I had varying results with the outdoor settings. The only difference is a damping-down of the flash (used indoors, the 'clear' setting gave a very moody-looking dark shot). I took a picture of a willing model in full morning sunlight on the 'fine' setting and found he almost disappeared into the white wall background.
A pound coin in the centre gives an indication of the photo size
Click for a larger image
I got a better result with the 'cloudy' setting - same model by the same wall the next day, when it was overcast. But there was still a lot of bleaching in evidence. There isn't much to choose between the 'fine' and 'clear' settings - the former is for 'bright' conditions, says the manual, and the latter for 'very bright'. It seems superfluous to have both, and I would have been happy enough with just three settings - indoor, cloudy, and bright.
The camera by its nature requires a lot of trial and error, but I'd suggest night shots are going to have the most consistent results while outdoor will be more hit-and-miss. Results are good whether you take vertical or horizontal shots (vertical is the default), and focus is always good; close-ups don't come out so well (and you run the risk of blinding your subject - risky when your subject is a large, irritated dog), but this will surely provide plenty opportunity for comedy.
I got good results in general from a trip to a festival, where the appearance of the 300 was always greeted by a chorus of "oh, I thought they'd stopped making them". To say it's a conversation piece is an understatement. A shot of a gig taken in a shady tent with the indoor setting came out well, and one shot of some festival-goers on the same setting in a very dark tent later came out perfectly.
A couple of daytime shots proved that the fine and clear settings don't always lead to a bleachfest if you avoid full sunlight (one shot taken from the top of a ferris wheel in the middle of the day was unusable because of this). And yes, the Thelma & Louise-style arm's-length self-portrait is possible too.
Works brilliantly in very low light
Click for a larger image
The counter did let me down once, cheerfully informing me I had six shots left when in fact the film was spent, necessitating a lot of bothersome clicking before I could change it. It may be best not to rely on it, and instead remember to count to ten - although it worked fine for the second film I used.
Next page: Individual Sample Images
COMMENTS
No.... what I am saying is......
that if you have, say £50 to spend on a camera, a 35mm camera will produce better quality pictures than a £50 digi.
I am not talking about TCO [total cost of ownership] or digitals ability to share / email / upload etc. But, when you look at the capability of film, the depth and resolution you get, the ability to capture detail almost limitless zoom, digital is not as good as film.
For a lot of people, digital is /fine/, but that does not negate the fact that film is superior to digital.
inkjet
What they need to do is combine a digital camera with a built in inkjet printer. That way you can select which photos to print, and have digital photos for adding to facebook, etc. Plus even with the high cost of inkjet inks, it would be vastly cheaper per print.
Print Life?
I've had a polaroid in the past, always seemed expensive compared to 35mm and some of the prints died after 5 years or so, like the memory of the event they fade away into nothing. Then again Mum has prints of me as a child so they can last in some cases (and some I wish would fade from the "stop mum showing old photo's of me" point of view.)
That said this seems like an Retro version of facebook. Take pictures of mates whilst drunk, pass around a week later. No annoying data retention and very little chance for your boss to "accidentially" end up seeing how bad you were.
Still a lot of money per print for what it is though,
As I remember
the only use anyone put a Polaroid to was for taking naughty pictures with your girlfriend. The kind you couldn't send to the developers. The 70's equivalent of sexting.
They could offer that as a special firmware version
Review and delete buttons disabled, no frozen image in the display after you've taken a pic, no "best shot selector" option, 36 pics max (or 12 for the real pro) after which the camera simply goes into standby for a minute or so, and maybe 4 frames/sec max in motordrive mode.
