The analog resurgence has been one of the biggest tech trends of 2026 after making a slow comeback last year.

Whether you’ve made the switch from a smartwatch to a Casio or you’re taking a trip down memory lane with your old iPod, more users are reverting to analog devices to escape brain-rotting algorithms and indulge in nostalgia. The same goes for the best compact cameras — and Lola is one of the next emerging brands to embrace this simplicity.

In October 2024, Lola launched its flagship $109/ £79/ AU$159 camera, a compact device that leans into early Y2K digital photography but with smartphone connectivity features. The camera was a response to the rising lo-fi tech craze, gaining exponential traction among Gen-Z users, and I grew increasingly curious.

Retro tech has become quite a prominent theme in my life at the moment. Recently I ditched Spotify and spent some time with the Miko cassette player by Gadhouse, but coming across the Lola camera online unlocked memories of my childhood I’d completely forgotten about.

I haven’t used a digital camera for the best part of 15 years, so it was time for a reunion.

A tiny camera, but a big first impression

For the past few weeks, the Lola camera has lived inside my everyday bag, and I used it at every opportunity I could — but I will never forget how I felt when I first took it out of the box.

First of all, the camera is absolutely tiny with dimensions of 3.75" x 0.75" x 2.25" and a weight of 0.5lbs (approximately 225 grams). I can’t remember if that’s always been the standard size for a digital camera, but I felt like a giant holding it in my hands. That said, it’s a handy pocket-sized device with a simple design to go with it.

Just like your average point-and-shoot camera, Lola has a built-in flash, supports SD cards, and packs an array of 19 fun effects, as well as 9 scene modes including Party, Beach, Night, & Portrait. One of the biggest differences is its USB-C charging port, which also comes in handy for transferring images to your smartphone.

Lola has numerous editions of its digital camera, including a cute Betty Boop-themed version and one in a clear shell finish that lets you see the inner workings of the camera. I quite like the stripped-back standard silver version because it’s minimal, but can still turn heads.

Then it was time to put the pedal to the metal.

Classic, but with a twist

Overall, Lola is a camera that’s bound to satisfy casual users who want to revert to a compact smartphone alternative for snapping images and creating memories. It’s great for taking photos to fill up a scrapbook or for your next Instagram photo dump, but it’s not one for established photographers who want crisp results. If anything, it’s for those who want to embrace imperfection.

Going into it, I knew that it wasn’t going to give picture-perfect results like professional cameras, but I developed a quick admiration for it as a beginner-friendly device. While its 8MP resolution is low by modern standards, it’s more than enough in this case, producing clear-looking images with a soft lo-fi finish that looks more authentic than a retro smartphone app filter — particularly for outdoor shots.

I found taking photos outside much easier than taking photos indoors, and for the most part, the camera adapts very well to natural environments. In some cases, however, it can be quite sensitive to sunlight, resulting in harsh, overexposed spills in the images.

This can be fixed with a few minor tweaks in the settings, and they don’t require a lot of photography knowledge. All I did was bring the exposure down to -1, increase the ISO to 100, and enable the Daylight preset in the White Balance setting. You can see the difference it made in the images below.

While these amendments made a big difference, it does mean that some parts of your image will appear darker than others in order to balance out the harshness of the light. In the second image, you can see the footpath and trees are slightly darker, but the grass patch in the background isn’t as overexposed, so for me it’s not too much of a setback.

But another feature that caught my eye was Lola’s surprising x20 digital zoom, which goes further than you think. Of course, the further you zoom in, the more crunchy your image will turn out, but zooming roughly halfway to two-thirds in is great for spotlighting the finer details of architecture and infrastructure, or for framing subjects in an entirely different way.

Lola takes everything you loved about your 2006 digital camera and puts it back into a refreshed device, but this is the 2020s, and the company is fully aware of your social media-posting intentions. This is where the SD card adapter comes in handy.

One of the biggest pain points I found with digital cameras 15 years ago was the importing process, which usually required a laptop or computer to transfer your images, since smartphones weren't as advanced as they are now. Admittedly, I was probably just too lazy to do this.

With the Lola camera, all you have to do is insert the SD card into the adapter, which goes into your phone’s charging port. You can then select the images you want to import right from your camera roll, and they’re imported in seconds, making it a lot easier to share them with your friends. For me, this was the icing on the cake.

