Gear Check: Belair X 6-12

     I wrote 90% of this review before blogger decided to delete my post.  I am now starting over.

   
     The Belair X 6-12 is one of the latest cameras from the Lomography folks, and was a bit of a departure from their usual MO.  Lomography, being almost synonymous with the "toy camera" movement, normally makes very cheaply produced, all-plastic cameras.  I won't get into the pros and cons of toy cameras or the lomography movement, but will say that this is what got me into photography and what enabled me to experiment with medium-format photography in the first place.

     Back to the Belair.  I hate to let you, reader, in on my thoughts on the camera so early in this review, but I have a very important point to make.  Though I said the Belair seems like a change from what Lomography usually does, it fit squarely into one of Lomography's main goals: to give us affordable access to a style of photography normally reserved for the pros or rich amateurs.  In this case, unfortunately, I feel Lomography tried to fit too many of these styles into a single camera.  I'll explain the details of the camera before I get to the review portion.

     First, the Belair cameras (there are actually 3 models) are very fine-looking, folder-style cameras in the design.  Actually, to be sure, the design of the camera is absolutely identical to the design of the 100 series Land Cameras in regard to the folding portion, the bellows, the light meter eye, and the finder.  It basically looks like a Land Camera from the front, and a Kodak folder from the back.  Why mess with something that worked, right?

Belair X 6-12 City Slicker Edition
photo via Lomography

     The camera front pops out by pushing a button on the bottom and carefully (as always) pulling the front out to expand the bellows until the metal supports lock in place.  Unlike the vintage cameras from which this design was "borrowed" the bellows on the Belair is made of black rubber.  This, I feel, was a great idea.  Older cameras used black fabric, paper, or vinyl, and while this worked for those cameras, provided proper care was taken with them, something tells me Lomography's quality control would not have been strong enough for an error-prone material to succeed.  The rubber will obviously stay intact as long as sharp objects are kept away.  To collapse the front for storage a set of spring-loaded pins are pushed on the top and bottom of the metal supports and the front is carefully (again) pushed back in.  Lots of wiggling and shifting is required to make sure this doesn't put an end to your camera.  As I have mentioned many times before, no force should EVER be applied to anything on a Lomography camera as they break far more easily than can be imagined.

Side view
photo via Lomography

     The back is released for film loading/unloading by pulling the small tabs on each side, at the bottom, and then pulling the back completely off.  The literature that comes with the camera, and with all Lomography medium-format cameras, points out that the camera uses 120 film, and that color or B&W film can be used.  I don't know of many cameras that can use only color or B&W film, so I don't understand why they always say that, but maybe they're just trying to add as many positive bullets to the spec list as they can get away with.

Lens & light meter eye
photo via Lomography

     One feature of the Belair that is very rare for Lomography is the fact that the lens are interchangeable.  The camera comes with two lenses - a 90mm and a 58mm.  Both lenses, like most Lomography and other toy cameras, have plastic optics.  The lenses have a few focus settings, similar to most cheaper cameras (1m, 1.5m, 3m, infinity) and have two aperture settings, which are f8 & f16.  I'll talk more about the lens settings and upgrade options later.  The lenses - actually the lens mount to be exact - are the biggest source of frustration for me with this camera.  To attach a lens one simply lines the lens up with the body and gives a tiny, maybe 1/8" turn to "lock" it in.  I've read a handful of reviews written by others and have yet to see somebody else mention that they experience what I do, but on my camera (I have the Jetsetter Edition, if that makes any difference) the lenses simply don't stay in place at all.  I have to hold them in place when actively using the camera, and have to put the lens back in every time I remove the camera from my bag.  I may try to devise a solution at some point, possibly by adding something to hold the lens in with pressure or temporary adhesive, but I haven't messed with it yet.  Actually, the lens cap that goes on the back of the lens when not in use also fall off constantly.  With the interchangeable lenses come a pair of interchangeable finders, which do stay in place without issue.  Each finder has the same angle of view as the matching lens, making it easier to frame shots.

