Now I know the world is Upside Down

[ken_jeanette1]

<p>I watch an auction site sponsored by GoodWill, and I am usually happy to see quality cameras being sold and the proceeds going to a cause that helps people in need instead of the bottom of the barrel scammers on the other sites. Today, I went into auctions ending today, and there was my absolute proof that the world has turned upside down. A Retina 1b has a bid of $27.01, and a Diana is going for $35.99. Dianas are a $1.00 piece of ****. What have we come to?</p>

[longname]

<p>Trends come and they go, but in the end it's the Argus C3 that remains. :)<br>

Urban Outfitters started off selling Dianas for $40, and they've expanded their selection to include more "advanced" cameras such as the Holga and the Lomo.</p>

[User_502260]

<p>It's funnay about these novelty cameras. If you have a camera with a pretty good but not great lens, no one wants it. If a camera has a dreadful lens then the images are considered artistic. I just bought my second camera item from Goodwill website. It's an Olympus OM2000 with a 35-70 lens and a case all for a whopping $26. If the camera works that's a good deal. If it doesn't then $26 for the lens and case still isn't too bad.</p>

[john_tran14]

<p>It is upside down or not depends on your perspective. They go for the Diana not because it takes better pictures; they wouldn't take any pictures with it either. I had both the OM1 and OM2000, and I believe the OM2000 performs better even though the OM1 has much higher value.</p>

<p>Besides, as photographers, the pictures we take are always upside down and we never have any problem with that</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Living deep down here in the South Pacific Ocean, we get used to being upside down... In a way I find it kind of refreshing that people can enjoy and admire images I'd struggle not to produce. I guess we get a little obsessed with lens quality, and the absolute recording of reality. I have a friend who shoots both 5D MarkII and a Holga, and the couple of eye-catching prints that grace his workroom wall aren't from the 5D... Like any art form, it's all in the eye of the beholder.</p>

[photo5]

<p>I had a Diana for a while. It was in mint condition and I paid $35 for it. This was 15 years ago. I shot a couple rolls of film with it and couldn't see the attraction, so I sold it later for $50. Never missed it. <br>

I think there are a lot of different styles of photography. Before digital you had to use a cheap camera like that to get a certain effect. Now you can just throw some filters and curves at it in photoshop and call it good. <br>

Frankly I am surprised that you can buy a Nikon F with a lens in good condition for less than $200, when they sold for $300-600 15 years ago. Amazing.</p>

[patrick j dempsey]

<p>Urban Outfitters also sells the Seagull and Lubitel TLR's for upwards of $300... you know... the kinds of prices you could easily get a pristine Rollei for. Let's face it, people are stupid.</p>

[Mike Gammill]

And a new Lubitel goes for more than a Yashicamat 124G used to sell for new.

[User_4525289]

<p>Lubitel for $300, the world is turning upside down. And it is not made on LOMO I think that they sold the brand name.</p>

[john_fleetwood]

<p>Does the $39.99 include a roll of duct tape?</p>

[alex macphee]

<p>Be grateful that there are mugs spending their attention and money on Dianas, and leaving the Retinas at lower prices for you and me. Some kinds of stupidity are worth encouraging.</p>

[tom_price1]

<p>Yeah, it's weird. I recently bought a Spotmatic F off of Ebay for less than $20 with a 50mm f1.8 SMC Takumar on it for less than $20.<br>

At least they are shooting film through their crap cameras and thus helping to keep something of a demand for it.</p>

[carbon_dragon]

Part of the attraction I suspect is just that it's different, and different lights up the "little grey cells" as Poirot would say. It

gets you thinking a different way and seeing something from a new perspective can be useful. That said I don't see much

attraction in such "bad" cameras (or the lens baby for that matter). I'm an engineer so I like precision and beautiful design,

which is why I'm typing this on an iPad. I'm a sucker for great industrial design which could explain my Leicas.

[chuck_foreman1]

I like what Alex wrote .. all the better for us and another wrote keeping up the demand for film is also not bad.. all kidding aside what Rick and others mentioned is only so true .. beauty is in the eye of the beholder and whatever floats your boat. I can often see what the "artist" intended and if he feels the Holga/Diana opens up new venues ..then "go for it man"

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>After going to google earth and doing a little judicious mousing I have out Australia and NZ on top, kind of looks correct that way.<br>

The whole Holga/Diana thing is quite amusing, but you would be much better off with any of the multitude of box cameras out there, same results but for much less money. I'm not too concerned though, at least they are using film!</p>

[carbon_dragon]

Just cleaned out my Mom's house, she's going to assisted living, and found two of my ancient cameras, a Kodak Brownie

and a Polaroid 103. I have to admit I'm a little curious -- maybe enough to put some film through them. The Brownie was

not, as I recall, a particular effective camera, it would probably quality for the kind of camera that appeals to the lomofiles.