"Digital Film?"

[AgentX]

Who thinks it will happen?

Or, rather, would it be relevant by the time it's technically and financially feasible?

I'm talking about a drop-in cartridge which fits into an existing film camera (35mm, 120, whatever they can make) with electronics/memory/battery where the film canister/roll would normally sit, with a semi-flexible film-thin digital light sensor which lays over the film gate. It would have to be able to understand separate exposures and record each one independently... (Perhaps thus no high FPS motor-drive shooting, but that would hardly seem to be the point...) Access to your photos and options (if any, such as ISO settings) could be by a wired or wireless PDA type device.

 

[BillBingham2]

Dream that was tried about three years ago.

Perhaps it's another time to try in a year or two down the road.

B2

 

[MP Guy]

you mean like this from way back in 1999?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/9909/99090501siliconfilm.asp

 

[AgentX]

Like that, but actually produced/sold... 🙂

I figured it was an idea out there...didn't know there'd been any attempts to actually make it.

 

[dmr]

I've been holding my breath for something like this for so many years!

I'm turning quite blue! 🙂

 

[btgc]

Quite inefficient, I guess. Imagine, people would buy one (in case it fits any film camera) or two cartridges (say, one for small, another for large cameras) and...what's next?

I mean, how force people buying new cartridge each one or two years like digital cameras go by?

 

[BillBingham2]

you mean like this from way back in 1999?

Was it that long ago, Damn I'm old.

Time flys when you are turning blue!

B2 (;->

 

[AgentX]

Quite inefficient, I guess. Imagine, people would buy one (in case it fits any film camera) or two cartridges (say, one for small, another for large cameras) and...what's next?

I mean, how force people buying new cartridge each one or two years like digital cameras go by?

Nah, you could have upgraded resolution, memory, sensitivity (7200 ISO and a Noctilux!), video capacity...wireless live view from the sensor...plenty of doo-dads to add on over the years. And they'd probably only work for a year or three before needing replacement.

 

[kermaier]

Yeah, I followed that attempt for a while, hoping to make my Canon FD gear a bit more future-resistant, despite it's abandonment by Canon. Never happened, obviously.

I'm not sure it's really a worthwhile solution these days. In 1999, they were proposing to charge $800 for a 1.3 MP insert. What would a version with 6-12 MP go for today? Wild guess: $1500-$2000. Users of Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Minolta, Leica, Contax, etc. all have options for good digital bodies in that sort of price range. Pretty much the only folks with no digital body options are poor saps like me with Canon FD lenses.

I gave up hope and bought an R-D1, which is as close to the feel of a film camera as a digital body can get, IMO, and I'm loving it. I'm keeping an F-1N body and a couple of lenses for nostalgia, but my 35mm gear hasn't seen a roll of film in 3 years, and I wouldn't spend the price of a new DSLR to revive it.

::Ari

 

[spiderfrank]

This remembers to me the story of Preston Tucker and his revolutionary car. Did you see the movie?

 

[AgentX]

Yeah, I'm figuring by the time it'd be feasible it'd be sort of pointless...

 

[hks3sgte]

I would like to see digital backs. Polaroid backs were available, why not a digital back for, say, a Canon F-1, or Nikon F or... anything with a removable back???

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Besides the technical problems of interfacing a digital back to various cameras, just the very basic problem of dust on the sensor would make it impractical.

 

[Jamie123]

I would like to see digital backs. Polaroid backs were available, why not a digital back for, say, a Canon F-1, or Nikon F or... anything with a removable back???

You mean like the Leica DMR? I'm sure you can still get one on the used market.

 

[Traut]

As digital technology becomes more ubiquitous I can forsee someone taking a sensor with micro electronics and a builit in memory, battery or solar power supply and just being able to tape it over the shutter. Probably the most difficult thing will be to communicate between the camera's shutter and advancing the memory cartridge. It's reminiscent to me of the movie (story) Benjamin Button - as one technology moves ahead to where its simple and doable the need (film camera) will be aging in the other direction. There might be a small time window where it will all come together - in someone's garage workshop probably. Many of the obstacles in 1999 have been overcome, specifically in sensor design and production. What would really be cool though is a scanner/processor wherin you could insert an exposed 35mm film cartridge and get scanned negatives ala what Polaroid came out with 30 years ago.

 

[dmr]

You mean like the Leica DMR? I'm sure you can still get one on the used market.

That thing is/was HUGE! That with a 35mm SLR would be like carrying around a press camera!

I did look at it. Other than the obvious coincidence, it really did not appeal to me.

 

[spiderfrank]

I think with the actual technology the digital film should be possible, but not convenient for the big brands, that want to sell the entire camera, not only a sensor

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Leica abandoned the DMR. Enough said. 😉

 

[Mephiloco]

Yeah, I followed that attempt for a while, hoping to make my Canon FD gear a bit more future-resistant, despite it's abandonment by Canon. Never happened, obviously.

I'm not sure it's really a worthwhile solution these days. In 1999, they were proposing to charge $800 for a 1.3 MP insert. What would a version with 6-12 MP go for today? Wild guess: $1500-$2000. Users of Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Minolta, Leica, Contax, etc. all have options for good digital bodies in that sort of price range. Pretty much the only folks with no digital body options are poor saps like me with Canon FD lenses.

I gave up hope and bought an R-D1, which is as close to the feel of a film camera as a digital body can get, IMO, and I'm loving it. I'm keeping an F-1N body and a couple of lenses for nostalgia, but my 35mm gear hasn't seen a roll of film in 3 years, and I wouldn't spend the price of a new DSLR to revive it.

::Ari

I sold my AE-1 Program, but still shoot with my t90 regularly. The lenses are so inexpensive, the camera can take a beating (moreso than a leica), and it has a spot meter. I don't think I'll ever completely abandon the FD system.

 

[wgerrard]

As B2 suggests, market forces are the real stumbling block. (Ignoring, for the moment, the problem of fitting the thing in all kinds of cameras.) Unless it was a one-shot affair like a roll of film, the price might be surprising.

I don't see any chip makers being convinced that there are enough people using old cameras.