     Another feature of the Belair designed to make the camera more user-friendly for beginners is the automatic shutter.  An aperture wheel is set on the light meter eye to select the correct ISO, allowing the camera to measure the correct light for the film and to choose shutter speed accordingly.  I'm not sure if the light meter takes lens aperture into account (I suspect not) but in my experience the speed settings appear to be pretty accurate for an evenly exposed photo.

     The final noteworthy feature of the camera, which happens to be the main selling point, is the fact that the Belair can be used for not two but three size formats.  The smallest format available is the standard square, 6x6 size (we're talking centimeters, my American friends), giving you 12 photos per roll of film.  From there you can move up to the slightly rarer 6x9 format (8 photos, in case you don't like math).  But the real selling point here is that a 6x12 format is also available.  That's 6 enormous, panoramic photos per roll.  For those of you who are only reading this to be nice to me, I would like to explain that 6x12 format is almost impossible for photographers without spending thousands (or thousand, at least) dollars on a camera that can do nothing but 6x12 photos, though of course they usually do them very well.  6x12 is a big deal for a consumer-priced camera.  There are, of course, some major problems with shooting in 6x12 format though - the biggest being that most commercial, automated film scanners can't handle 6x12 negatives.  But a flatbed scanner can certainly handle them.

     Needless to say, I have loads of cameras that can shoot in 6x6 or 6x9 format, so since I have gotten the Belair (as a Christmas present) I have only shot in 6x12 mode.  Oh, and the format is changed by switching out the mask inside the camera, behind the lens and in front of the film, meaning that a single format can be used for an entire roll of film.  That's pretty standard, but worth mentioning perhaps.

     As promised, I will now mention the lens upgrade options.  Lomography has produced two premium lenses they are calling "Belairgon".  They come in 90mm and 114mm, and unlike the standard lenses, they both have glass optics.  The 114mm lens advertises an extremely shallow depth of field, making it ideal for portraits.  The problem is that these lenses are $200 each!  For that reason I will not be reviewing the lenses, and unless somebody gives me a pair I will never be using them.  It would be nice to see the sharper images, but I suspect the improvement isn't worth the money as the lenses still only have 2 aperture settings.

     I guess that's a pretty good starting point for the beginning of my critique of a few features.  Just like the saying "a chain is only as strong as its weakest link" some of the more "professional" features of the camera are limited pretty severely by the fact that the lens has only two aperture settings, and both settings are pretty close to the middle of the usual spectrum.  It is not possible to achieve either shallow or deep depth of field.  As I said before, the 114mm Belairgon lens specs advertise very shallow depth of field, but I have trouble believing that with a maximum aperture of f8.  You never know, though.  Because f16 is the minimum setting all panoramic shots tend to have a dreamy, slightly blurred look.  Some of this may be due to the plastic optics.  I don't mind the blur, honestly, but do wish I had the option to have very sharp photos if I want to use the camera for its most exciting negative format.  And I do.  Even one more stop, to f22, would make enough difference for me to be much more excited.  I would also like one more stop in the other direction - either a f5.6 or even skipping that and going to a f4 would be great to try out.

     The finder is also a bit of a frustrating part, too, though reading other reviews makes me feel like I am happier with the finder than most.  Since the finders are set up to display the same angle of view as the lens, but the negative format is interchangeable, the Lomography people have devised a rough way to frame shots more accurately than guessing.  A few sets of "teeth" are visible in the finder to show where the approximate edge of the frame will be depending on which mask is being used.  Clearly these are approximate, as are almost all finders in non-SLR cameras, but I have not had many frustratingly unpleasant surprises with framing.  I suppose, for me, much of the appeal and understanding I have with toy photography is that nothing is predictable.  That's the way it should be, and if that is not acceptable I feel that only very expensive, precision-made cameras should be used.  But where's the fun in that?

