Get a Hasselblad and switch backs.
A used CFV-II 39mp back will run you $7-10k, depending on seller/condition/market, etc... Just carry it and use like a standard A12/A24 back. Just no darkslide
It would be curious, but probably severely hindered. Either you have small enough film to make the sensor cheap, or put in a big sensor at great cost to match a larger film area.
You could have two lenses attempting to recreate the field of view, from say, a small sensor to a 6x9 film or whatever, but that seems like a very convoluted way to make a product with limited appeal.
For me, digital and film have their benefits, but building digital into a film camera seems to limit the film camera with digital's problems such as a camera with large digital sensor is expensive, camera with large film area is not. Digital needs batteries, film does not.
I would rather see film and film cameras be marketed and succeed on their own merits. Film cameras have profound technical advantages over digital, not just the other way round, we should be shouting about that, really.
Movie cameras do this, they have a mirror shutter that rotates and has a live feed to monitors so the director can see what is being filmed even though they are using film in the camera.
Originally Posted by cliveh
So there is a market just not for stills.
Also the comments about film and digit backs are silly, he's talking about the same shot, in the same moment, capturing it both ways simultaneously.
Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller
No, cliveh clearly stated "you could make a second shot on film". The Hasselblad almost meets this requirement except that the digital back is not full frame (6x4.5), so the second shot would be cropped.
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
The point would be to get a high quality film image, which calls for a high quality system like the Hasselblad. On the bright side, it would probably be less expensive than to build a camera from scratch, especially in any format other than 6x6.
I can’t imagine more than a handful of buyers.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
For TLRs, they worked that out years ago.
Originally Posted by wblynch
"People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.
Certainly when the film and the viewing screen are the same size and distance from the lens and the viewing and taking lens are the same focal length it is quite easy.
Originally Posted by Steve Smith
But in my example the film would be 6cmx6cm but the sensor would probably be 2.5cmx2.5cm, requiring two different focal lengths and a progressive linkage to keep the focusing synchronous. But that would be the only 'hard' part.
The upper chamber, with its smaller sensor closer to the lens, would have plenty of room for batteries and electronics.
It would be possible to take a single simultaneous shot on both media.
The R&D costs to get something like this in a usable state would be enormous, and I can't see there being much consumer or professional demand. While a nice concept, it seems pretty farfetched to make it to production. Also, it would pretty much have to be a fix-focal length camera without interchangeable lenses... or it could take Mamiya TLR lenses and suddenly drive the market up!
Seriously, though, I think it is easy enough just to carry a small digital camera for tests and sketches alongside an analog camera. It's what I do, and it ads very little weight or difficulty along with an awful lot of functionality. Still trying to find a good digital camera with a light meter accurate for film exposure, though... It seems like it would be easy, but they all seem slightly off, so I still carry an analog meter (or compensate in my head, when needed).
The market for something like that is virtually non-existent. That's the reality of it.
I was thinking of something like a 6 X 6 folder, with perhaps the sensor on a foldaway screen in front of the film (automatic focus adjustment when switching to film mode) and one you could programme for the type of film/look you had in the camera like fujichrome or Tri-X. All shots taken in digital mode assessed on the back of the camera and then if you really like what you get you take one on film (doesn’t help with decisive moments if not repeatable), but would ensure a great set of film images and all your best shots with physical integrity.
“The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”