Would you like to use your old film SLR as digital?

[usayit]

Theres alway the Epson RD1 coking the shutter like film, i would love one

Quirky awesome camera. Wish I didn't sell it.

The 1:1 viewfinder is a dream for those that prefer two-eyed-shooting. Battery power sucked and it had a short rangefinder base length which made it only effective for 28/35/50s.

 

[gsgary]

Quirky awesome camera. Wish I didn't sell it.

The 1:1 viewfinder is a dream for those that prefer two-eyed-shooting. Battery power sucked and it had a short rangefinder base length which made it only effective for 28/35/50s.

Perfect i only shoot those lengths

 

[EDL]

Didn't someone else post about this thing a month or so ago? I think I responded to it....

 

[bratkinson]

And there's guaranteed to be some joker in the crowd wanting a digital back for his Kodak Brownie from 50 years ago...

Brownies take 120 film, which is one of the two major standard types. If a company were to actually make an insert like this, I imagine they would make a 35mm one and a 120 film one (even if the sensor doesnt take up the whole space of the 120 film, the canister would be that size to physically fit in, etc.

So you probably COULD use it with a brownie, with no aftermarket modifications.


You talk about "film backs" but that's not really the concept here. Film backs are individualized to camera models. The whole point of this idea is that it attaches to the one most standardized part of ANY camera: the film canister slot. Thus, if you have a 35mm and a 120 digital insert, you can use just those two in dozens or hundreds of different models of camera, with no changes or modifications. Including brownies.

Perhaps I should have said Speedgraphic rather than a Brownie. I was merely trying to make the point that there's too many variations to 'fill'.

My other point is that the distance between the two rolls in a 35mm camera differs from model to model, and likely vendor to vendor as well, perhaps with some overlaps. Compare a Canon AE-1 to an F-1. My point being that the exact location of the 35mm "frame" on the film from left-to-right varies, therefore one 'solid' plastic back/insert or whatever would necessarily have to be variable. And any thoughts of simply having the sensor loosely tethered to the electronics/memory portions makes locating the sensor exactly where it should be a near impossibility. It must be held firmly in place as to not interfere with the focal plane shutter 1-2mm in front of it. Therefore, it must be mechanically 'locked in' by some means, most likely the drop-down screw posts used for advancing/rewinding the film would be used as 'locating pins'.

 

[Buckster]

Perhaps I should have said Speedgraphic rather than a Brownie. I was merely trying to make the point that there's too many variations to 'fill'.

I didn't get the impression that the proposed product was intended to 'fill' every possible camera and film size ever produced. I think the goal is more along the lines of fitting common 35mm cameras that had high numbers produced and used.

My other point is that the distance between the two rolls in a 35mm camera differs from model to model, and likely vendor to vendor as well, perhaps with some overlaps. Compare a Canon AE-1 to an F-1. My point being that the exact location of the 35mm "frame" on the film from left-to-right varies, therefore one 'solid' plastic back/insert or whatever would necessarily have to be variable.

But we're talking a few mm at most here, not inches. A sensor just large enough to cover the difference might produce a bit of dark frame on the left side of the image on one camera, the right on another, but not much. That's one possible, simple solution. I think it's a problem that's not very hard to deal with from a design/engineering point of view.

And any thoughts of simply having the sensor loosely tethered to the electronics/memory portions makes locating the sensor exactly where it should be a near impossibility. It must be held firmly in place as to not interfere with the focal plane shutter 1-2mm in front of it. Therefore, it must be mechanically 'locked in' by some means, most likely the drop-down screw posts used for advancing/rewinding the film would be used as 'locating pins'.

Again, I think the overlap-sized sensor solves it, but even if it were movable to accommodate different cameras, that doesn't mean it has to be "loose". It could be engineered to ratchet to various sizes, matched to the camera it's being used in, and still be solid. Remember, we're only talking a maximum of a few mm. Besides, the film guide rails should keep it from interfering with the focal plane shutter just as well as they work for keeping film from interfering, even if it was "loose", as film could be considered to be.

These are very minor engineering "problems", easily overcome, and therefor hardly worth bringing up, let alone cited as reasons why it's near-impossible to make the device.

 

[Gavjenks]

^ Or alternatively, if using a crop frame sensor, it would already have several millimeters of tolerance on all sides since it is smaller than the 35mm film. So you'd get a full image each camera, but you'd just have to learn essentially what the "shift and fall" were. and just run with that. Not a big deal.