Inside of the finder
Taken with iPhone

     Despite my very recent dismissal of framing accuracy, I will say that the parallax issues are slightly frustrating in a camera that has lenses so clearly made for portraits.  Parallax error, for those who don't want to follow that link to the wikipedia article, is actually a pretty easy concept to explain and understand.  Parallax is just the difference in perspective (in sight) between two different physical points.  Look at the layout of the room you are standing in, with attention to which objects are visible to you, and how far they appear in relation to each other and the edges of your sight.  Now move five feet in any direction and look at the same layout.  Everything looks different - some things previously visible are now hidden, some new things appear, etc.  Pretty simple.  The same issue is present with cameras where the lens and finder are not in the exact same place.  This is barely noticeable when taking panoramic shots focusing on things way off in the distance, but the closer the subject the greater the parallax error.  This is something I am quite used to, though, as most of the cameras I use are not SLRs (where the finder is the lens) so I get used to using the finder to get close and then trying to make a guess about what adjustments would be needed to get the lens aimed in the exact right spot.  A little practice and this becomes fairly easy to deal with.

     I don't really have much else to say about the way the camera works, but will mention one last supposed flaw that I have not encountered personally.  I read from several people that the film does not spool correctly on the take-up spool.  I can feel that the spools aren't kept very tight, meaning that they can slip back or forward slightly after advancing the film.  This typically means that the camera is prone to warping the film inside the camera.  I have studied my photos closely and see only tiny indications that this is happening to me, and it is such a small difference that I may as well say that this is not an issue in my camera at all.  Though I don't want my Belair to warp my film, I actually love film warping and have a camera that I treasure for it.  The other potentially film-ruining result of the spools not staying tight is the dreaded "fat roll" issue.  I actually do get a bit of this with my camera, but haven't really seen any major problems with it.  "Fat roll", which I'm putting in quotes because it's a pretty unofficial term despite being a fairly standard name for it, is where the film isn't wound tightly on the take-up spool, making the film and backing paper end up sticking out further than the spool, which leaves it vulnerable to being penetrated by light after removing the film from the camera.  My usual solution is to remove the spool in a dark room (or darkroom) or at least in subdued light.  I seal the roll up as usual and wrap in foil to ensure no light gets in.  When taking the roll to get processed by the lab I just explain that I've got a fat roll, and they have no problem dealing with it.

     So, friends, that's more or less a wrap.  I'll do my pros & cons bullet list, as I usually do, and I'll post a few 6x12 photos I took while on tour with the ol' band.  These photos were taken on the ultra cheap 800 ISO film branded by Lomography, as it came for free with the camera.  I do not recommend Lomography's film as it is overpriced and cheaply produced.  As if Lomography wanted to prove my point, the first roll I ran through the camera had a large tear in the actual film itself.  It was still developed without issue, but a little frustrating to lose a shot due to film quality, rather than the usual photographer quality issue I suffer from.

     I don't really want to spend any time talking about the three models, but will just say that the only differences are mostly in look, and slightly in construction.  The most basic model is mostly made of black plastic, where the other two have many more aluminum parts.  The difference between the middle and top models, from what I can tell, are purely in color and grip material, though the $50 price difference makes me curious if I'm missing something.  If anybody knows please leave me a comment.  The specs are identical.

     Pros:

• The Belair allows one to take panoramic shots for a fraction of the cost of a standard panoramic camera.  This alone is enough of a selling point that I believe it to be a worthwhile camera to have if 6x12 is a goal.  I only wish this would have been the main focus of the rest of the features of the camera...
• Interchangeable lenses add to the versatility, and I'm sure the glass lenses are great.
• The Belair looks very nice.  The bellows and collapsing portion of the camera are a major eye-catcher, and from a practical standpoint it's nice that the camera isn't always unfolded as it would be enormous in that case.
• The rubber bellows will, unless I'm missing something, make the camera last longer than a vinyl or cloth bellows.
• Automatic shutter speed makes the camera easier to use, and allows for quicker film wasting.

     Cons:

• The price!  This is often a con in my lists, but that's because the whole point of the Lomography and toy camera movement is to take experimental and creative photos without having a pro's budget.  Seriously, the cheapest of the three Belair models costs $250.  The higher-quality lenses are $200 each!  Too much!  It would be better, in my humble opinion, to offer a more basic version of the camera for a lower price.
• Aperture options.  Two settings in the middle of the spectrum is far too few, and a panoramic camera with large aperture settings doesn't make sense to me.  Maybe I shouldn't complain much.  Two is better than one.
• I wish those lenses would stay firmly fixed to the camera!  One of these days a lens will fall from the camera while I'm taking a photo and will be ruined, and I'll be super angry about that.  I don't think I should have to devise workarounds for something so basic.
• It's stupid of me to mention this, but given the price it would have been great to have better storage/protection.  The finders came wrapped in small squares of cloth, where I would have preferred pouches of some sort so that they can stay inside their protective fabric.  Also, it'd be awesome if the lens caps stayed on so that they don't get scratched up inside the camera bag.

