Holga or not to Holga?

[bobbler13]

<p>Hey all,<br>

So I've been trying to absorb as much information as possible through this threads and a lot of you guys have helped a bunch! I am super interested in MF and am looking for a camera. I had a previous post probably almost a month ago asking a similar question. I read all the replys and got some good information. However, I do not have a lot of money at my disposale for a new camera like a Rollie Mayima, etc but never really asked or read much about Holgas. I noticed that they (Holgas) tended to be a in the lower price range for MF camera, although I do realize that it is not the best quality, but for a beginner who may venture his way into developing film (later down the road) would this be a good investment to at least start with? I enjoy a lot of street/documentary mostly all in black and white. Thanks for your help!!</p>

 

[john_a5]

<p>Holgas are a lot of fun. I have about 10 of the original ones, because they take time to reload with all the taping and such to prevent light leaks. These had but one shutter speed and two apertures. I think there were 3 focus settings. I do believe that there are some models out now that have more shutter speed options and I think that might be better if you are doing street photography. I was pretty much limited to bright areas while shooting.</p>

<p>I don't know how much a Holga will teach you though if you are a beginner. Because of the limited controls, the fact that the viewfinder is not all that accurate(I think the camera shoots much more than what you see) and such, it really serves more as a liberator for those of us who know all the technical stuff. I love the fact that you just shoot and have so little to think about, kind of cathartic for those of us who work more precisely most of the time.</p>

<p>But, hey, get one, they are cheap and just play with it.</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>Absolutely a good investment. They are so different than "normal" MF cameras, that they are more of a niche item. If you want sharp photos and maximum control of your exposures, they won't do. If you want an artsy edge, and to develop your ability to see and compose images, they would be a perfect tool. I shoot Hasselblad for MF, but think I might jump into a 120N because I like the look of the images they produce. At around $30 with shipping, how can you go wrong?</p>

[steve_parrott]

<p>Holgas are definitely their own little world. I cannot honestly say they are any kind of "entry level" medium format camera. It is simply a unique camera that happens to use medium format film. Even the newer cameras have no controls. There is only one shutter speed which is about 1/125. There are two apertures shown as a daylight and night symbol, but in reality, the way the camera is designed, you only have one aperture of about f11. Don't even waste your time with the selection switch. Light leaks are somewhat better controlled in the newer cameras due to a much better interior mask piece. Also, there is now foam installed under the film spools to keep the film tight. In the past it was common practice to stuff a rolled up matchbook cover under the film rolls to keep tension on them! No joke! Also, the newer cameras now have a tripod socket and a bulb mode for long exposures, but you are totally on your own as far as how long the shutter remains open. How accurately can you count? <p>So yeah, Holgas can be fun and you can actually get some good output from them in their own special style. However, as another answer stated, i do not feel a Holga is a good learning tool at all. It is just too limiting. I can promise you, if you get a Holga, it will make you want a REAL medium format camera all the more. I would say find a good used Mamiya 645E kit. These are relatively inexpensive and will be a much better start than the more toyish Holga. <p> Here are some of my Holga shots if you want to browse: http://www.lightanon.com/-/lightanon/gallery.asp?cat=92459</p>

[dweezil]

<p>if i where you I'd stay away from a holga as a starter camera.<br>

Get something decent 2nd hand like a mamyia, it doesn't really matter what but get something that has a decent functioning an is able to learn you the difference between high diaphragm numbers and low ones. A camera that is able to let you choose how to set the depth of field and not one where you only have one shutter setting and the further choices you have are some vague diaphragm settings.<br>

Most of them are not light tight and so there are so many ways they can ruin a photo for you that you can not learn what you've done wrong.<br>

If you ask me, it's the worst investment you can make.</p>

[k5083]

I too say stay away. If you really only have Holga kind of money to spend, I would get a cheap twin lens reflex. Either a beat-up Ikoflex, Yashica, or Mamiya or a not-so-beat-up Seagull. An old 6x6 folding camera would be an option, too. There are a lot of things that could be wrong with such a camera but none of them would leave you worse off than the typical Holga.

