Digital back for M Leica

[cwatgo1970]

Does anyone recall what many referred to as the 'e-film scam' back in the early 1990's? It was a concept digital imaging device in the shape of a roll of film and thin sensor that would fit in most 35mm cameras which could be charged and downloaded via USB port. The company that was attempting to market it went bankrupt and the digital film device never met full development. I was laughed at to no avail on photo.net a year or so ago when I had suggested that while (e)film was a monumental failure, such technology would eventually become possible and affordable to produce. I still think eventually a (full frame) digital 135 shaped film cartridge device with a thin sensor will one day come to life. There are millions of cameras out there that could use them. The same for medium and large format as well.

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

never heard of that! 😱

gimme!

 

[phc]

I often wondered why such a thing wasn't followed up.

Or maybe... [Conspiracy Theory Warning] ... because of corporate vested interests. Who would develop it?

Camera manufacturers? They're making more money than they could have dreamt of a few years ago, simply by bringing out whole new cameras all the time with bigger pixel counts. The last thing they want is a gadget like this that works in any camera. No incentive to spend money on research.

Film manufacturers? Not much doubt in my mind that this would reduce further the use of film. No incentive there either.

Would be wonderful though.

Cheers, Paul.

 

[Gradskater]

efilm

efilm

yes, efilm! please oh please oh please someone make it!!

 

[dmr]

Does anyone recall what many referred to as the 'e-film scam' back in the early 1990's

I don't remember it from the early 1990s, but from the early 2000s, and yes, I was watching that closely.

I would REALLY like to see something like this happen! I was holding my breath for a while until I realized it was vaporware.

 

[Ken Ford]

I recently read an interview with one of the tech guys from efilm. He claims they were less than 60 days from market when they lost their funding and tanked.

 

[dmr]

I seem to recall reading that Efilm actually demonstrated a working prototype at a trade show, but the major issues were less than full frame and the fact that it only fit certain models of 35mm cameras at the time.

 

[cwatgo1970]

Thanks dmr, you are correct. It was early 2000.


For anyone who is curious, below is a link which gives much of the story and history about (e)film. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0109/01091702siliconfilmvaporizes.asp

 

[johannielscom]

Sorry. No. Jumpers for ISO :bang: No LCD :bang: 6 MP :bang:

Hi Tom,

simple math:

ISO dial + LCD + >6Mp = Leica M9 <> USD 900.😉

Just loaded 100ASA film into my Leica. Now I have no ISO dial, no LCD but a lot of fun. Like you could have with a USD 900 digital back on a classic Leica M.😀

To those that will not sign up for the 6Mp back: get out the time table.

Question: How long did Leica take to release a DRF with crop factor 1.5? Answer: Approx. the same time first patents on the sensor took to expire. That's how long it will probably take before you can buy a full frame DRF. Before that, the sensor will be too expensive to affordably build the camera with.

Now that the 6Mp sensors have become cheaper due to market saturation and dropping prices, it IS possible to build a digital back for USD 900.

 

[Alex v T]

It would even be worth it for $1500, if it was done as a one way Leica factory upgrade that included a CLA.
M2, 3, 4, 4p, 5????, 6, 7, and MP. They would sell loads of these. Who cares for the LCD. Just an ISO dial on the back, that's it.

 

[user237428934]

Now that the 6Mp sensors have become cheaper due to market saturation and dropping prices, it IS possible to build a digital back for USD 900.

I must admit that I am no expert in production of sensors. But if no one produces 6Mp sensors anymore how can you say prices are dropping? If you now start a new line of 6Mp Sensors I assume prices must be really high.

 

[Darren Abate]

Speaking as an actual working photographer who likes to use his M6 on assignment, and not just someone who likes to stare at it on a shelf or use it to shoot flowers and cats, or someone who would rail against spoiling the "purity" of the Leica M by *gasp* not running film through it, I can say that YES I would be interested in a digital back for my M6.

As my M6 sits now, it is unusable on assignment. A digital back would bring new life to the Leica for the working photographer, because not all of us are willing to drop 5 Large on a camera that simply isn't worth that much money. And for the record, 900 bucks is totally reasonable. FF would be nice, but 1.3X is also acceptable. No more than that though.

 

[parsec1]

Just DO IT !

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

wow someone said it 😀

 

[Socke]

I often wondered why such a thing wasn't followed up.

