Polaroid announces its smallest-ever analog instant camera

Shawn Knight

Posts: 13,160   +132
Staff member
Editor's take: Niche cameras like the Polaroid Go can be fantastic teaching tools. Unlike digital cameras and smartphones with "unlimited" storage, film-based cameras force the photographer to consider every shot before depressing the shutter button as each print comes at a cost.

Polaroid has put its modern instant camera on a diet.

The new Polaroid Go is described as the smallest analog instant camera in the world. At just 4.1 inches long, 3.3 inches wide and 2.4 inches tall and tipping the scales at 0.53 pounds (sans film pack), I tend to believe them.

The camera comes in a classic white colorway, shipping with a 750mAh lithium-ion battery that’ll reportedly get you through 15 film packs before needing to be recharged over USB. It features a variable shutter speed between 1/125 and 30 seconds and has a self-timer, selfie mirror, dynamic flash and double exposure capability.

Polaroid said the development time is between 10-15 minutes, not exactly what I’d call truly “instant,” but you get the point. Images are printed on a classic white frame with an actual image area of 1.851 inches x 1.811 inches.

The Polaroid Go carries an MSRP of $99.99 and is available to pre-order today directly from Polaroid ahead of its April 27 launch. A starter pack, which includes a double pack of film (16 photos per double pack), will set you back $114.99. Additional packs of film will sell for around $20, we’re told.

Permalink to story.

 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,024   +3,154
It still amazes me that anyone would buy an instant camera these days.... and the fact that the only camera company that is even coming close to profitability is Sony probably means that not that many do...

When you can pack just as good (or better) of a camera in your phone, there's no real need for anything else unless you're a pro - and then you get an SLR or other high-end camera - not this POS.

If you MUST print (almost no one does for casual photos anymore), colour printers are cheap...
 

Mister_K

Posts: 2,062   +766
It still amazes me that anyone would buy an instant camera these days.... and the fact that the only camera company that is even coming close to profitability is Sony probably means that not that many do...

When you can pack just as good (or better) of a camera in your phone, there's no real need for anything else unless you're a pro - and then you get an SLR or other high-end camera - not this POS.

If you MUST print (almost no one does for casual photos anymore), colour printers are cheap...

Pretty sure you can get portable printers for your phone too the side of this Polaroid. I have no idea what the image coming out of this looks like so maybe that might be the reason people get it too. They want that "vintage" feel as smart phones over process the **** out of photos.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,433   +2,315
It still amazes me that anyone would buy an instant camera these days.... and the fact that the only camera company that is even coming close to profitability is Sony probably means that not that many do...

When you can pack just as good (or better) of a camera in your phone, there's no real need for anything else unless you're a pro - and then you get an SLR or other high-end camera - not this POS.

If you MUST print (almost no one does for casual photos anymore), colour printers are cheap...
It‘s perfect for photos that you don‘t want on a device that is or can be connected to the net. Analog has its advantages...
 

Ludak021

Posts: 438   +298
It‘s perfect for photos that you don‘t want on a device that is or can be connected to the net. Analog has its advantages...

Not disagreeing with your point, just adding that:
- mobile phones don't have to be online at all for most basic applications, such as making phone calls, sms, mms, camera etc.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,024   +3,154
It‘s perfect for photos that you don‘t want on a device that is or can be connected to the net. Analog has its advantages...
Why wouldn’t you want your photos on a device? You can print from a device pretty easily... what advantages?
 

Irata

Posts: 1,433   +2,315
Why wouldn’t you want your photos on a device? You can print from a device pretty easily... what advantages?
I once told my niece to treat anything stored on an internet connected device (or worse stored online) as something everyone can potentially see.
So self developing analog is great for photos you don‘t want most other people to see.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,433   +2,315
Not disagreeing with your point, just adding that:
- mobile phones don't have to be online at all for most basic applications, such as making phone calls, sms, mms, camera etc.
True, but feature phones usually have a very small display and an offline smartphone is not that useful.
 

Ludak021

Posts: 438   +298
True, but feature phones usually have a very small display and an offline smartphone is not that useful.
True, but it can take photos, and still more useful than that kodak pos polaroid that you would have to carry alongside your smartphone, that already has a camera..
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,024   +3,154
I once told my niece to treat anything stored on an internet connected device (or worse stored online) as something everyone can potentially see.
So self developing analog is great for photos you don‘t want most other people to see.
And for an 8-year-old, that makes sense... but hopefully an adult (or reasonably educated child) knows how to secure their photos on a smartphone...
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,024   +3,154
True, but feature phones usually have a very small display and an offline smartphone is not that useful.
Not much smaller than the size of the photos that the Poloroid prints... and an offline smartphone is actually VERY useful... I always keep my previous smartphone as a camera/ipod once I buy a new one.... also works as a decent portable HD in a pinch....
 

kapital98

Posts: 351   +293
Perfect for passport size photos but the film prices seem horrible.

This! I've bought these type of cameras as gifts for friends & relatives. The cameras are really fun to use for parties & have a big 'nostalgia factor'. As a person who grew up with 'real' polaroids -- these are nice throwbacks (like playing records on vinyl).

But... the price of film is horrible. For every camera of this type. Just like it was horrible for the old polaroids (after adjusting for inflation). Digital photography has vastly superior quality & no cost per image. The 'nostalgia factor' rarely takes into account all the reasons why analog tech is no longer used (whether it's vinyl, developing film, etc...)
 

Irata

Posts: 1,433   +2,315
And for an 8-year-old, that makes sense... but hopefully an adult (or reasonably educated child) knows how to secure their photos on a smartphone...
Judging by the various cloud leaks affecting celebrities, I guess not. Plus you‘d be surprised, how many people just use their device, not worrying about hard core security. I‘d say the majority.

True, but it can take photos, and still more useful than that kodak pos polaroid that you would have to carry alongside your smartphone, that already has a camera..
Or, you could just keep it at home or take it with you when needed for those special pictures.

Plus, it‘s a fun gadget when you want to take pictures and instantly give someone the prints. Beats carrying around a portable photo printer.

I do agree that it‘s not for everyone.
 

Danny101

Posts: 1,623   +697
Not disagreeing with your point, just adding that:
- mobile phones don't have to be online at all for most basic applications, such as making phone calls, sms, mms, camera etc.
I wish I can find a notepad app that doesn't ask to be online. They can't seem to do simple anymore.
 
Last edited: