Main Content

Customer Ratings & Reviews

Canon - IVY Cliq Instant Film Camera - Seaside Blue-Front_Standard

Customer rating

Rating 3.8 out of 5 stars with 66 reviews

73%
would recommend to a friend

Pros

Cons

Customer ratings & reviews

Filter:
Page 1, showing1-3 of 3 Reviews
  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars

    This is not a good camera

    Posted
    TechEnthusiast
    • Tech Insider NetworkTech Insider Network
    • Top 500 ContributorTop 500 Contributor

    I’m not going to beat around the bush. The Canon Ivy Cliq is a truly awful camera that isn’t worth the money. Do yourselves a favor and don’t buy it. I’ve seldom encountered a product with no redeeming features or use cases, but I can honestly say that this camera is a complete and total waste of plastic. The camera is made of light-weight plastic and feels cheap in the hand. My camera was yellow, but the entire back of the camera is a glossy white plastic that will start to look dirty within a couple days of use. The camera has four buttons on it: power, shutter, aspect ratio, and duplicate photo. The camera has no LCD screen to it, and there are no menus or options whatsoever. Once you click the shutter button, the camera prints the photo (no matter how bad it is). There is no app, this doesn’t pair with your phone, and you can’t cancel the print if you know it’s going to turn out poorly. This was okay with the original Polaroid cameras of the late 80s and early 90s back when you were getting instant gratification instead of going through the hassle of getting film developed, but this is quite frankly unacceptable in 2019. The camera does have a spot for a micro-SD card. If you should somehow blindly luck into a decent photo, you can retrieve it from the SD card to share or print later. And trust me, you will be blindly lucking into decent photos. The positioning of the optical view finder is awkward, and it’s somewhat painful to use unless you’re open to smashing your nose into the back of the camera. The camera’s strap is a MAJOR design flaw. It’s positioned in the upper left-hand corner of the camera, and it dangles right in front of the printer. There’s a reason that the Polaroids of old spat the picture out through the front. With this camera, you have to move your left hand out of the way, and hold the strap so that it isn’t in the way of the printer. I’m at a loss as to why they thought this was a good idea. The instructions recommend that you be within 1.6 feet of the subject of your photo. At this distance, I found that the flash washed out my subject rather badly. It should be noted that there is no way to turn off the flash with this camera. The camera holds ten sheets of instant photo paper and the blue data sheet that comes with the pack. My very first print jammed until I took the paper out and lightly fanned it before putting it back in. The paper is fairly expensive at the time of this review, and you’re not going to want to waste a single print. At 5 megapixels, this camera has the same resolution as my first digital camera from 2003. Given the size of the print (2x3 inches), the prints look “okay.” If I could return this camera, I would in a heartbeat. I do not recommend buying this camera. Spend a little more and get something better, or buy a standalone mobile, instant printer and use your smartphone instead.

    No, I would not recommend this to a friend

  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars

    Not sure why

    Posted
    dharr18
    • Tech Insider NetworkTech Insider Network
    • Top 1000 ContributorTop 1000 Contributor