     And now, here are a few photos I took in 6x12 mode on Lomography 800 color film, scanned with my Epson flatbed, and did no editing to... forgive the dust.

Downtown Salt Lake City
Taken with Belair X 6-12 Jetsetter on Lomography 800 film

Salt Lake Temple

Taken with Belair X 6-12 Jetsetter on Lomography 800 film

Texas State Capitol

Taken with Belair X 6-12 Jetsetter on Lomography 800 film

Gear Check: Revolog Tesla I

     For anybody who hasn't heard about Revolog, they are a seemingly tiny Viennese company of two people handmaking 35mm film with various special effects.  I picked up a few rolls a while ago and finally got around to getting one through the camera.  The specific option I am now writing about was called "Tesla I".  The description on the website promises blue or white flashes on the photos, and the film canister let me know that the flashes would show up best on dark images, or on the dark parts of images anyway.
     I had been very excited to try this film out, and it did not disappoint!  As stated on the Revolog website they use some secret process to get the special effects on the film, and it's done by hand, so the surprise makes this a pretty exciting film to use.  You never know where the flashes will show up on the photo, and you don't know how many, how big, what color, etc.  Revolog makes several different types of effects with various ISOs and exposure counts, but this particular film was ISO 200 and 12 exposures.  I took advantage of a sunny trip to the Olympic Peninsula with a group of friends to try it out, using my trusty Pentax ME and my favorite macro lens, which I basically use for everything.  I ended up getting 15 usable photos out of this roll along with 2 megaduds.  Normally I like just to post the highlights, but in this case I'll post all 15 to show off the unpredictability of the effects.  I seem to have had some problems with the film advancing so I got some strange double exposures on the edges of a few, but I'd be more likely to blame the camera operator than the film.
     Check them out!  Feel free to click for a full-screen version.  I just learned how to do that!

     And since I'm a "save the best for last" kind of guy, here is the best photo from the roll.  Whitney reluctantly let me get a portrait of her enjoying the sun, and purely by chance she was anointed by Zeus.  Is this a sign?  Probably, yes.

     For those of you wondering about the photos being taken with the Mamiya 645 by the dapper young man, they can certainly be seen on his blog over here.  This trip was a going-away party for him.  He's  now living in NYC, and he is missed here in the NW.  

     Pros:

• The handmade element of the special effects is very exciting, and the quality seems to be very high.
• The overall look of the film stock itself is very pleasant - cool colors, similar to those expected from expired film.
• It's something your friends aren't using, and probably haven't ever heard of.  That makes you awesome to them.
• It's C-41 so it can be processed anywhere.

     Cons:

• This stuff is EXPENSIVE.  The film is pricey to begin with, and then we here in the states have to pay a little more for that whole import thing.  I buy mine here, and it ends up coming to around $1.00 per image before developing costs.  Get yourself a roll that comes in 36 exposures and you're still looking at $0.33 per image.  I have to say, though, that it's worth it for the surprise factor.  Sure, you could do this stuff in photoshop, but it wouldn't be the same.  Just buy some.

     Thanks for reading!  I'll post photos of the Volvox and Tesla II film from Revolog after I expose and develop.  It may be a little bit before I get to that, but we'll be in touch soon regardless.

