Photo Challenge - New vs. Old Diana
Hello All -
Its often said that the vintage Dianas are a much more interesting picture that the new ones - for any particular reason that you may care to offer (though I would agree that the price of a current version automatically makes them slightly less cool)
If any of you have both a new and old version - I only have a new one - I would love to see a side by side comparison of the two - same composition, same film, same processing and then we can let the critique begin. Hell I'd even be willing to front some film costs in the name of photographic discovery.
That would be an interesting study all by itself - two (or more even) old ones and new one or two just to see the variation......
well - I don't know about "more interesting" (a matter of taste of course), but certainly different.
Originally Posted by nhemann
I get annoyed when I hear the claim that it is the same camera - same lens and so on.
It is clearly not.
I have both. Used the new one once - the old one for years.
I'll upload two images. Not the same film/processing and so on, but maybe to clarify what I am thinking...
The first is done with the new Diana+ (gold version, if you please...)
The figure in the lower right corner would never in a million years be seen so clearly on an old Diana... the new one makes much clearer images - the old one seems to have a very small person sitting in each corner; pulling in the negative/motive...
the second one is made with the old Di.
Not better (as I actually like the little figure in the first image), but different (?).
It only shows, that one need to know what one's camera can do - and what it does to a motive...
But they are different for sure.
It all depends on the background I think. I have "old" Diana images, where the distortion isn't that obvious, bu tI havn't managed to get the new Diana to do it...
Dark corners? Proberly on both...
EDIT: about the variations: true! I actually have a "version" which makes sharper images in the corners than in the middle.... Hard to do something worth wile with....;-)
Last edited by gandolfi; 03-01-2011 at 03:19 PM. Click to view previous post history.
this thread "died" quickly....
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Yeah -- the side-by-side testing idea did not pan out. But either here or in the imaging sharing thread, an alternate would just be to post Diana images (no other plastic camera type) and just label them as either from the original Diana or the new Diana. After awhile, we would get a much better picture of the differences.
Alex and Calder, North Jetty -- scanned platinum print
Film: Expired Tech Pan in original Diana camera (double exposure)
Peace: scanned silver print
Film: Some type of expired film in original Diana camera (on World Toy Camera Day)
At least with LF landscape, a bad day of photography can still be a good day of exercise.
Hi guys - Yeah, I was a little surprised at the lack of interest in the topic...I thought it was a pretty cool idea myself :-)
I'm still game to do some real "studies" if anybody is interested...
go for it..
Originally Posted by nhemann
I've never shot either but am always interested in interesting imagery.
But isn't that part of the, ahem, charm of the original? You never really know what you're going to get. It seems to me that by introducing some minimal level of quality control to the manufacturing, you remove some of that quirkiness. I suppose that fits in with selling them at places like Urban Outfitters, where you go if you want a little bit of quirkiness, but not too much. The quirkiness is reducing to a predictable effect.
Originally Posted by chriscrawfordphoto
"People get bumped off." -- Weegee
The problem is that I don't personally own an old Diana, only a new one. Now if somebody wanted to lend me a vintage lady or two - I'm a very trustworthy fellow, btw - I would be more than happy to perform this test for the benefit of us all.