Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,822   Posts: 1,581,886   Online: 1156
      
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    medform-norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    863
    Images
    1

    Here's a thought for the 2nd day of Xmas: adapting a d*g*tal camera to take film

    Reverse engineering is a technique that shouldn't wholly be left to the Chinese nor to meaning only one thing. I'll introduce another meaning here: viz. to modify a digital camera in such a way that it can take pics on ordinary film. It's just a thought experiment.

    Suppose you end up in a time and place where digital cams are of no use since you can't reload the batteries or you have no access to electricity and computers or whatever. But you do have a top of the bill digi-gizmo. Plus endless rolls of 35mm film. How much effort would it be to 'reverse engineer' the camera to take roll film?

    My question was triggered by yet another brochure of a new 6x9 monorail fit for the digital era. A lot of companies abondon the regular LF gear and start focussing exclusively on catering to the digi market. Is that a wise decision? What happens if the digi market crumbles? What can be done with the left overs? Has anyone ever done a hack like this before? What will the resulting cameras of pictures taken with them look like?

    All ramblings welcome. (I am aware that monorails adapt a lot easier than DSLR's, so let's stick to the harder to modify models for fun's sake!)

    Have a nice day, Norm

  2. #2
    David Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    near Dallas, TX USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,341
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by medform-norm
    Suppose you end up in a time and place where digital cams are of no use since you can't reload the batteries or you have no access to electricity and computers or whatever. But you do have a top of the bill digi-gizmo. Plus endless rolls of 35mm film. How much effort would it be to 'reverse engineer' the camera to take roll film?

    Have a nice day, Norm
    If you can't use the batteries, how is the modified digicam going to work, even with film?

    Now, assuming that you want all the electronic gizmos (sans image sensor) in a film camera, well maybe, but we have those. In fact, in 35mm, we have little else ...

    I could be wrong, but this would probably be more trouble than it's worth.

    Cheers,

    David

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Moscow, Russia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    768
    Images
    36
    Oh, we can rip away all the electronic crap and plastic lenses from inside, and make an excellent pinhole camera... the only trouble is that the camera doesn't have a back cove, so we can split a back with a saw and make some hinge... maybe from black artificial leather from digicam's case

  4. #4
    medform-norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    863
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by eumenius
    Oh, we can rip away all the electronic crap and plastic lenses from inside, and make an excellent pinhole camera... the only trouble is that the camera doesn't have a back cove, so we can split a back with a saw and make some hinge... maybe from black artificial leather from digicam's case
    That's the spirit, Zhenya!

  5. #5
    medform-norm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    863
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by David Brown
    If you can't use the batteries, how is the modified digicam going to work, even with film?

    Now, assuming that you want all the electronic gizmos (sans image sensor) in a film camera, well maybe, but we have those. In fact, in 35mm, we have little else ...

    I could be wrong, but this would probably be more trouble than it's worth.

    Cheers,

    David
    David, of course, with things being the way they are right now it wouldn't be worth it. My question was a highly hypothetical one, placed in a hopefully distant future.

    But to make things a little easier, I'll allow battery power, or some form of electricity.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,146
    I think th epinhole idea is the way to go. Image quality will be a zillion times better compared to the plastic lens :o)

    G

  7. #7
    Andy K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Sunny Southend, England.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    9,422
    Images
    81
    I think the easiest way to make a film camera from a digital camera would be to take something like the Epson RD1, take the back off the lens, throw it in the bin, then put the lens on a Leica mount 35mm camera, and voila! One film camera!


    -----------My Flickr-----------
    Anáil nathrach, ortha bháis is beatha, do chéal déanaimh.

  8. #8
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,527
    Images
    65
    Although it may be hard for us to do, it would be possible for a camera manufacturer to make a dual purpose digital/conventional body. Just remove the backs as you do in a MF camera and replace the back with the other one depending on use.

    But why? The conventional one is soooo much better.

    BTW, news here in Rochester is that Kodak has perfected its new MF 38M pixel back and will be selling it through leaf. No details yet, but this is a serious step upwards in digital pixel capability. If they had put that much work into conventional, imagine where we would be.

    PE



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin