3 ms·

I have to concur with this. I tried the Impossible polaroid film a few years ago and it's not very good compared to the original polaroid film and the Instax fi

I have to concur with this. I tried the Impossible polaroid film a few years ago and it's not very good compared to the original polaroid film and the Instax film. I use the Instax mini now and it's a great little instant camera.

jacobush 8y ago
Impossible changed recipes several times, and while I hear that the old Polaroid had different (better) colors back in the day, the recipe Polaroid is using now (the "originals" line) is much improved both in development speed and color rendition from what they sold under the Impossible brand. I myself think that the colors of the Instax line are fantastic, but if you want a larger image, Polaroid is yet again the place to go.
- tecleandor 8y ago
  Have you tried Instax Wide ? The camera is more expensive than the mini but the film price is quite similar to the mini, and of course, way cheaper than Polaroid. Polaroid runs about 2USD a picture (being 8 pictures by cartridge). Instax Wide, by its B&H price, is around 0.9USD a picture. I think Polaroid image size is 3.1 by 3.1 inches Instax wide is 3.9 by 2.4 inches
  - giobox 8y ago
    I’d bet good money Instax Wide isn’t long for this world. It has nowhere close to the popularity of the Instax mini line and is supported by just one not particularly popular Fuji model in their current lineup of Instax cameras. Instax Wide camera models see updates at a glacial pace compared to the Mini models too. Instax Mini film can be bought in a ludicrous number of physical retailers (considering the overwhelming ubiquity of digital photography now) - Target, Michaels, Urban Outfitters etc. Instax Wide not so much, another indicator of it’s increasingly niche little market. I have the latest Fuji Instax Wide model given to me as a gift and it’s really not difficult to see why Mini is so much more popular - it’s significantly more expensive and much bulkier than the cute little mini models. I used it three times and then left it in a cupboard, it’s simply too large to carry around regularly. Finally I’d argue the difference between 3.1 inches of image height on a Polaroid and the 2.4 of the Instax Wide feels much more different in person than the numbers alone might suggest. For me personally, I don’t think it’s a nice substitute for the look and feel of the traditional Poloroid format.

jacobush 8y ago

Impossible changed recipes several times, and while I hear that the old Polaroid had different (better) colors back in the day, the recipe Polaroid is using now (the "originals" line) is much improved both in development speed and color rendition from what they sold under the Impossible brand. I myself think that the colors of the Instax line are fantastic, but if you want a larger image, Polaroid is yet again the place to go.

tecleandor 8y ago
Have you tried Instax Wide ? The camera is more expensive than the mini but the film price is quite similar to the mini, and of course, way cheaper than Polaroid. Polaroid runs about 2USD a picture (being 8 pictures by cartridge). Instax Wide, by its B&H price, is around 0.9USD a picture. I think Polaroid image size is 3.1 by 3.1 inches Instax wide is 3.9 by 2.4 inches
- giobox 8y ago
  I’d bet good money Instax Wide isn’t long for this world. It has nowhere close to the popularity of the Instax mini line and is supported by just one not particularly popular Fuji model in their current lineup of Instax cameras. Instax Wide camera models see updates at a glacial pace compared to the Mini models too. Instax Mini film can be bought in a ludicrous number of physical retailers (considering the overwhelming ubiquity of digital photography now) - Target, Michaels, Urban Outfitters etc. Instax Wide not so much, another indicator of it’s increasingly niche little market. I have the latest Fuji Instax Wide model given to me as a gift and it’s really not difficult to see why Mini is so much more popular - it’s significantly more expensive and much bulkier than the cute little mini models. I used it three times and then left it in a cupboard, it’s simply too large to carry around regularly. Finally I’d argue the difference between 3.1 inches of image height on a Polaroid and the 2.4 of the Instax Wide feels much more different in person than the numbers alone might suggest. For me personally, I don’t think it’s a nice substitute for the look and feel of the traditional Poloroid format.