[tomwatt]

<p>I still have a Diana (a Holga knock-off - that's a concept to ponder) that I used in school. I also have (somplace) an old Kodak Brownie.<br>

If you can latch onto a better camera do it. If not, and the point is to burn through some film, Holga will do that... the biggest downside to the Holgas is the plastic lens, although some people are attracted to the aesthetics of it.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>"I still have a Diana (a Holga knock-off - that's a concept to ponder)"</p>

<p>If you have a real Diana, that is anything but a Holga knock off! Those are collector items and preceded the Holga. The Diana sort of started it all, the plastic camera thing!</p>

<p>I also noted some of the comments about the older holgas. Yes, I used rolled up edges of the film box to keep the film tight--otherwise it rolled so loose that you had to unload it in a darkroom or ruin all your film. Sometimes you got it so tight that it was almost impossible to advance the film, eventually you figured it out though. I am not sure the difference with the inserts, but the insert that came with mine created the 6x4.5 format, so you removed it to get the square format and then had to tape two holes inside the body that the insert covered or you got light leaks. Of course, any good holga owner then used black gaff tape and taped up every external seam, including around the lens. Mine had two apertures, supposed to be f8 and f11--nice of them to give you such a range!</p>

[arthur_gottschalk]

<p>Holgas are toy cameras with plastic lenses that make (very) funky pictures. Has very little to do with regular medium foremat as such and offers no MF advantages, like sharp, high resolution pictures. Still, they can be fun. Some folks call them the poor man's Hasselblad. At $20 or so you don't have much to loose.</p>

[alpenglow]

<p>Synthesize all that has been said above and you have your answer. Holgas are a blast and are wonderful to help train your eye and to force you to be creative. They are capable of producing truly beautiful images in the right hands. But, because of their limitations, they are not a good choice for a first medium format camera. Get a camera that has greater features and quality lenses, and then maybe also get a Holga (for $25.00), in addition, to help you explore your creative side.</p>

<p>Mike</p>

 

[tomwatt]

<blockquote>

<p>If you have a real Diana, that is anything but a Holga knock off! Those are collector items and preceded the Holga. The Diana sort of started it all, the plastic camera thing!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>John A, yes it's real. Was my joyeous distraction from 'real photography' while I was in school. I got so enamoured with the MF point and shoot, that when I ran across a Brownie, I snapped it up. To be honesst, the Brownie produced pictures of lesser quality than the Diana.</p>

[bobbler13]

<p>awesome thanks for all the input. i bought one just for giggles. what are your thoughts about bronica cameras? I noticed that were a little bit less expensive than others that you mentioned. I have been looking at them but do not really know the pros and cons of those cameras. any help? would this be still be a decent MF beginning camera?</p>

[george_peng1]

<p>I would avoid the Bronica only because its a system camera, meaning you'll be tempted over time to add accessories to it, increasing your investment in it. The only problem is that the brand is defunct, meaning that repairs and parts will be very difficult to come by, especially compared to longer-lived systems.</p>

<p>You're probably better off with an old Yashica-mat or Rolleiflex - I have a Hasselblad 500 C/M but just bought a Rolleiflex on the auction site for $150, and it works perfectly and takes lovely photos. So if you're careful, you can get something which is much more permanent and compromise-free than the Holga, and for which there is a very active user community.</p>

[tomwatt]

<p>Seconding George's suggestion about Bronicas. Among the systems I used to play with was a nice enough Bronica, but it never seemed to be in my comfort zone... I used the Hasselblad more (and waffled 35mm among the Canon, Minolta and Nikon depending on what was handy, loaded and suited me). But one of our photogs loved the Bronica line and had a pile of goodies, lenses, etc.<br>

On the other hand, as with anything that seems to have quirks and a unique feel (Hassleblad is one of those), take a look at one, hold it, see if it calls your name. You might be made for one another.</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>Bronicas are excellent cameras. They all have leaf shutter lenses so they flash sync at all speeds. They are simple to service, too. You can get a 645 ETRSi for a song. They're inexpensive enough that you can afford a backup body and multiple film backs.</p>

[alpenglow]

<p>I would look at the Mamiya 645 system options. The Pro and ProTL versions are wonderful, but the 1000s camera is also great at a much reduced price. I have all of the above (in addition to other medium format systems), and can attest to the quality and bang for the buck.</p>

<p>Mike</p>