mobile photography technology, culture and community

Look Lock smartphone holder for DSLRs keeps subjects focused

The Look Lock holds a smartphone in the hotshoe mount of a DSLR.

Any parent knows that getting a young child to sit still for a minute is almost as hard as finding a unicorn outside of North Korea. Photographers often use toys or other distractions to keep todlers focused on the camera but in the age of mobile distractions, some kids need a little more than a rubber ducky to keep their attention.

The Look Lock smartphone holder for DSLRs attaches your smartphone to your DSLR through the camera's hotshoe mount. The phone can then be used as a tool to keep your tiny model's attention with cartoons or, if turned around, it can work as a secondary recording device.

Pop Photo recently reviewed the Look Lock:

If you photograph kids or animals a lot and you don't feel like DIY hacking one together on your own, it will likely come in handy. [...]

I plan on using the Look Lock on the regular with my family clients who have toddlers, I just likely won't break it out until we're getting to the end of the session. That way, it's a new thing to keep the child interested and if he or she throws a tantrum when we put it away, it won't ruin the shoot. 

Hey, maybe I can even use it during my wedding shoots by putting the football game on it and keeping the groom's eyes locked on the camera. 

The 7-inch version of Look Lock is available from B and H photo for $75.

What do you think: Would you try this tool? 


Total comments: 24
Philip Young
By Philip Young (Jan 18, 2013)

Tune that iPhone into a Porno Channel and it'll get me to pay attention with a big smile !!

Rage Joe
By Rage Joe (Jan 15, 2013)

That's just HORRIBLE.

Rob Bernhard
By Rob Bernhard (Dec 4, 2012)

This is by far a better, happier, and less expensive solution:

By fuego6 (Dec 4, 2012)

AGree... a $4 fix.. and yummy candy treats afterwards for the kids!

$75.... LOL!

By RobG67 (Dec 4, 2012)

DPR expects to be taken seriously and they 'report' on products like this...

By RUcrAZ (Dec 4, 2012)

No, not for that kind of money. The unit is clearly too heavy for the accessory shoe, and has one terrible "moment arm" so it will damage the shoe. One little "bang" will certainly do it.
A much lighter, simpler device mounting the phonecam directly above the accessory shoe makes more sense.
But the idea, of having a mini-scrolling speech, just above the lens, has some intriguing possibilities. To be able to read a speech while looking (almost) at the lens has value.

1 upvote
By dholl (Dec 4, 2012)

More importantly, is this potentially damaging to a child's development? They are learning the 3D nature of our world, that objects have 3D-dimensions and can thus be identified. If by catching their attention we're showing them 2D cuddly animals instead of 3D, what might that mean for the kids' development of spatial awareness, and object-based reality?

Le Kilt
By Le Kilt (Dec 4, 2012)

Yeah, strap a live rat on top of your lens!

By tkbslc (Dec 6, 2012)

You seem to be implying that we should hide all picture books and framed photos from young children.

string cheese
By string cheese (Dec 4, 2012)

Yeah, make the camera heavier and bulkier.

By fuego6 (Dec 4, 2012)

LOL... True enough!

1 upvote
By photophile (Dec 4, 2012)

Best use of a smartphone so far :-)

1 upvote
By Kodachrome200 (Dec 4, 2012)

As a pofessional photographer who photographs children. I actually think this is a nifty idea. I use an app called mouth off to get kids attention, i think it may work like this

Deleted pending purge
By Deleted pending purge (Dec 4, 2012)

Next there will be a nifty sliding rope attachment for alpinists, I guess... or a paddle attachment for kayaking :)
Let's be fair. It's not the manufacturers - it's the people who actually buy things like that.

1 upvote
Michael Melb AU
By Michael Melb AU (Dec 4, 2012)

Is there a model for iPad?

By drolo61 (Dec 4, 2012)

I actually like the idea, but I would use my Eye-Fi to send the actual pictures. I shoot child fashion semi-professonally and the little ones (2-6y) are very keen to see themselves. Could be an interesting option

1 upvote
By fuego6 (Dec 4, 2012)

That is THE stupidest thing I have seen today... LOL... $75!! What.. a stuffed animal is too difficult to hold over your head?

By neo_nights (Dec 3, 2012)

As if a big camera isn't scary enough, then put something hanging on it. Really?

1 upvote
By brianj (Dec 3, 2012)

Its almost as ridiculous as the size of the DSLR just for taking a child's photo!

Teila Day
By Teila Day (Dec 4, 2012)

How "ridiculous" is it?

I wouldn't want to shoot child shots with a 1.6x crop as I find it too restrictive (I did it for years at 1.5x with pro Nikon bodies); so that rules out everything beside the 5D3 and 1Dx for many photographers, and more will settle for the 5D3 + grip for action portraits due to cost.

I'd much rather shoot a fast raw shooter an 8-10 fps burst can be the difference between "awww I LOVE this photo!" and selling $675 worth of work from a session, or wasting your time.

Indoors or out, there are few lenses that can match the *results* and latitude offered by the large primes (85, 200 f/2; 300 f/2.8, etc..) when shooting children in their play environments. People usually settle for less only because of cost.

So, realistically speaking it isn't "ridiculous" at all for a working photographer to shoot children with a large camera and a large lens when there aren't smaller FF options that offer the same capability. ;)

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
By brianj (Dec 4, 2012)

Possibly for a professional, but I was unable to tell if the article was showing a professional photographer or not. It looks like someone shooting outside their house.

By Lng0004 (Dec 4, 2012)

Yeah, because no professional child photographer will shoot outside.

By leno (Dec 4, 2012)

The price of that Lens means I think its professional. But I think you could do the same for a lot less money.

1 upvote
By RoelHendrickx (Dec 3, 2012)

What a ridiculous product!

Total comments: 24
About us