Digital photography is timeless

There’s a handful of elements with the Lola camera that could do with some improvement (mainly its sensitivity), but for a $100 digital camera I think it has solid value for casual users. But beyond that, reverting to a digital camera removed the obsession with the finer details, evoking a deeper appreciation for being in the moment.

Sure, you can add effects and filters on the camera, but you can’t fine-tune individual settings such as saturation, contrast, shadows, and highlights on the device itself. That way, you have no choice but to embrace the realness and humanity of capturing what's before you.

I recently attended a bridal fitting for one of my closest friends, and instead of using my phone, I captured everything with Lola (I haven’t shared the images for obvious reasons). Though these photos have since been imported to my iPhone gallery, they stand out differently because I know how they were taken, and I look back at them filled with the same feelings of excitement from that day.

Simple, effective, and raw at its core, I’m going forward with a new attitude to memory-making. For some reason, somehow you remember the joy of each moment more vividly.

• Reto Project has released a new Kodak-branded film camera, the Kodak EC35
• It’s a total point-and-shoot, with focus and all settings fixed
• However, it features a stylish sliding lens cover, in the style of the Olympus Mju from the early 1990s

A new Kodak film point-and-shoot camera has just been announced. And the reason for the tortured use of the passive voice in the previous sentence is that it isn’t actually made by Kodak.

The Kodak EC35 is a 35mm film camera made by Reto Project, a company that licenses the Kodak name to produce a range of both analog and digital cameras. While my personal favorite is the Kodak Snapic A1, a sleek little 35mm film, its most popular release by a considerable margin has been the little digital keychain camera, the Kodak Charmera.

Reto generally produces simple point-and-shoots, and the Kodak EC35 is exactly that. It takes 35mm film, and all its settings are fixed, with a 1/100sec shutter speed and f/10 aperture. The lens is fixed-focus — there isn’t even the option to switch from near to far focus like there was on the Snapic A1 — and is a 25mm optic. The camera also has a built-in flash.

What really caught my attention about this camera, however, is its design. Specifically, the fact that it has a gorgeously curved sliding lens cover that protects the optic when it’s not in use. It’s a chip off the Olympus film camera block — the iconic Olympus Mju immediately comes to mind.

All style, some substance

While I tend to associate sliding lens covers with the Olympus XA2 that’s sitting on my desk as I write this, with the curved design of its plastic body, the Kodak EC35 is pretty clearly meant to evoke the look and feel of the Mju.

And I also like the idea of having a lens cover in a practical sense — not just aesthetic! A lot of these cheap film compacts, like the Snapic A1, the Ektar H35N, etc, don’t have a lens cap or lens protection of any kind, meaning it’s easy for the lens to get dirty, dusty or bashed around. The cover also doubles as a shutter lock, meaning that the camera won't end up accidentally firing off shots while it's in your bag.

The EC35 is being released in an attractive range of colorways: Midnight Black, Vanilla White, Butter Yellow, Lavender, Powder Blue, Blush Pink and Avocado Green. I’m normally ‘give me black or give me death’ when it comes to cameras, but I’ll admit, that yellow version is pretty striking.

The EC35 is powered by a single AA battery (which is only needed for the flash), and weighs a pleasingly slender 102g. It’s available on its own for $34.99 / £35.99 (about AU$50) or in a bundle with a 24-shot roll of bright and colorful Kodak Ultramax 400 for $44.99 / £45.99 (about AU$65).

Panasonic made quite a splash when it announced the Lumix L10 at its Lumix 25th anniversary event in May this year. I called it 'Panasonic's prettiest Lumix in years', and many tech journalists, myself included, have compared it to the viral Fujifilm X100VI.

These are two premium compact cameras with retro design and high-end features, but both take a different swing at the format. For example, the Lumix L10 packs a 20MP Micro Four Thirds sensor and 24-75mm f/1.7-2.8 lens, while the X100VI shoots 40MP stills with an APS-C sensor and fixed 35mm f/2 lens.

I've already compared the two based on specs and my extensive experience with each camera separately in my Lumix L10 vs X100 VI article. But I was keen to see which one I personally prefer based on using the cameras side by side — it had been a while since I last used the X100 VI.

