Newbie with some theoretical questions on... camera modding..

[Gavjenks]

I guess I have to ask...what would be the possible advantage gained in 'hack building' a camera?

Yes, this is really the crux of the issue.

The OP's whole motivation seems to have been based on the assumption that the only reason 100x superzoom lenses aren't available for DSLRs is just a matter of physical mounting.

But this isn't actually correct, and since there are optical reasons why it won't work, that motivation for doing it in the first place just isn't there anymore.




There are a few things you CAN do for digital cameras to give you new abilities, but they mostly reside in the world of custom lenses, not hacks to bodies. Adding tilt/shift technical movements, for instance, or doing really telescopic pinholes, or giving yourself unique, intentional low fidelity "flaws" in your lenses for creative purposes (like lensbabies or that new Petzval lens, etc.). Stuff like that. All happens in the lens, though. Which is easy to muck around with.

 

[Cartogrophotographer]

Hi everybody! back almost a year later after having spent lots and lots of time snapping away photos and doing some research into various subjects relating to the question I originally posed in this thread (and of course photography in general). A lost password and laziness was part of the reason I did not returned sooner. So basically, what I should have been investigating was the feasibility to to strip the original lens (which actually is, just as mentioned by KmH, a 4.3-215mm lens) and somehow attach a new mount+lens (for example a decent 70-300, or a APO ED telescope) for increased range (loosing auto-focus, image stabilization etc). Makes me wonder why canon does not make a exchangeable lens cameras with a high crop-factors.

 

[Cartogrophotographer]

Anyone with knowledge on the feasibility of modding the lens-mount of camera such as sx50hs? (Removing the complete lens and attaching a new lens mount interface).

 

[robbins.photo]

I thought for sure the OP would get a lesson in how to prototype his own cobbled together camera...

Wow, this thread was a shocker and a disappointment to me...

Ok Derrel, I think you missing the "big picture" here. First we all might as well, I mean the DSLR is dead and we will all be switching to cell phone cameras in the next couple of days anyway, so why not take some of this old junky equipment and do something creative with it? I give you FrankenCamera:

http://graphics.stanford.edu/projects/camera-2.0/images/frankencamera-2.0-2-sshbal.jpg

Lol

 

[robbins.photo]

Anyone with knowledge on the feasibility of modding the lens-mount of camera such as sx50hs? (Removing the complete lens and attaching a new lens mount interface).

Feasibility? Practically nil. The lens that is mounted is specifically designed to work with the internal electronics and is specifically set at a particular distance from the sensor which is determined by it's optical qualities. In short you've got so many factors involved that it's not even funny.

 

[Cartogrophotographer]

Yeah I suspected that the lens might be "electronically locked" to the body. But just to be clear, auto-focus and image stabilization is not an issue. What is the central point is if one via an new adapter could mount a new lens on the body - at the right distance to achieve focus of course - and being able to take pictures, have control over ISO and so on. But I guess control over aperture might be a problem if the camera is not made for communicating with another lens.

 

[Overread19 7]

Electronics are a funny area; even companies like sigma can't backward design them to work perfectly. Minor changes in the code can mean that whilst a Canon made lens will still work on a newer Canon body - a Sigma lens (with canon mount) of the same age might cause errors. (its a reason they are now starting to put USB ports on some lenses so that firmwire can be updated instantly by the user instead of having to send it in to be rechipped).

You can get adaptor mounts on the market already - they oft contain optics where the original lens to sensor distance is closer than possible with the adaptor and new mount. Most are low grade optics on the market because there just isn't the market pressure to produce high end options in most areas (there are likely some exceptions of course).

Most also have to do something with the aperture, when the lens has an electronic one its not uncommon to see the adaptor with its own aperture blades instead of trying to bridge the gap it just provides its own aperture.

 

[robbins.photo]

Yeah I suspected that the lens might be "electronically locked" to the body. But just to be clear, auto-focus and image stabilization is not an issue. What is the central point is if one via an new adapter could mount a new lens on the body - at the right distance to achieve focus of course - and being able to take pictures, have control over ISO and so on. But I guess control over aperture might be a problem if the camera is not made for communicating with another lens.

