digital film

gns

Well-known
Local time
6:58 AM
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
1,215
A couple of years ago, there was a company working on a digital conversion product for film cameras. Short-lived and nothing emerged from that.

Why is that not a feasable idea? Obviously it would require some camera mods, like removal of pressure plate or whatever to make room for the sensor, etc. If it is a matter of fitting all the electronics into the camera, couldn't that mostly be handled by a small box in your pocket or camera bag with data transferred by cable or wireless connection?

Just curious.

P.S. Not looking for (yet another) film vs. digital "Discussion".

Gary
 
Leica has essentially taken this as far as it can be taken without a purpose-built camera with their new Modul-R back for the the Leica R8 / R9 film-based SLR cameras. You may notice that the module takes the place of the entire back and hangs quite a bit below as well. A significant achievement in retro-fitting as well as in doing what they said they would do, no matter how impractical it ended up being in the end - liable to cost them dearly, but they did promise.

The Kodak DCS series cameras were similar in nature - basically Nikon and Canon SLR cameras that were retrofitted. They were also huge.

I'm not saying it cannot be done, but not on the form-factor of a sensor and associated electronics that would take the place of a 35mm film cartridge, film plane, and takeup spool in terms of space needed inside there; and basically, that's all you have room to work with if you're going to build a 'universal' type of digital replacement back as the Digital Film people had envisioned.

The biggest problem right now is that it is a solution looking for a problem. By the time the technology will be able to tackle this (and I'm sure it will in time), demand will not exist in sufficient quantity to support such a thing.

A real shame, because I'd love it!


Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Bill,

Is it that much that would have to go into the camera itself as opposed to some sort of satelite unit?

I think the beauty of this kind of solution is that it sidesteps the whole soon obsolete/not upgradable issue many paople are concerned about with digital cameras.

Gary
 
A really neat idea that apparently almost came to fruition. I don't remember the name of the company now, but the last I heard, they were having problems getting FCC certification. At least that is what was reported in some of the media. I don't know how close they were to actually getting anything usable into production. I don't even remember seeing any of the magazines saying they had actually seen a demonstration of a working model.

The size permitted would have been the same for all cameras, given the model they were touting. It had to fit into the space for the 35mm cassette and the film at the focal plane. As Bill alluded to above, that didn't leave a lot of room. I don't recall now, but I presume it was to have been a full frame sensor. They may never have been as close to a solution as they wanted everyone to believe. I would like to think they were. I also seem to recall they were looking for more capital.

What a neat idea to be able to use that interchangably in all my current 35mm film cameras, if they, or anyone, had been able to make it work. It is hard to believe that if it could be made to work, there would not be a market for it if it could be done at a marketable price. That may also have been a big problem. If you could offer that to me at $300 or $400, or even $500, I would be interested. $5000 and I would not be!
 
The solution you propose is technically feasible but probably not fiscally feasible. Consider that it took Leica several years to come to market with their Modul-R. No matter how cool it may be, it costs about $6,000 street retail. And it has a limited lifespan, it will be obsolete soon - because digital sensors keep getting denser and better and so on. Memory cards change size and form factor, batteries are updated in capacity and then form factor as well. In other words, you can't upgrade it, and you have to buy a new one every couple of years if you want to 'keep up' with the latest changes.

I'd bet nearly anything that there will not be a new 'Modul-R' released in a couple of years with all new specs, still fitting the R9/R10. So people who buy that option are locking themselves into a dead-end investment. If it gets them by until they can unload their Leica SLR lenses, etc, and buy into another system, then great. If Leica comes out with a DSLR R-series, fine. But I think they're hosed.

The retail price that Leica is selling the Modul-R for is really not bad considering what the potential market is for it. And I suspect that's kind of what we'd be looking at for a 'generic' version of the Modul-R.

Sadly, I think it's a non-starter, but it sure would be nice.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
Miniaturisation is one problem which will be solved some time, if it isn't allready.

Interfaces are the big problem. You have to interface the sensor to the shutter, some medium format backs do this via the flash contact, and you have to support some sort of mass storage device.