So, with my loan samples in hand, I headed out, taking the same photos with each camera in a variety of scenarios, including travelling, commuting and weekends exploring. Objectively, each camera has its practical advantages over the other, but there was one camera that truly gave me the feels...

The head

If I'm to make a list of pros and cons based on features and specifications, then each model has distinct advantages over the other.

In favor of the X100VI: its 35mm f/2 prime lens quality, 40MP resolution (which is twice that of the Lumix L10), in-body image stabilization, quicker start-up time, fancier viewfinder, and its next-level retro aesthetics.

There's plenty going for the Lumix L10, mind you: its versatile 3.1x optical zoom lens, superior battery life, Real Time LUTs profiles (which for me outdo Fujifilm's film simulations), superior burst shooting speeds, snappier autofocus, vari-angle screen, plus its video performance has the edge. Oh, and it costs less — depending on which region you live in, the price difference can be pretty sizable.

Speaking objectively, I believe I'd get more use from the Lumix L10, especially the telephoto end of its 24-75mm f1.7 to f/2.8 lens. It is overall a more versatile camera. However, objectivity goes out the window when considering creative tools such as cameras for personal use.

We can talk features all day, but you really need to get a feel for a camera, and the only way to do that is to get properly hands-on, which is exactly what I did with the L10 and X100VI side by side. And in doing this direct comparison, a favorite quickly emerged.

The heart

Rather than getting bogged down in features and specifications, I'm going to articulate what it felt like to use each camera, because honestly that's more important in the long run, especially for this kind of premium compact camera designed for personal, daily use. (My workhorse mirrorless camera is another matter — it's there to do a job efficiently and reliably.)

I'm going to come right out and say it — I enjoyed the X100 VI more. Aesthetically, it has the edge: both cameras are retro, but the X100 VI is next-level with its manual exposure dials and hybrid viewfinder. With the two slung over my shoulder, it was the X100VI that I wanted to reach for first.

When I did, the X100 VI required more effort to master; there's more involvement in operating the exposure controls and such, which I actually preferred as a serious photographer. I liked how much more premium it felt in the hand too: the weightiness, the dampened shutter button...the X100VI just felt... better.

I also appreciated its quicker start-up time, and liked how much more compact its prime lens is. The hybrid viewfinder was more enjoyable too, especially since I'm in the small camp of photographers who genuinely enjoy the optical viewfinder.

Sure, I'd rather that autofocus was as good as the Lumix L10's. And for a variety of scenarios, wished that I could zoom the lens. And it's not like I didn't get any feeling with the Lumix L10 — how its lens handles in particular is a delight. But for feeling alone, and that sense of pursuing a craft, the X100VI captured my heart all over again.

Lumix L10 vs Fujfilm X100VI: the images

A collection of Panasonic Lumix L10 pictures. I have matched the Fujifilm X100VI's 35mm focal length in most of these samples, but I have also included some at different focal lengths to show how versatile it can be.

And the comparisons with the Fujifilm X100VI. For both cameras, I set the color profile to the standard setting, but in reality I would be playing around with various looks and making selective exposure adjustments.

How a camera handles is a major part of the equation — but the resulting images need to be easy on the eye too.

With wildly different sensor sizes, number of pixels, and types of lens, it's tough to pick one camera over the other, plus some assumptions about image quality need to go out the window.

For one, despite having the smaller sensor, the Lumix L10 actually has bigger pixels and light-gathering potential, so don't assume that the X100VI is better in low light. Also, beyond sensor size and pixels, the Lumix L10's autofocus is overall more reliable, so you're more likely to get a sharp image in the first place, depending on the scenario and camera settings.

But for direct comparisons, as in matching the X100VI's 35mm f/2 lens with the Lumix L10 as close as possible (35mm f/2.3), I think what pleased me the most overall is the X100VI's superior control over depth of field.

When I took street portraits at 35mm, the X100VI's images were easier on the eye. I also liked having 40MP to play with and the greater level of detail in the pictures. The X100VI was also less susceptible to lens flare.

That said, the Lumix L10 has that zoom lens versatility, and when set to 75mm and f/2.8, it is very capable of shallow depth of field portraiture too, with a greater compression effect that I prefer.

As for color, I didn't have a strong enough feeling scouring my images to recommend one camera over the other, though the Lumix L10 Real Time LUTs profiles are more versatile.