    Canon - IVY Cliq Instant Film Camera - Bumblebee Yellow Maybe I am missing the point... OK. Maybe I am missing the point. I have the Canon Ivy Printer, and I use it as needed when I find a picture I want to print out. It does a really nice job for a small format print. So I was intrigued when I found the IVY Cliq Camera. I was excited when the package arrived looking forward to having camera and printer in one package. After opening the package, the excitement quickly died. I grew up back when instant cameras were a thing. Film cameras were the norm. Digital cameras were not a thing yet. The fun part of taking pictures back then was seeing how they turned out after waiting an hour at the local photo lab. Then you start going thru the pictures and were lucky to get 3 or 4 good shots of people in a 36 picture roll. The odds of someone not blinking or making a odd face were pretty slim. Instant cameras were fun too as you took the picture and stood there like a fool waving it in the air trying to get it to develop quicker. The fun there was watching the photographer and seeing the disappointment as they see the picture was nowhere near as good as they had hoped as cousin Jimmy decided to stick a finger in someone's nose. Why do I bring up this memory? At 50 cents per sheet, taking a photo to be instant printed is not cheap. It would be very easy to go thru 10 pictures and not get a good one. Clearly there must be a way to take a picture and view it before it prints. Right? Maybe a app that sends the photo over Bluetooth...but then why not just use the phone to take the picture? But don't worry Canon took care of that...there is no app...there is no Bluetooth...there is no control over what prints. All pictures print, even the nose picking Jimmy pictures. That is OK, I thought. I just won't load the paper, save the image to the micro SD and figure out how to get the right photo to print later. Nope. The camera will not take a photo without the paper. Clearly this wasn't right. I go to Canon's support page. Nope. You can't take a picture with no paper. OK, this can be fixed in a firmware update I am sure. I'll download the software and see what the firmware update process is like. Hmmm? No software for the camera. I am now assuming no firmware updates either. So I have a camera with a SD slot that will not take pictures without "film" being in this digital camera. A 5 megapixel camera? You honestly could buy a cheap cell phone and have similar results. I am not sure who this camera is for nor why it exists in this format. Buying just the IVY printer and using your phone will give better results and known results. Honestly I can not recommend this camera in any sense of the word. It might be more tolerable if the paper was cheaper and affordable, less than 10 cents a sheet seems about a right price point. But for the gamble of taking a good pic and no way of editing the picture before print and the hassle of having to have extra paper available if you are taking a lot of shots... I'll stick to my cell for everyday shots and break out the DSLR for special moments or projects. For the life of me, I don't know who the target consumer is for this camera. The prints are so small that older people won't be able to see them. The price per shot is too high for most people sub 30 years old to find affordable. The inability to just take a digital picture is a waste. The beauty of digital photography is the ability to correct a picture before publishing or printing. This works against the grain of the advantages of digital photography. For less than 10 cents an image, I can select the photos I want printed and pick them up in an hour or have them shipped to me. Or I can wait 30 seconds to get a picture I am not sure of with cousin Jimmy and his stray finger. Good: - It is yellow??? - It has a strap - It is lightweight - The pictures can be used as stickers (can you hear my eyes roll as I typed that?) Bad: - Requires paper to take pictures - The paper is about 50 cents a sheet (same complaint for IVY printer) - Can not preview what is being printed - No software - No app - No Bluetooth - Might have been cool 30 years ago - 2x3 format - 5 Megapixel

    No, I would not recommend this to a friend

  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars

    Worst Canon product ever.

    Posted
    TechnicallyCorrect
    • Tech Insider NetworkTech Insider Network
    • Top 250 ContributorTop 250 Contributor

    As Best Buy Insider, I hate giving a bad review . However, let me be clear, the Canon Ivy Cliq camera is a truly awful waste of money. When you first take the camera out the box, it looks good. Nice color, seems to be decent craftmanship. It has some heft to it. Then you notice things that are move evident in the specs. No screen. Weak flash. Little to no memory. No app. 5MB photos. No Bluetooth. No NFC. That is correct, 5MB. The lack of screen is acceptable because it is an instant camera, but pictures on a digital camera that are only 5MB? So maybe the prints are okay at 5MB because they are only 2” X 3”. Not even close. The colors are completely off - skin tones are reddish, whites are yellow and there is an odd washing out on the edges. I tried multiple different lighting scenarios and they all came out terrible. So in thinking about, the 5MB does not really matter. The reality is you can print photos 3 times the size at 5MB if the lens is good and the print media is good. Therein lies the problem. You have a tiny lens and the “Zink” media is very poor quality. Bad combination. The competition offers digital cameras with instant printing with 10 to 20 MB, wider lenses, Bluetooth, screens and more. If you look at the non-digital instant cameras, you find much more features and much, much better image print quality. Then the competition does all that at a lower price. The reality is this is a product with no target customer. The image quality is too low for the enthusiast. The lack of screen will not get the under 30 customers. The camera is basically a toy and that will not get the teens ( which seem to be their target customer from the ads.) The price of $99 will not get parents to buy for kids. This should have been a $50 camera marketed kids who will use it a couple of times and put it in drawer. In summary – poor features, poor functions, poor price. This is the worst Canon product I’ve ever owned. Nothing to look at here, move on to the competition that just does a better job. Sorry Canon, I usually like your products but - uugghhh.....

    No, I would not recommend this to a friend