Leica interfaces it's DMR to the R8/9 databack and motordrive interface, those are different from manufacturer to manufacturer as well as from camera to camera and must not be available at all!
This would leave us with a digital cartridge with very limited features without a review, no way to set parameters from the outside and and and ...

I think film and a scanner is better 🙂
 
I don't know if I'd say it's a non-starter, and I don't think it's fair to judge Leica's offerings the same way that one would judge some other well-funded, well engineered offerings. Leica is afterall a small lens company that occasionally throws a few dollars into camera development...I recently read that their entire development budget for the average year is less than $4 mill. Add to that bad management and a general lack of understanding for how the market moves, well, you've got some lovely cameras, but worldshakers they are not.

I think the main problem is that there is a general lack of the needed technology yet on the market....in a couple of years even, such a thing may be eminently feasable.

The secondary problem is not one of demand per se, because as we all know, there are a lot of people who are not even as fanatical as we are here at RFF about their long assembled gear. Imagine all the guys and gals out there with their battle-scarred OM-2's, K1000's and AE-1's, that will not sell them, not matter what, even though all they do is collect dust.

The problem is rather that The New always beckons, and thanks to advertising and a general perception that film somehow has ceased to exist (a few weeks ago I ran into a friend with my camera in hand, and he asked me where I get my film these days, since it is no longer made...that was news to me); people always want the newest and the coolest, even if that means throwing the trusty old SLR into the attic.

If somebody really creative could assemble some venture capital to not only develop, but also market the hell out of such a device, I think it could work....unfortunately, there seem to be some fields that venture capitalists are willing to wet their feet in, and some that they are not. We can hope for such a product, but I think it's unlikely to happen, as Bill said, because when the technology exists, the demand will not be there; everybody will already have a DSLR or some such.

As a couple people have said already, the whole package wouldn't HAVE to fit into the camera, although that would be a much more effective marketing strategy. With blue-tooth, or some of the new promised wireless technologies, all the guts except for the sensor and a battery to power that sensor could be in a little cell-phone sized apparatus that one would stick in their pocket, complete with an LCD and a banana to chimp with.
 
I did a Yahoo Finance lookup on Voyager One, Inc, which purchased and now runs the company formerly known as Silicon Film. They have a burn rate of 2 million USD every nine months, and it is increasing. They list assets of 1,000 dollars and huge liabilities and are listed as a penny stock - which is not currently trading at any price.

And by the way, Bobofish - congratuations, you made me snort soda out my nose when you said that "Leica is afterall a small lens company that occasionally throws a few dollars into camera development." I'm eating lunch at work - I nearly coated my monitor with Mountain Dew. Of the three Leica operating companies, Leica Camera reported sales of 93 million euros last year. They report having spent 3.9 million euros on R&D the first half of fiscal year 2005. That's nearly 8 million euros per year, or just shy of 10% of their total sales - very nice. Leica just a 'lens company'? Yes, and Ford is just a car company.

In the end, I think that the "Silicon Film" dream is a lovely thing - wish it could be done - but suspect that there is no will for it, no perceived demand for it, and it won't happen.

Are there thousands who would rush out and buy such a thing? Sure! But millions would have to do so to make any major company want to do it, and that demand does not exist.

Best hope - Cosina. But they say that Cosina does not like digital - they like film.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
bobofish, you have to produce and market it to a certain price point! I don't think anybody but Leica can sell a "digital back" in that price range.
And the DMR is an exceptional piece of engineering and creativity.
As Kodak showed with the DCS x20 and x60 series it is doable with Canons and Nikons bodies, too.
But as it stands today getting a second body is not the worst solution to use the existing lenses.

As I understand it, the Konica-Minolta 7d and 5d should take most of the Minolta lenses, the Pentax istD series most of the Pentax lenses, Nikon midrange to pro most if not all of the Nikon and Canon all EF lenses. I'm not sure about the Olympus E Series and older lenses.

So we allready have solutions for old lenses a digital film has to meet.
 
Socke said:
As I understand it, the Konica-Minolta 7d and 5d should take most of the Minolta lenses, the Pentax istD series most of the Pentax lenses, Nikon midrange to pro most if not all of the Nikon and Canon all EF lenses. I'm not sure about the Olympus E Series and older lenses.