Conclusion

If you're considering the Lumix L10 or the Fujifilm X100VI, then the choice is tough, and, in truth, you'll be happy with either model! They are two of the best premium compact cameras, with a string of unique advantages over the other.

For me, however, the decision goes beyond specifications and features, and to an underlying feeling that I would get more joy in using the X100VI regularly than I would with the Lumix L10, even though the L10 is more practical. My head says Panasonic Lumix L10, my heart says Fujifilm X100VI.

• Lomography has released a new version of its ‘Simple Use’ disposable-style film camera
• It’s half-frame, meaning it exposes half a frame of 35mm film at a time to effectively double the shot count
• It comes pre-loaded with a roll of film, in a choice of color or black & white

Many people are put off trying out film photography because they perceive it to be too complicated. Lomography tries to take some of that mystique out with its disposable-style ‘Simple Use’ cameras — and today, the analog specialists have announced the new Half-frame Simple Use Reloadable Film Camera, which doubles your shot count from a standard roll of 35mm film.

The name ‘half-frame’ refers to the fact that the camera only exposes half a frame of 35mm film at a time, cutting the standard horizontal 36mm x 24mm frame into two shots with rough dimensions of 18 x 24mm. This means that while your shots are smaller, you get a heck of lot more of them — a standard 36-shot roll of film could produce around 72 discrete images when run through the Half-frame Simple Use Reloadable Film Camera.

Half-frame cameras aren’t new. In fact, they’ve been around since the 1960s, with Japanese manufacturers first offering them as a cost-saving alternative to standard 35mm film cameras. We’ve also seen more recent entries in the genre, such as the Kodak Ektar H35N. They tend to be small, cheap and straightforward.

However, the Lomography Half-frame Simple Use Reloadable Film Camera sets itself apart by taking all steps possible to be incredibly, mind-bogglingly easy to use. This is the definition of an idiot-proof camera, one that basically anyone could pick up and use, and for this reason it might just be the ideal gateway drug for anyone who’s been tempted to try film photography.

Couldn’t be simpler

The Simple Use cameras are often described as ‘disposable-style’. This means they operate just like the kinds of disposable cameras that everybody used to bring on trips and then drop off to get developed. There’s no means of setting shutter speed or aperture — both are fixed — and the lens is completely fixed focus. The only control other than the shutter release is the flash, which is activated via the unmistakable lightning-bolt button on the front.

The Half-frame Simple Use camera also comes pre-loaded, meaning it’s completely ready to go out of the box. You have a choice of two options — getting one pre-loaded with LomoChrome Classicolor, or with Lomography Lady Grey monochrome film. Both of these stocks have an ISO rating of 400, meaning they’re good all-rounders for most lighting situations. They do only come in rolls of 20 however, which is quite small for a roll of 35mm. But remember, on half-frame, that works out to about 40 shots.

Once you’ve rattled through your shots, you can rewind using the dial on top to extract your film. In another quite sweet bit of idiot-proofing, the camera body is covered in stickers and labels to remind you to rewind before opening the rear door — indeed, you have to physically remove two of these stickers before opening the door is even possible.

With a plastic lens and fixed settings, this isn’t a camera that’s going to create images of stunning quality — even before you factor in that your shots will be half the size of normal 35mm frames. However, I think its simplicity means it could be a fantastic choice for anyone who has always wanted to shoot film but has found the process intimidating. And with a low asking price of $29.90 / £21.90 / AU$37.90 for the B&W version, or $34.90 / £24.90 / AU$44.90 for the color, you don’t have a lot to lose by giving it a try.

You might also like

• Why is a Kodak point-and-shoot with worse picture quality than your phone the best-selling camera year after year?
• Godox's $29 camera also works as a light meter — as a film photographer, I'm buying
• Polaroid vs Instax: I’m an instant camera addict and I’m team Polaroid all the way — here’s why

• Kodak PixPro FZ45 and FZ55 top best-selling lists in multiple regions
• They are currently the most popular models at Amazon US and elsewhere
• Prices start from as little as $100 / £90 / AU$145

Camera fans might expect Sony or Canon to top the best-selling charts, but for outright popularity beyond various high-end categories, you'll have to set your sights a little lower, to humble point-and-shoots.

