Yashi
Established
OK, you got me for a second.......
http://photographyblog.com/news/april_fools_day_round-up/
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/digitalca...-photo-pranks/4885?tag=content;selector-blogs
....
BUT can you remember this ????? THAT WAS THE YEAR 2001 !
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0109/01091702siliconfilmvaporizes.asp
http://photographyblog.com/news/april_fools_day_round-up/
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/digitalca...-photo-pranks/4885?tag=content;selector-blogs
....
BUT can you remember this ????? THAT WAS THE YEAR 2001 !
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0109/01091702siliconfilmvaporizes.asp
Man, if this ever happens... ebay will blow up!
Why would you want it? It completely eliminates all (read most) of the advantages of a digital camera. No preview screen/histograms, none of the in camera control. Also is without most of the benefits of shooting film.
Some of us love digital, but also love old cameras. I would love something like this.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Some of us love digital, but also love old cameras. I would love something like this.
The best April Fools jokes are those that people want to believe in.
This was tried 10 years ago, and the company actually had test images available. In the end, it was the power source that they claimed killed it off. "Silicon Filmworks", or something like that.
If a company does pull this off, I'm buying one.
These guys tried:
http://www.dcviews.com/press/SiliconFilm_SF10.htm
If a company does pull this off, I'm buying one.
These guys tried:
http://www.dcviews.com/press/SiliconFilm_SF10.htm
Last edited:
kzphoto
Well-known
I'd pity the first guy who had the sensor sucked up into the auto-wind mechanism of a newer camera.
Hahahahahah -- I hadn't even considered this!
Why shouldn't anyone believe this?
After all, Kodak introduced a similar product to turn my Digital camera into one that uses film.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84251
After all, Kodak introduced a similar product to turn my Digital camera into one that uses film.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84251
MC JC86
Negative Nancy.
Some of us love digital, but also love old cameras. I would love something like this.
Oh, I understand that and count myself in that number (well, I don't LOVE digital, but think it would be neat to be able to use my cameras for digital output straight from the camera without scanning) I just don't see how it would come close to being as efficient and effective as either A. Using a digital camera to take pictures or B. Using a film camera to take pictures on film.
If it ever became available, and was reasonably priced, and was just like shooting film only without all the consumables involved it certainly would be neat. Those, however, are some mighty big "ifs".
MC JC86
Negative Nancy.
Why shouldn't anyone believe this?
After all, Kodak introduced a similar product to turn my Digital camera into one that uses film.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84251
Yeah Brian, I used to own one of those but IIRC the add-on part was a lot larger than a 135 canister and also "hard-wired" into the camera body
EDIT: I'm dumb, I didn't read your post carefully enough.. I get it now. :bang:
jaredangle
Photojournalist
"Set the ISO to 400 and your done - your camera will now take high quality digital pictures."
Last modified 11 AM 4/1![]()
Yeah, I don't see any DX contacts on the canister to even know that the camera is set to 400. Plus, it wouldn't even matter then with the old mechanical cameras with meters that don't couple to the shutter.
Likely possible in maybe another decade, but for now we'll just have to deal with people screwing around.
edit - PLUS, how would it know when the shutter is firing? They've worked that out with the Hasselblad V system by connecting the leaf shutter to the digital back via PC Sync, but I don't see that working with an internal system like this.
Last edited:
... but think it would be neat to be able to use my cameras for digital output straight from the camera without scanning) I just don't see how it would come close to being as efficient and effective as either A. Using a digital camera to take pictures or B. Using a film camera to take pictures on film.
You contradicted yourself... Anyway, that's the point. Digital is more efficient.
MC JC86
Negative Nancy.
You contradicted yourself... Anyway, that's the point. Digital is more efficient.
I don't see any contradiction; just saying it sounds like a neat idea, in practice though just silly.
If you think my words contradict one another, I assure you my thoughts are even more confused.
EDIT: After rereading perhaps some clarification is in order (as this is a matter of the utmost import and seriousness) I wasn't questioning why one would want to use an old camera with a digital sensor inside; just why anyone would want to do so with what it would have to be to work. Think of how upset people were having to use filters on the M8 or kvetching over coding lenses or not.
Last edited:
Jani_from_Finland
Well-known
Man if this would have been true ...
ZeissFan
Veteran
At some point, the technology will advance to the point where it's feasible. However, the big issue with old cameras will be dust. Secondarily, will be Leica users who put their camera onto a table lens up, which will burn a hole through the shutter and subsequently destroy he sensor.
And it will be a long time -- maybe never -- before we see one for 6x9.
Hopefully, I'll be dead a long time before I ever want to stick a sensor into one of my cameras. I actually like film, how it looks and the entire act of processing film, limited number of exposures and pulling the processed negatives from the tank.
I feel zero emotional connection to images from my Pentax K10D, although it is an excellent device.
And it will be a long time -- maybe never -- before we see one for 6x9.
Hopefully, I'll be dead a long time before I ever want to stick a sensor into one of my cameras. I actually like film, how it looks and the entire act of processing film, limited number of exposures and pulling the processed negatives from the tank.
I feel zero emotional connection to images from my Pentax K10D, although it is an excellent device.
MC JC86
Negative Nancy.
Hopefully, I'll be dead a long time before I ever want to stick a sensor into one of my cameras.
This evokes images of a zombie photographer. I like it.
stevebrot
Established
How do you make it know when to record an image? Apparently it is not connected to the shutter button of your old camera, is it?![]()
That is the key issue. MF digital backs use the flash synch, but that is not very accessible from the inside of a 35mm camera, eh?
Steve
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Some of us love digital, but also love old cameras. I would love something like this.
eBay 120707362640 is for you - it's old, it's digital, it's a Nikon F3, and it doesn't even have a screen.
(Try to figure out how to get the pictures out of there without the extra hard drive unit, though.)
Shane
Member
MC JC86
Negative Nancy.
Quite.
This was established in post #2, #3 and cited in #10 and #22 among others.
Regardless, surely we're (I'm?) allowed some inane ramblings in an April fools post, no?
gliderbee
Well-known
Same way as you make it "known" to the film in your camera: it captures whatever light hits it when the back is closed. The only light hitting it then should be when the shutter is open.
How do you make it know when to record an image? Apparently it is not connected to the shutter button of your old camera, is it?![]()
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.