So we allready have solutions for old lenses a digital film has to meet.

Olympus makes an OM lens adapter for E-series cameras. I've got one for my E-1. Olympus was giving the adapter away free at least in the U.S. and Europe, not sure what's happening now. Cameraquest sells an adapter for $175, and there's a less robust (aluminum) version from a company in eastern Europe (Poland?).

The lenses work well in general, but there are metering quirks at the widest and narrowest stops. And the lenses are completely manual--you have to stop down manually to meter and shoot. This makes them OK for landscapes and macro, and sometimes for shooting wide open or nearly so in available light. But it's a pain with anything that's moving. And some lenses perform better than others with digital--sometimes beautifully, sometimes worse than they do on film.

Of all the SLR companies, Pentax is the best in terms of supporting diaphragm automation on legacy (non-autofocus) lenses. The *ist cameras support K-mount lenses with all the automation the lens provides, and the camera has a function to briefly stop the lens down for metering and shooting. With most other companies, it's stop-down metering, or none at all with legacy lenses, and you must stop down manually to shoot I believe Nikon pro bodies support some legacy-lens metering that the prosumer bodies don't. Manual focusing on those small DSLR screens is often quite difficult.

The point is that using old lenses is a bigger pain than many people wish to deal with. You often get less usability than you do on a compatible film body. And you find out why autofocus, automatic stop-down diaphragms and full aperture metering were invented. 😀

--Peter
 
The problem of how you'd interface the thing into different cameras (different manufacturers), the problem of fitting the sensor, electronics, and, don't forget probably the biggest space grabber- the battery- into the space where the film cassette and film went... well, now it doesn't seem doable. You sure ain't going to power the gizmo on the two button cells that are probably the original body's power source, are you? And what would the price be? Digital SLRs have come down in price so much that I don't think this SiliconFilm thing could compete.
 
Socke said:
Miniaturisation is one problem which will be solved some time, if it isn't allready.

Interfaces are the big problem. You have to interface the sensor to the shutter, some medium format backs do this via the flash contact, and you have to support some sort of mass storage device.

Leica interfaces it's DMR to the R8/9 databack and motordrive interface, those are different from manufacturer to manufacturer as well as from camera to camera and must not be available at all!
This would leave us with a digital cartridge with very limited features without a review, no way to set parameters from the outside and and and ...

I think film and a scanner is better 🙂

Volker,
Some people get the Canon 20D and use their Nikon, Contax and Leica lenses with adapters:
http://ca.geocities.com/spirope/EOSclassiclenses.htm
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/manual_focus_EOS.html
http://www.lens-scape.com/article/rollei-vs-canon.jpg
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Lens-adapters.html~mainFrame
http://www.novoflex.de/english/html/adapters.htm
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000tDG
http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/text-eos-to-fd-adapter.html
http://www.outbackphoto.com/the_bag/paul_adapter_note/essay.html

R.J.
 
gns said:
I think the beauty of this kind of solution is that it sidesteps the whole soon obsolete/not upgradable issue many paople are concerned about with digital cameras.

This is one concept I'm totally fascinated with!

I would most definitely be interested in this. It would be one film option of many, and one reason I don't consider going digitial is because you are stuck with one kind of "film" and one that will always be obsolete a few years (or months) later.

However (comma) with 1.3 megapixels and ISO 100. 🙁 Not exactly the Charles Atlas Seal of Approval<tm>.

And, unfortunately, it looks like perpetual vaporware to me. 🙁

Ya know, if somebody could ever make something like this really work, they could really spoil the market for all of those high end DSLRs and such.
 
RJBender said:
Volker,
Some people get the Canon 20D and use their Nikon, Contax and Leica lenses with adapters:
[R.J.
Yes, friend of me uses R lenses on Canon, but as far as I understood metering works stopped down only.

Regards,
Bertram
 
Bertram2 said:
Yes, friend of me uses R lenses on Canon, but as far as I understood metering works stopped down only.

Regards,
Bertram


The professional photographer friend?

R.J.
 
Why build a digital sensor for an old film camera body when you can adapt a lens to a digital camera body? 🙂

R.J.
 
Back
Top Bottom