...maybe, but like most things in life you get what you pay for. Having shot 6 different 35mm systems and 4 medium format systems over the years, I've settled on Leica and Hasselblad. Even though you can still make great photographs with any camera out there if you know how to use it, I've found that the quality of my prints are much better when I use negatives from these systems as opposed to my other ones. I think "overpriced" is the wrong term to use. I would say "more expensive".
Originally Posted by tomalophicon
Given you can get similar results with pinholes or other cameras shot wide open, I see no reason to get a lomo. I borrowed one from the store this week, shot a roll and it's nothing special. The meter on it was about 2 stops under exposed and I had very little focusing freedom along with no choice in shutter speed. A very limiting camera in my opinion and not worth wasting time and money on. If you like the "look" it gives, you can keep your $50-250 and make your own pinhole or go to a thrift shop and pick up a cheap point-and-shoot and buy some film with the money you save. Many people like the lomo look, but fail to realize that much of it is just cheap optics (as well as a lens that doesn't quite cover the film it takes) paired with cross-processing slide film.