Or maybe... [Conspiracy Theory Warning] ... because of corporate vested interests. Who would develop it?

Then it was common knowledge that:
a) Film has more than 12 stops dynamic range
b) 135 film delivers more than 25 Megapixel which anybody needs
c) Film has better colours
d) Film is easier to work with, i.E. you don't need Photoshop

In short words, nobody wanted a cropped ISO limited e-film delivering much less then what film delivers.

Ok, today we know that:
a) only b/w film has that much of dynamic range
b) only slow slide film has a resolution worth scanning to 25MPixel
c) film colours are as they are, Velvia for a portrait under artificial light, anyone?
d) scanning is harder than converting a raw file and you can't avoid Photoshop in the 21st century.

All those who need digital have since moved to digital cameras or are in a situation which allows them to use the right film for the purpose.
When Sebastiao Salgado insists on a 645 Pentax with TriX in 220, he can do that. The common PJ can't and is probably using his 3rd DSLR by now.

I'm an amateur, which means love for a craft, and I can use whatever I like. That's why I use grainy Fortepan and APX400 souped in Rodinal 1+50 🙂, others are artists and sell what they do because it's worth to be paid, an then there are others who just have to deliver to get paid so they can feed their family.
IMHO there is no market for digital film, those loving their old cameras will use film as long as it is available, those who need or want digital have long moved on.

Oh, by the way, my old Contax SLR lenses work very well on my Canon 5D 🙂

 

[mwooten]

I voted yes--I would love to have be able to use my m4-p as back-up to my RD1. 🙂

 

[Rob-F]

For me the critical issue is the camera's framelines. The widest in any film M is 28mm, just like the R-D1. So if it has only a 1.5 crop factor, then the widest equivalent focal length using the camera's finder is 42mm. Wider than that, and we need an aux. finder. That is not terrible--I do use them anyhow--but i'd rather be able to go wider with the built-in finder. A real breakthrough would be a digital back with a 1.2 crop factor. We could use our 21mm lenses as 25mm equivalents.


Edit: No, wait. with a 28mm frame, obviously the widest equivalent fiield will be 28mm! So, the right thing to do might be a 1.33 crop, which is less demanding, and would allow using the 21mm lens as a 28mm eq. Whew!

But the trouble is, then a 24mm becomes a 32mm, which is just a bit wider than the 35mm frame. and a 28mm becomes 37mm, which would probably agree well with the undersized framelines on an M--especially the M6 and later. a 35mm is then 47mm; not a bad normal lens, but again, it won't agree too well with the 50mm framelines, espacially on current Leicas.

No perfect solution here. It depends on which focal length you want to optimize for. OK how about a square root of two crop: 1.414x? Now we have: 21-->30; 24-->34; 28-->40; and 35-->50. Notice the 28mm now becomes a 40, now a popular focal length, while the 35 hits 50 right on the nose. 24 comes out close enough to 35. And we will just have to muddle through with a 30mm eq. from the 21mm. Finally, a 21mm eq. can be had with the 15mm CV lens.

Hmm, that doesn't seem too bad. a 1.414 crop factor might be achievable, and we could have an approximation of our most-used angles of view.

 

[Newjerseyjohn]

no, because that is just stupid. if you want a digital camera, get one

 

[Spider67]

Thanks for posting!

Thanks for posting!

Does anyone recall what many referred to as the 'e-film scam' back in the early 1990's? It was a concept digital imaging device in the shape of a roll of film and thin sensor that would fit in most 35mm cameras which could be charged and downloaded via USB port. ... I still think eventually a (full frame) digital 135 shaped film cartridge device with a thin sensor will one day come to life. There are millions of cameras out there that could use them. The same for medium and large format as well.

Wow until your post it was just a bit more than an urban legend for me.
When I heard of it I was very intrigued. Later I asked myself Ok, how can you control the number of shots taken, so that you know when to change the cartridge. Conspiracy theory or not it would have been quite a PITA.
...Perhaps some guys from the FSU will buy up Zorki 4/4K's and exchange their backs for some homemade contratption and even produce some fake RD-1's
And yes I would like to have a product just like that not only for an M6.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

no, because that is just stupid. if you want a digital camera, get one

Yeah, you guys! You're all stupid! Geez, why don't you all just get digital cameras? YEAH!!!!! Losers!!

I think we can lock this one up now--I mean, really, what more can be said?