Lomo Instant Wide Review

January 25, 2016 | Amy Davies |


The biggest problem with the Lomo Instant Wide camera is its huge size. That’s a result of the wide film, but it means that it’s quite a faff and hassle having to carry it with you, making it unlikely that you’ll want to carry it with you often.

As each Instax cassette can only produce 10 shots, you’ll find that you often need to change the film pack too, so be prepared to either limit your shooting desire, or carry lots of spare packs with you if you plan on taking quite a few images in one session.

You should perhaps also be prepared to get some stares when you’re out using this camera in public as it looks fairly strange.

If you are a fan of analogue photography, and the Lomo brand in particular, though, this is quite a fun piece of equipment to play with. Although there’s not hundreds of buttons to get to grips with, there’s enough to make it feel like you have some element of control, and you can experiment with different settings, flash, coloured filters, add-ons and so on.

However, you have to wonder how much somebody is going to be prepared to spend on something which is just a bit of fun. There’s the price of the camera itself, which is not cheap (£169 for the basic kit, or £209 for the combo kit at the time of writing), but there’s also the price of Instax wide film, which is something you’ll have to constantly invest in. That’s also not cheap, averaging out at about 70p per shot. What’s more, it’s not that easy to find in stores, so you’ll probably find you have to order it online.

Once again, Lomo has created something which is a lot of fun, but it comes at a high price premium. The images that the Lomo Instant Wide produces are decent, in the right conditions, but it may take a lot of practice and experimentation before you get something you’re really proud of. It seems more likely however that you’ll take it out for a spin a couple of times, get bored of it, and move on to something else.

3 stars

Ratings (out of 5)
Design 3
Features 3.5
Ease-of-use 3
Image quality 3
Value for money 2.5