Sandokan Posted August 17, 2013 Share #1 Posted August 17, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I donated some money as I would love to see it come to fruition. http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/digipod. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 17, 2013 Posted August 17, 2013 Hi Sandokan, Take a look here Digital insert for film camera. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pico Posted August 17, 2013 Share #2 Posted August 17, 2013 Google "digital film" for dozens of failed attempts to make such a device. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 17, 2013 Share #3 Posted August 17, 2013 There's no explanation of how the device will know the shutter has been pressed. He's also proposing to supply a red rectangle to stick on the SLR mirror to show the crop factor. That would be out of focus, and impossible to remove without damaging the mirror. I fear the exercise is doomed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angora Posted August 17, 2013 Share #4 Posted August 17, 2013 Also, that page contains a link to Ken Rockwell's site Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted August 17, 2013 Share #5 Posted August 17, 2013 ".....and in the case of the cameras there are still things you can do with an old roll film camera that can't be offered by the new digital cameras." Yeah, like using film. Film cameras are meant to be used with film. They're 100% functional with film. If it's about being too bothered with using film, then get a digital camera instead. There are tons of digital cameras readily available with new models appearing every day. And many of the interchangeable lens models allow for the use of legacy lenses. Manufacturers have been making digital cameras so that they emulate using a film camera. e.g., there's really not much user difference between a Nikon F6 (film) and a Nikon D4 (digital.) Or the M7 and the M9. Film cameras are built specifically for analog film images and digital cameras are designed for electronic images (I think that Leica seemed to understand this after the DMR.) I say just leave it that way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted August 17, 2013 Share #6 Posted August 17, 2013 I think it is ill thought out. It would be a cute plaything at best, with the crop factor and low resolution, and what seems to be a clunky system to make it work, why bother? I think the price is something of a giveaway, if you can convert a 35mm film camera to a worthwhile digital camera for less than $400 there has to be a catch (and there are many catches). It is a great dream though, making your M2 into an M for a fraction of the price, but it just isn't going to happen. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted August 18, 2013 Share #7 Posted August 18, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) A very limited market, I suspect. An intriguing gimmick. Ten years ago, it may have been more promising. Film cameras still work perfectly, of course -- with film! However, an interchangeable or upgradeable digital sensor module -- like Ricoh's -- for more digital cameras, especially Leica, would be welcome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guido Posted August 18, 2013 Share #8 Posted August 18, 2013 I think the exercise misses the point. The camera body ist just an interface. The lens and the film determine the look and feel of the final image. If you want the personality of a specific lens with digital today, there are solutions for many common systems which will allow you to adapt vintage lenses to a digital camera. No need to brute force a film body into something it never was designed to be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted August 18, 2013 Share #9 Posted August 18, 2013 It is a great dream though, making your M2 into an M for a fraction of the price, but it just isn't going to happen. Steve No, not a dream, a nightmare !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted August 18, 2013 Share #10 Posted August 18, 2013 There's no explanation of how the device will know the shutter has been pressed. Actually this is easy to implement. Digital backs such as Phase One on a manual Hasselblad achieve this by using a sync lead from the lens flash connection to the back. On a 35mm body where the sync is internal to the camera a simple internal wire or pin connection would suffice. If inernal meddling was avoided the flash sync could be external if inelegant, as is the Phase back The Hasselblad digital backs use an interlock pin but they are dedicated to the 'blad. Phase One can be mount swopped. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 18, 2013 Share #11 Posted August 18, 2013 Actually this is easy to implement. Digital backs such as Phase One on a manual Hasselblad achieve this by using a sync lead from the lens flash connection to the back Depending on the camera's design, couldn't this limit the device to the maximum flash synch speed - ie. the flash sync is only triggered at speeds of up to say 1/125 and less? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted August 18, 2013 Share #12 Posted August 18, 2013 Depending on the camera's design, couldn't this limit the device to the maximum flash synch speed - ie. the flash sync is only triggered at speeds of up to say 1/125 and less? That may well be correct, I forgot the 'blad between the lens shutter syncs at all speeds Though is it not the case the flash is triggered at all speeds but the exposure with flash is only correct at the speeds at which all the frame is exposed? Anyway I still don't want my M2s converted, especially not every three years to keep up with each new sensor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
masjah Posted August 18, 2013 Share #13 Posted August 18, 2013 IMHO the small proposed sensor sizes, even in the most expensive latter proposed implementations, make it a total non-starter. All it shows to me is what a technical tour de force the DMR was in its day. (I'd have got a DMR myself except that my particular photographic needs put full frame high up on my list of priorities.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_livsey Posted August 18, 2013 Share #14 Posted August 18, 2013 Indeed the DMR module is selling for around £2,000 against the M8 at £1,500. Of course smaller production runs affect the price, but the demand must still be there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB_tx Posted August 18, 2013 Share #15 Posted August 18, 2013 While I would love "digital film" for my collection of old cameras, I would only be interested in full-frame, and likely a good solution would require a new sensor technology. With the low cost and acceptance of today's digital cameras, I doubt if anyone would invest to make the sensor breakthrough required for the limited market. I agree no LCD is really needed, and I don't care about a huge picture capacity or battery life - just an equivalence to film. So I like some of their concept - but don't see a success without a lot more investment - which won't happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsgary Posted August 18, 2013 Share #16 Posted August 18, 2013 This got me last year RE-35 | Digital cartridges for analog 35-mm cameras Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joop van Heijgen Posted August 19, 2013 Share #17 Posted August 19, 2013 Digital insert for digital camera:) "However, an interchangeable or upgradeable digital sensor module -- like Ricoh's -- for more digital cameras, especially Leica, would be welcome." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalArts 99 Posted August 21, 2013 Share #18 Posted August 21, 2013 Google "digital film" for dozens of failed attempts to make such a device. Silicon Film - Dead Media Archive Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 22, 2013 Share #19 Posted August 22, 2013 While anything is possible..... USB Typewriter — Classic Typewriters for the Digital Age ....frankly, if you want to keep an old film camera going, simply shooting film and scanning it will give vastly better results, more simply and cheaply, than any hack to put a digital 'film' device into a film body. Trying to somehow "preserve" old film cameras with a digital insert just smacks of http://www.spookyisles.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Helena-Bohham-Carter-as-Elizabeth-in-Frankenstein.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.