Over recent years, two particularly cheap digital compact cameras have been flying off Amazon US shelves, and from other retailers across the world such as Yodobashi Camera in Japan. They are the Kodak PixPro FZ55 (pictured above) and PixPro FZ45. Other models such as the waterproof PixPro WPZ2 are also in the picture.

The major reason why these PixPro models are so popular is pretty obvious — you'll struggle to find another digital camera with genuine 4x optical zoom for less than the PixPro FZ45's approximate price of $100 / £90 / AU$145. Or one with a 5x optical zoom and built-in rechargeable lithium-ion battery that costs less than the PixPro FZ55.

Both pocketable models shoot 16MP stills and HD video onto SD card, and come in a range of colorways, including black, white, blue and pink.

These cameras are no mere trend — they have dominated best-selling lists month after month, year after year, just when we thought that such cheap cameras had had been replaced by camera phones. So what's really going on here?

A surprising truth behind the name, and shopping habits

In addition to the low price point and immediate availability of these PixPro models, the trust in the Kodak name has to be a factor for casual buyers. After all, Kodak is one of the most recognizable names in photography, from its roots in making popular camera film through to pioneering digital camera tech.

However, there's something that you might not know about Kodak today. The original Kodak — Eastman Kodak, which dates back 138 years — stopped its production lines of consumer digital cameras long ago, and due to crippling debts it may not survive at all.

Today, Kodak is instead one of a string of legendary photography brands (alongside Yashica, Rollei, Agfa, Minolta and more), who have licensed their names to third-parties, who are largely manufacturing low-cost digital cameras. The outfit manufacturing the PixPro FZ45 and FZ55 is in fact JK Imaging Ltd, which has less of a ring to it.

There's something further going on here, too: a general rise in camera sales spearheaded by compact cameras, a pushback against always-connected tech, and burgeoning privacy concerns.

A camera such as the PixPro FZ55 shoots directly onto local storage, an SD card. It's not connected to the cloud. It's simple, it's lo-fi, and the kind of tech being embraced by Gen Z.

Will you get better quality photos using these Kodak point-and-shoot compact cameras over your phone? Absolutely not. Even a basic mid range phone will take better snaps.

What you will get, however, is the nostalgic simple pleasure in the simple act of taking everyday snaps, the data of which you are in complete control of.

I’m someone who likes the idea of taking a dedicated camera with me wherever I go, in the hopes of capturing higher quality shots than what I can manage with my iPhone 15 Pro. I already have an OM System OM-D E-M10 MKIV, but I’ve taken it away with me on holiday exactly one time, where I used it exactly one day.

Despite being quite small (at least compared to many full-frame alternatives), I found it to be too bulky to fit in a sling bag, especially when spare lenses were thrown into the mix.

It was with this in mind that I actually used a Fujifilm Instax mini camera during my recent trip to Europe. Not only was it easier to fit into my bag, but it made me carefully consider compositions, and I love the fact I now have physical, printed photos to admire.

I can still admit digital is more convenient however, which is why I’ve been keen on the Panasonic Lumix S9, and now it’s 42% off ahead of Prime Day, now is a great time to snap it up.

Now, as I’ve just mentioned, the Lumix S9 is definitely geared more towards videographers, due to its support of open gate 6K video, which benefits from the full height and width of the 3:2, 24.2MP full-frame sensor. The Lumix S9 also boasts one of the best image stabilisation systems when shooting video that we’ve come across.

Unfortunately, this capability would be lost on me, as a videographer I am not. I’m far more interested in the S9’s picture-snapping credentials, and based on our Panasonic Lumix S9 review, I’m in for a treat if I hit the ‘buy now’ button.

That’s because the 24.2MP sensor — which is essentially the same as the one found in the Lumix S5 II — takes great still images, with superb noise control and dynamic range, meaning it can capture detail in darker areas.

Also, its bigger sensor is better suited to low-light photography compared to my E-M10 Mark IV’s micro four thirds one, although the latter does still take lovely images.

The S9 also employs real-time LUTs (look-up tables) which, despite being recommended for videos, allow you to use a range of colour profiles to help enhance images, although I am a little intimidated by the fact that Panasonic doesn’t make this the easiest of options in its photography menu system. I’m still keen to try this feature for stills.

