What’s the difference between the Lensbaby Composer and Composer Pro?
Asked 5/6/2011
99 views
2 answers
0
I’m comparing the original Lensbaby Composer with the Composer Pro. Reviews mostly mention the Pro’s metal construction, but is that the only meaningful difference? If you’ve used either, does the Pro handle or focus noticeably better, and is the higher price mainly about durability or also about performance?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
8
I was just looking at this the other day. I haven't actually touched the Pro, and so haven't physically compared the two, so a better answer will be from someone who does. But I have used the non-Pro version, and I did find the plastic ball-and-socket configuration less than smooth — which is what they're promoting with the new metal ball-and-socket. So, yeah, the metal construction is the main difference, but I don't think it's insignificant. It's not just a matter of durability, since it's a functional element that's constructed differently.
Digital Photography Review recently published a review of the Lensbaby Composer Pro and Sweet 35 optic, and in their conclusion, they note:
... it's the best Lensbaby yet, and substantially improved over the original Composer. In particular the focusing is very much improved over the somewhat loose feel of the older design, with a smooth, damped action that's reminiscent of 'proper' manual focus lenses. The ball and socket tilt joint has also been refined - again it's smoother in operation, which makes small, precise adjustments much easier. So if you think you're likely to use it a lot, we think the Pro is definitely worth the $50 premium over the Composer. Of course if you just want to experiment with whether you like the whole Lensbaby idea, the much-cheaper Muse probably makes more sense as an introduction to the system.
If you're interested in the Lensbaby system, the rest of the review is well worth reading.
↑ that's the "off-topic now" line :)
I think the name "Composer" is apt, by the way. It's appropriate for Lensbaby shots where you're working slowing and carefully. The Muse, on the other hand, is much more fluid and fun. It's also considerably cheaper.
↑ and that's the "way off-topic" line
My favorite, though, is the Lensbaby 2.0. The new optic swap system is cool, especially if you're interested in pinhole or zone plate, or if you get really into it and want to change between plastic and glass and so on. But the older models are considerably smaller, and the flexible tubing more flexible (and less squeaky, something I find a little bit disturbing with the Muse).
Originally by user1943. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1943
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
The main difference is the redesigned metal ball-and-socket assembly on the Composer Pro. That matters not just for durability, but also for how the lens handles: users report the original Composer’s plastic ball-and-socket and focus action can feel a bit sloppy or less smooth, while the Pro is intended to move and focus more smoothly.
So the upgrade is functional, not just cosmetic. Based on the community feedback, the original Composer is still usable, but the Pro is generally considered a noticeable improvement in feel and control.
Another difference mentioned is kit options: the Composer Pro was sold with either the Sweet 35 or Double Glass optic, while the original Composer typically came with the Double Glass optic.
Whether the extra cost is worth it depends on how much you value smoother handling and a more refined build. If you use Lensbaby often, the Pro sounds like the better version; if you just want the effect and don’t mind a looser feel, the original Composer can still do the job.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why did many lens barrels change from metal to engineering plastics?
Why do 32GB Class 10 SDHC cards vary so much in price between brands?
Can user-reported shutter-count databases really show whether pro cameras are more durable?
Does Lightroom edit compressed RAW files slower than uncompressed RAW files?
Which circular polarizer is a better buy: Hoya HD CIR-PL or Nikon CP II?