Well assuming you have some sort of precision manufacturing plant stashed away in your garage that might improve your odds of pulling this off to where you've got a slightly better chance than getting hit by lightning after being mauled by polar bear and a grizzly bear on main street all in the same day.

That's assuming of course that when you switch the camera to manual focus mode that the cameras internal electronics will still respond to the new lens and won't require some form of electronic feedback signal - since 99% of the cameras internal functions are electronic in one form or another. Of course this might be possible if you could get Canon to give you a full set of design schematics - and you could spend a few months going through them to get a good idea as to exactly what form of communication takes place between the camera and the lens.

That is assuming also of course that you can successfully resolve the optical issues involved, without having to resort to some form of optical resolution to try and use a lens in conjunction with a sensor for which it was never designed to be used. That and I'd have no idea how on earth you'd ever get this to work considering that the SX50 uses an EVF and without more specifications on how it operates your pretty much dead in the water right there. Add to that the fact that the moment you throw the Image Stabilization feature overboard your new design is going to be pretty hard pressed to get any sort of a decent picture out of it at 500 mm plus without a tripod of some sort anyway, plus about half a dozen other problems I can think of off the top of my head..

And of course why in the world you'd go through all of this when you could buy a low end DSLR, get a 500 mm manual focus lens and a 2 x teleconverter for it and with some cropping and probably exceed the telephoto abilities of this new wonder cam your trying to create. Granted the image quality isn't going to be great but then again the IQ on an SX50 as is really isn't that great so you'd be looking at about the same result in the end.

In short there are some very good design reasons why the SX50 is designed the way it is, and why my D5100 and the 70-300 mm VR I are designed the way they are designed.

 

[Cartogrophotographer]

Yeah I suspected that the lens might be "electronically locked" to the body. But just to be clear, auto-focus and image stabilization is not an issue. What is the central point is if one via an new adapter could mount a new lens on the body - at the right distance to achieve focus of course - and being able to take pictures, have control over ISO and so on. But I guess control over aperture might be a problem if the camera is not made for communicating with another lens.

Well assuming you have some sort of precision manufacturing plant stashed away in your garage that might improve your odds of pulling this off to where you've got a slightly better chance than getting hit by lightning after being mauled by polar bear and a grizzly bear on main street all in the same day.

That's assuming of course that when you switch the camera to manual focus mode that the cameras internal electronics will still respond to the new lens and won't require some form of electronic feedback signal - since 99% of the cameras internal functions are electronic in one form or another. Of course this might be possible if you could get Canon to give you a full set of design schematics - and you could spend a few months going through them to get a good idea as to exactly what form of communication takes place between the camera and the lens.

That is assuming also of course that you can successfully resolve the optical issues involved, without having to resort to some form of optical resolution to try and use a lens in conjunction with a sensor for which it was never designed to be used. That and I'd have no idea how on earth you'd ever get this to work considering that the SX50 uses an EVF and without more specifications on how it operates your pretty much dead in the water right there. Add to that the fact that the moment you throw the Image Stabilization feature overboard your new design is going to be pretty hard pressed to get any sort of a decent picture out of it at 500 mm plus without a tripod of some sort anyway, plus about half a dozen other problems I can think of off the top of my head..

And of course why in the world you'd go through all of this when you could buy a low end DSLR, get a 500 mm manual focus lens and a 2 x teleconverter for it and with some cropping and probably exceed the telephoto abilities of this new wonder cam your trying to create. Granted the image quality isn't going to be great but then again the IQ on an SX50 as is really isn't that great so you'd be looking at about the same result in the end.

In short there are some very good design reasons why the SX50 is designed the way it is, and why my D5100 and the 70-300 mm VR I are designed the way they are designed.

I hear you. Thank you for your input.

 

[vintagesnaps]

This idea seems similar to the Ricoh GXR (which I have); there are interchangeable units that slide in and out of the body/base. Some are self contained w/sensor and lens, the one I have is a mount for Leica M mount lenses. They don't seem to have come out with any further units to take any other lenses since they bought out Pentax and are coming out with some new cameras.

I think some of the Pentax camera bodies take old Pentax K mount lenses but they have a line of cameras that only take their new lenses. Seems like the companies often try to keep this proprietary so users would need to buy their lenses etc. Some things don't necessarily get marketed in the US where manufacturers seem to market what people here want (or what they think people want anyway).