And then there’s how the camera itself looks. I’m pretty infatuated with the S9’s aesthetic — it’s compact and minimal, two qualities I adore. However, one of the biggest gripes we had in our review is the fact there’s no viewfinder. On paper, this won’t be a huge deal for me if I’m not using the camera constantly but, clearly, I have to point it out. The screen does extend and tilt though, which will help when composing shots.

Another advantage that the S9 has is based on Panasonic’s L-Mount Alliance membership, which allows you to use any full-frame L-mount lens from other members, like Leica and Sigma — although this particular offer comes included with an 18-40mm kit lens. If you’re keen to know more, our friends at Digital Camera World have put together a guide to the best lenses for the Lumix S9 to help you on your way.

All in all, I think this is a superb camera, although I did baulk at the AU$3,299 RRP, which is why I held off buying it for this long. Thankfully, the 42% discount fixes that in a big way. Less than two grand for a very capable full-frame shooter? Count me in.

• Though mostly known for photo lighting equipment, Godox has announced a small 'transparent viewfinder camera' that weighs just 65g.
• It features a transparent(ish) window for composition that also doubles as a settings display — and it can also function as a light meter.
• We don't yet have information on key internal specs like sensor size and resolution (but you can expect them to be low).

Very cheap cameras are back in vogue these days, so I wasn't necessarily surprised to see another one released — but I was surprised to see it coming from Godox.

The Godox C100 is a 'transparent viewfinder camera', announced by the Chinese firm who heretofore have been better known for producing the kind of high-end lighting equipment you'd find in the studios of professional photographers, as well as more affordable flashguns. However, with an announced price of just ¥199 (equivalent to about $29 / £22 / AU$42), the C100 is considerably more affordable than anything else on the Godox books.

As you can see, the C100 is built around quite an unusual form factor. A palm-sized rectangle, it doesn't feature a display exactly, but instead a transparent window that you use to compose your images. This window is also able to display key information like exposure settings and battery life.

Now, I said 'unusual' form factor, not 'unique'. This is because, as a few people have already observed, the Godox C100 looks a lot like a camera that debuted at CP+ in 2025, the Escura InstantSnap. The Godox version looks a bit more advanced, offering a few interesting features that the Escura version doesn't. But we can make a few inferences — the Escura camera produces images at a resolution of 1.3MP, and I'd be surprised if the Godox offered a great deal more than that.

The Godox C100 features a USB-C connection for charging and file transfer, and it accepts 128GB micro SD cards for storage. It also records video and can do so continuously for up to 1.5 hours, and offers shooting in a number of different aspect ratios: 16:9, 4:3, 3:2 and 1:1. There are a couple of physical buttons for shooting and changing settings, and it weighs just 65g.

A handheld light meter

At first glance, the Godox C100 looks like another cheap novelty camera in a market beginning to be saturated with them. However, there was one feature announced that really caught my attention, since I'm an avid film photographer — the C100 can also act as a light meter.

Like any good handheld light meter, Godox C100 can read the levels of brightness in a scene's central area, and provide the optimal exposure settings with which to capture a balanced image. Once hugely invaluable tools, light meters have been rendered mostly entirely redundant in the digital age. However, anyone who habitually buys a lot of old film SLRs will tell you that the metering system is always one of the first things to go. I have several beautiful Pentax SLRs in the drawer beside me that still shoot and wind on beautifully, but can't meter a scene because the electronics are shot.

So, the idea of an elegant little pocketable device, costing just $29, that I can carry everywhere with me and use to quickly meter a scene, and maybe even use to take a couple of comparison shots for reviewing alongside my developed and scanned frames — that interests me.

Granted, the metering functionality is only going to be of interest to a small percentage of users. But still, I wouldn't be surprised if the Godox C100 is a huge hit, if and when it eventually arrives at international retailers (it's currently only announced in China). Tiny cameras have been big hits of late, most notably the keyring-sized Kodak Charmera, and screen-free cameras that offer a purer, more immersive shooting experience have also seen success, the poster child for the movement being the Camp Snap.

People like cute cameras. People like cheap cameras. And the Godox C100 is both! I'm sure once we get hold of it for a review we'll discover that the image quality is no great shakes — but did that stop the Kodak Charmera? No, it did not.