Quote Originally Posted by eric
Holgas...been using it since 1990 and I'm tired of it. Images are starting to look really the same from all the Holga stuff I've been seing but I'd like to see more Diana shots. They seem to have a more etheral look to it.
Whose images are starting to look the same? Yours? Mine? I agree that there are way too many photogs who rely on the Holga (or Diana or fisheye or pinhole) as a device and that after a while, all such photos (not just the Holga ones) eventually start to look the same. The good ones, however, will transcend the effects of the equipment used and are effective anyway. Having seen so many LF studio shots of nudes I have certainly grown weary of them, but that doesn't mean that I'm not wowed by Gandolfi's work. Are you of the opinion that an interesting image cannot be made with certain pieces of equipment, in this case the Holga?

I would never argue that a Holga and a Diana are the same. They are not. But they are more alike than either is like a Hassy. To draw the between them there seems a fine distinction to me, akin to having a LF print exchange, but only permitting those cameras which have front and back movements. A legitimate distinction, but to me, an arbitrary one.