First Roll: Lomography MC-A – Kodak Ultramax 400.

First Roll: Lomography MC-A – Kodak Ultramax 400.

Subtitle: First thoughts and sample images.

I did not even bother with a “So…” post about the Lomography MC-A.

Why?

I am glad I imagined that you asked.

My “So…” posts are meant to explain why a bit of kit does not tickle my fancy. Occasionally, these will backfire spectacularly, and I will later fold like a cheap tent and pick the kit up anyway. I quickly surmised that I had little defense against the MC-A.

It was a direct hit on my inner camera nerd.

Short version assessment.

A Contax T2…

This Old Camera: The mighty little Contax T2 (Update)

…with a warranty, manual wind, and rewind.

Don’t believe me?

In my post about the Rollei 35AF…

Rollei 35AF Review: My “Shut Up & Take My Money!” Camera.

…I made the same comparison. I still stand by that assertion, but the MC-A is an even closer hit on the T2. To make my point, I will update the same table from that 35AF post.

	Contax T2	Rollei 35AF	Lomography MC-A
Focal length	38mm	35mm	32mm
Max Aperture	f/2.8	f/2.8	f/2.8
Built in flash	Yes	Yes	Yes.
Focus	AF	AF	AF
Top shutter speed	1/500s	1/500s	1/500s
Auto Exposure	Yes	Yes	Yes
Exposure Compensation	Yes	Yes	Yes

So a match for both. Why do I say that the MC-A is a closer hit? Welp.

For starters, there is the lens that juts out when powered up, revealing the aperture dial.

Above that, unlike the 35AF that was modeled after its much more rudimentary by design namesake feature-wise,…

… the form factor of the MC-A is not that far off from the T2.

Now that I think about the MC-A also reminds me of the point and shoot that put the T2 on a trailer.

This Old Camera: Konica C35 AF2

In fact… the more I think about it, the MC-A is a perfect mash-up of these two cameras.

Optically similar enough (Scoff if you will, but the Hexanon lens of the C35 AF2 gave up nothing to the ZEISS lens on the T2.)…

…concerns about the aging automation of the T2 also played a part in my trading it on. And similar to the C35 AF2, the MC-A takes one failure point off the table with manual wind and rewind… And adds a warranty. Now that I think about it, with the elevated build and feel, the MC-A is sort of the T2-ification of a C35 AF2… with a warranty.

If I am honest, what pleasantly surprised me most about the MC-A had nothing to do with its spec sheet or the images it creates.

Build and feel.

New film cameras often look the part <cough> Rollei 35AF and Pentax 17 <cough>, but the (plasticky) feel and (lack of heft) heft will leave a bit to be desired. Switchgear is serviceable but will also not win any prizes. Not here.

The MC-A is a brick of a thing. Nice heft while the materials feel top-notch. Dials click decisively, and everything feels first-rate. As much as I like the 17 and 35AF, you cannot say the same for either.

Wait…

This was supposed to be a first thoughts post with pictures and I have shared a lot of thoughts. So let me pivot to the pictures, and I will save further bluster for future posts.

The pics.

Thoughts…

I have a mess of them.

But I will close this post here and follow up on them in future posts.

Except this.

Very intuitive camera to use. I had not looked at the manual at all for this first roll. Grabbed the camera out of the door and figured it out.

Except for the top shutter speed being 1/250s when the aperture is set to f/2.8 and having no clue how to properly use the MX multi exposure button, everything else worked as one would expect.

A proper analog therapy distraction from the world being on fire.

If this camera interests you, check back as I expect there will be many more posts to come.

Happy capturing.

-ELW