Gear Check: La Sardina

     La Sardina is the newest camera from the folks at Lomography.  The name comes from the sardine can shape after which it was modeled.  A quick glance at the accompanying book, La Sardina: Seeing the World Through a Sardine Can, also mentions that the camera was modeled after a group of Chicago-made cameras, known as "candid cameras," which were being manufactured in the 1930s and 1940s.  I had seen one such camera, the Lark, on one of my favorite photo blogs, but don't know much about them myself.  The other similar cameras mentioned in the Sardina book are the Kandor Candid, the Komet, and the Kandor Jr. made by the Irwin Corp., as was the Lark, and the Sunbeam Minicam made by the company Sunbeam.  The original candids took 127 film, but of course La Sardina uses 35mm.
     La Sardina comes in a variety of designs and patterns, some with flashes, some without.  There are even a few brass coated versions.  The camera is built to accept the "Fritz the Blitz" flash, which comes with a few color filters for more experimentation.  I do not have the flash unit, nor is mine clad in brass, but I have a nice black and white pattern reminiscent of those mobiles people get for their babies, still convinced that babies spend their first months colorblind.  Mine looks like this:

La Sardina Domino Edition
(Photo via Lomography)

     Mixed reviews are all over the internet, but of course you can never really trust what somebody else thinks.  For those who say that the camera breaks easily, and there are quite a few people complaining about this, I ask: Have you never used a camera from Lomography?  Of course it breaks easily.  It's made entirely of plastic and is not meant to be dropped or jostled.  That said, it actually does feel a lot sturdier than most of their other cameras.  Every time I take one of my Diana cameras out I feel like it's as fragile as a hummingbird or something.  The Holga is another Lomo mainstay and it is a one-false-move-and-it's-done camera too.  If you, dear reader, have never used a Lomo camera, or any "toy" camera for that matter, I will say this: If you are always cautious and gentle you will not easily break these cameras.  The one exception I might make is for the notorious Diana Mini, which has a mechanism that allows one to change the size of the frame between square and half-frame.  This mechanism is constantly being slammed in reviews for its inevitably short lifespan (though mine is still intact).
     I took my Sardina out for its first roll yesterday and got the film developed hastily in order to get this post up as soon as possible today.  I already see that I have a lot of learning to do about how to use this camera, but my first mistake was really using the wrong film, which I did out of necessity (I don't have anything else at the moment).  I filled it with some late 90s expired Kodak Gold 200 film and took it around Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood.  La Sardina has a lever in front of the viewfinder allowing you to switch between bulb and normal shutter.  If you push the lever all the way to the right it cocks the shutter again to allow for multiple exposures.  Always fun.  The Sardina has the usual focus settings - distance, and close-up.  I was confused about the symbols for a short period of time, because the close-up setting has an icon that looks like a little fly.  Since I neglected the manual, I didn't really know what Lomography meant by this so I took a few shots as macro shots just in case.  Macro it is not.  The "fly" setting is for 0.6m to 1m.  The more standard "three guys standing shoulder to shoulder" icon is for anything over 1m.  Then there's the shutter button, the advance wheel, and a rewind wheel.  Nothing too exciting.  Taking a gander through the viewfinder suggests that the camera takes some pretty wide angle shots - pretty similar, as many other reviews will tell you, to the Superheadz Wide and Slim (which I love).  There are threads in the shutter button for cable release.  There is one other feature to the camera I haven't yet mentioned and that is the stowable lens.  I am told, by the manual, that the lens collapses into the body a little bit for travel.  The manual even says it will be collapsed in the package and that it's the first thing I should do, but it was not collapsed when I got it.  I gave the lens a jiggle just out of curiosity, but the resistance invoked the usual "don't force it" rule I have for my toy cameras.  Oh, the Sardina also has a lens cap that fits very well, which is nice.
     I took my 24 pictures and when it came time to rewind my film I realized that I had no idea how to accomplish this.  Normally I push the little button on the bottom to release the film, but I could find no such button.  I thought it best to double check when I got home before reefing on any knobs (see rule on resistance situations) and I guess maybe I was being overcautious.  You just start winding the rewind knob clockwise.  I unloaded the film and got the film developed.  Here are the best shots from the first roll.

      Here was my test of the multiple exposure lever.  Not the greatest use of multiple exposure, I know, but it proves that it could theoretically be awesome.

     So like I mentioned, this is not the right film for the job given the amount of light and my usual level of shakiness, but it's a good first roll.

     Pros & cons time.  Good news first, or bad news?  Feeling negative?  Ok, cons first.

