double exposure function is an interesting little addition that I didn’t expect.
In the end, I find this an interesting little camera that could use some minor improvements but otherwise it is a solid body that can beat well beyond its weight class and I will always celebrate. when a new film camera hits the market.
What I like
- Affordable with an expected price of $89
- Wider lens than other simple point-and-shoot bodies
- Solid construction
- Double exposure function
What I don’t like
- A fixed f/10 lens means you should shoot at a higher speed
- Gel flash came off during shooting
- No manual shutter control
