While quite durable, Holga’s don’t last forever, so about once a year I rotate new ones into the group. This year when picking up a few new 120n’s, the seller happened to also have a WOCA, so I added that to the order as well. I have never reviewed the Holga, because if you’ve ended up here, you probably already know quite a bit about it. If you are new to the Holga, you may not know that it has a twin. But not an identical one. We’ve received more then a few emails here asking what the difference is, so I loaded one up to find out…

I suppose I could end this right now with the line “it has a glass lens” and just show you a few images of chickens pecking at my camera. But the answer is a little more complex. We’ve spoken many times about the general feelings of those who shoot ‘non toy cameras’ and how they thing that is easier just to fake it in Photoshop, that we should grow up and get a real camera.. ect. No point in rehashing that issue, as again, if you are here, then you have already been enlightened. Toy Camera shooters use the Holga not only for its simplicity, but also for its ‘primitive’ optics. So why does a WOCA have a glass lens?

I’d love to give you an interesting story about how the designers were attempting to develop a cure for chromatic aberration, but to be honest, I don’t have a clue. I googled this till my eye’s hurt, and found little to nothing. If you have the actual story, please leave a little comment; I’d be interested in hearing about it. It seems a little odd that they would try to slightly improve a camera that was designed to be slightly soft focus in the first place. Remember ‘New Coke’? I was supposed to be better then the original formula, and start a soft drink revolution. Funny, it seemed to just taste like Pepsi.

As I was shooting with the WOCA, I felt this little pang of guilt, like I was cheating on my Holga by using a glass lens. What was I trying to do, make a better Toy Camera image? Was I going against all of my own rules? I thought that I should put a piece of black tape over the name so other Holga’s couldn’t see it.

The WOCA must have just been an attempt at creating a slightly better Holga. Sure glass will have a better optical quality then plastic, but how much? Looking closely at the negatives, you really can’t tell. All of the quirks of the original Holga are still there- the vignette, blurry edges, bottom right corner doubling (more on that tomorrow) and the overall feel of the soft, warm image that we know and love. Can I honestly say that the image isn’t a little sharper? No, I can’t. I just might be, but you would have to really get the focus distance perfect to tell, and where is the fun in that? The true test would be to get out the tripod, aim it at a subject that was an exact distance and include some objects that would demonstrate the ability for the cameras to achieve a very sharp image and then view the resulting photos side by side. Small problems though, the WOCA has no tripod mount, and no two Holgas will ever focus exactly the same.

The verdict, if there can be one, is that a WOCA is a nice addition to my family of Holgas. I don’t feel having the glass lens gives me any real advantage, and I don’t feel that its going against what we all set out to do: create Toy camera images. While technically it may have an advantage in optic quality, you’d be hard pressed to find it. Lee Frost’s book that we reviewed a while back has the most amazing display of Holga focusing I have ever seen- He has an ability to find that sweet spot in the center of the lens that I have never seen before or since. And guess what- they were shot with a plastic lens Holga.