     Cons:

• The viewfinder is a little small.  I can see it was done to make it look more nautical or art deco, but it's hard to get your eye positioned correctly without smashing your schnoz into the back.
• The size and shape do make it a little hard to hold without shaking, but maybe this is because I'm a relatively big guy.  This would be great to hold onto if you have kid hands, or if you're a kid.
• It's quite expensive.  The base model, with faux sardine can skin, costs $59.  The pattern model, like my domino, adds $10.  Get the sardine can with a flash and you're looking at $99.  The pattern models with a flash are, well you know, $10 more than that.  And finally there's the brass plated one with a flash.  That one's $179, and comes in what I consider to be the lamest designs.  The flash by itself costs $69 (!!!).  If you really want all 4 sardine can cameras, you can buy them as a "deluxe kit" for $249 with a flash too...

     Pros:

• It's really small & compact.  It would be easy to stow in any bag and would be great for hikes or something where you don't want any extra weight.  It does feel sturdier than the Wide and Slim, especially when it comes time to rewind the film.  It is bigger than the Wide and Slim though...
• The patterns are very attractive.  The camera has a definite art deco look and the Lomo people did a surprisingly good job of making the camera look like the originals while still keeping things fresh.  It does look even better with the flash attached.
• I like the rewind knob much better than the usual plastic rewind lever.  This will last much longer than the lever would, no doubt about that.
• It does take some nice, wide angle shots and has the great plastic lens look that we toy photographers love so much.
• I don't see much potential for light leaks, at least with the camera I ended up with, so that could be seen as either a positive or a negative.  I'll call it a positive since I don't know my camera well enough to know how to handle its specific area and intensity of leak.

     I guess that's all I have to say for now.  I definitely don't see any reason not to have one of these on the shelves and to give it plenty of use.  I will definitely be giving mine another shot soon, and will consider dropping the $70 on the flash just for fun.  That's the life of a hobby toy photographer, right?

Gear Check: NeinGrenze 5000T

     Tilt-shift photography seems to be one of those things that is easy in theory, but to get a really great image from it it takes a lot of practice and a lot of wasted shots.  I first realized tilt-shift photography was DIY-able after reading Bhautik Joshi's "Tilt-shift: A DIY Guide".  He even made his instructions available as a magazine via magcloud.com.  I keep meaning to purchase the print version to add to my bookshelf and to show my appreciation to the writer/photographer.
     Although I have experimented, with a degree of success, with building my own tiltable and shiftable lenses I did find myself attracted to the NeinGrenze 5000T when I realized that it would make a great practice camera.  It has a fixed lens that is tilted down slightly, so it is always in tilt mode.  As a film shooter, I thought using this relatively inexpensive digital camera to practice, to get a feel for how to use this type of lens, to develop an eye for scenes that work well with this effect, was a good idea.  I have had quite a fun time playing with this one.

(Photo via Photojojo)

     Likely an intentionally deceiving name considering its name translates to "no limit" in German, all signs point to a Chinese manufacture, from the plastic body to the interesting translations in the manual and on the website. It took me a little bit of open-minded reading to figure out how to change settings and use the camera in general.  For the most part, they are very simple.  You can set the date if you want that.  You can choose whether or not the date is stamped on the pictures (in case you like that crime scene photo look).  There are three flash settings: On, Off, and Auto.  Auto really makes the camera take a long time analyzing what's going on before it will shoot.  There is a focus setting on the front where you can change from distant to close-up, though I have yet to find a good close-up use for this camera.  My first shots were taken from my 37th floor hotel room while at a work conference in Las Vegas.  Here are a few examples of what tilt-shift lenses do best.

     The 5000T has a four different color modes: Standard, Vivid, Sepia, and Monochrome.  I didn't really like the sepia setting and thought it would be best to shoot in monochrome (B&W) and convert to sepia after the fact.  The vivid setting did make for some interesting shots.  Here is an example of a vivid shot:

     Greys become blues, bright colors become brighter, I guess everything happens the way you would expect on a "vivid" setting.  I have preferred the standard color setting for the most part, but this would definitely have its place somewhere.

     After taking many shots with this camera, I finally started getting a knack for shooting good "miniaturizing" pictures.  Here is one of those, taken in Smith Rock, Oregon:

     I guess the trick to this is getting above what you're shooting, but not too far above.  It really does make the trees and the little outhouse look like models.

     OK, time for my pros & cons:

     Pros:

• It's cheap
• It's digital, so you can take as many photos as you want without wasting film
• It's lightweight
• It's pretty fun

     Cons:

• It's cheap - it feels like it would break very easily.  I am obsessively gentle with all my possessions, so I'm not too worried, but I feel like it will still break before too long.
• It's not very versatile - Since the lens is fixed, you don't have any control over how much it's tilted, and you can't really shoot in portrait mode since it will then be shifted and will not have the desired effect.

     It seems I need to work on my reviewing skills, but this should answer the basic questions.  All in all, this camera has been fun and I am glad I have added it to the shelves for the learning opportunity.

Gear Check: Brinno TLC100

     When I got an email from Photojojo announcing the new arrival of the TLC100 time lapse camera I immediately thought about my upcoming trip to Smith Rock in Central Oregon.  I was pretty excited about the idea of taking this camera and setting it up to capture our rock climbing adventure.  After placing the order and eagerly waiting, the camera arrived in the mail, along with Photojojo's signature plastic dinosaur to add to my growing collection.  I opened the box and pulled this little space pod out:

(photo via Photojojo)

     The first thing that struck me was the size.  I hadn't expected it to be as big as it was, but no matter.  It seems to be very rugged.  What you see in the photo is basically all there is to it.  A lens on the front that turns to toggle between macro mode and normal mode, a start/stop button, and three LEDs to indicate power, low battery, and low memory.  Now a look at the back:

(photo via Photojojo)

     When you open the back you can see that the cover is surrounded by a foam rubber seal.  Upon inspection of the manual I see that  this guy is weatherproof, at least to some degree.  Inside there are the slots for the batteries, a slot for a flash drive (with a 2GB drive included) and a wheel for changing the interval at which the device will take a photo.  The time interval options are 1 minute, 5 minutes, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 4 hours, 24 hours, or you can choose a custom setting.  To use the custom setting, you plug the flash drive into your computer (and I'm seeing that it is not Mac friendly) and you are able to change it from 5 seconds to 12 hours.  You are also able to set the date and time, but I will cover this briefly later.

     Now for the good part!  The tests!  As soon as I got this powered on and set the time setting to 5 seconds, I put it on my trusty gorillapod, pointed it out my window, and pushed the start button.  A friendly beep let me know it understood my wishes.  I left for several hours and turned it back off upon my return.  I whipped the thumb drive out the back, plugged it in, and as soon as my PC recognized what was happening, I hit play.  I was very impressed!  The thing automatically stitched the photos together into a video and replayed the video at breakneck speed!  Then things got even realer...  As the light of our sun faded, the camera automatically adjusted.  The world got darker and darker, but still everything in the street was easily visible.  And did I mention that this was all happening in HD?!?

     Indoors, outdoors, dark, sunlight, it has worked great every time.  I have yet to test it in the rain, but being a Seattleite I will certainly get my chance.  I have had a bit of fun with the long exposures at night, so there's certainly more to explore there too!

     Now a quick mention of a few gripes, though these are far less important than the positives:

• It's pretty tough to aim.  I with there was a viewfinder for setting it up.  Even a small one...  I did waste a few videos filming the wrong part of a scene, but such is life.
• The time stamp never seems to be right.  I imagine this is because a thumb drive isn't powered, and will therefore take a snapshot of the time when it is plugged into your computer.  It will then start at that time when you start the video, but who will be taking their computer everywhere they take the camera?  That is just my theory - I have not proven it yet.  And again, hardly something to complain about.
• The ability to remove the timestamp (and "TIMELAPSE CAMERA V.1.0") from the bottom of the video would be nice.  There have been times when it is easier for me to mount this upside down and it just looks strange to see that upside-down bar at the top.

     Ok, so overall I say this is great.  A lot of fun.  I look forward to making time lapse videos of all kinds of things.  New ideas are constantly popping into my head.  Now here is a video of me and my friends climbing at the Phoenix Buttress in Smith Rock State Park.  Watch for the automatic light adjustment!

See more time lapse videos here:  Vimeo