Instant back for 35mm SLR cameras

[taemo]

A new kickstarter for a 35mm Instax SQ back just came out, compatible initially for Nikon and Leica, with Pentax, Olympus and Canon afterwards.
I don't understand why they went with Instax SQ instead of Instax Mini to keep a closer 2:3 ratio instead of 1:1.
Also the image will be reversed left to right.

Tempted on backing for the Pentax as I don't want to butcher my M3.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/ninmlab/instant-magny-35-an-instant-back-for-135-slr-and-r

 

[Godfrey]

Looks great!

No butchering of any camera should be needed as long as the camera back is easily removable. Just unhook the swinging back from the M3 (or M4-2 in my case) and fit the optical portion of the adaptation, then bayonet the film processor onto that. I put in a pledge for the Leica M unit ... they'll be first out of the gate, presuming the pledges meet their goal, and the price is lowest for the early pledges.

I prefer the crop to square format ... then you don't have to sweat about turning the camera to portrait orientation with that big lump hanging off the bottom. And the image size is a little nicer than the Instax Mini.

I love wacky gizmos like this. 😀

PS: I remember the original Speed Magny well ... Used one with a Nikon F many an eon ago when someone brought it in to the camera shop I was working for at the time, about 1971 or so. It was darn cool to use a Nikon and get an instant print out of it!

G

 

[seany65]

The basic idea is decent enough as you can check the lighting etc. but from an illustration near the bottom it doesn't seem like you get a very good/close view of the viewfinder.

I wonder how good the image quality is.

It doesn't look like they've tested with one but I wonder if it can fit on a Nikon F301?

 

[emayoh]

I feel like backing just because of the John Berger tome in the sample images.
Cred status: earned.
...

Spoiler: Still probably won't back.

 

[BillBingham2]

I like the idea but would almost do it if:

- They turned the based 180 around and had it spit the film out the back

- Had a hand grip with a trigger release (something I can perhaps screw into the shutter release) that I can use to fire the shutter. Build it into the body to keep it reasonably small.

I'd go out and get an FM of some variant as it looks like fun. So for around $200 USD I think I could end up with an instant camera for my Nikkors MF Primes......

Great idea. One thumb way up, almost two.

B2 (;->

 

[BillBingham2]

Seems that if I had looked further on their page I would have seen the ejection port can point towards the back. I'm wondering if for the next version the hand grip (screw into the tripod port on the unit) could be made to eject the film say two seconds after you press the trigger on the hand grip.

B2 (;->

 

[Godfrey]

I’d like to see the first version produced before I ask for changes in the second version sion... 🙂

 

[Livesteamer]

Get a Speed Magny back for a Nikon F. Do they still make instant film for that back?


Joe

 

[Mackinaw]

Get a Speed Magny back for a Nikon F. Do they still make instant film for that back?

No, it used peel-apart instant film, like the discontinued Fuji FP-100C.

Jim B.

 

[BillBingham2]

The original is, well, BIGGER. I'd get a Crown Graphic with an instant back.

 

[Godfrey]

Get a Speed Magny back for a Nikon F. Do they still make instant film for that back?

There's one available on Ebay at present:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-Mikami-Speed-Magny-Attachment-for-F-Rare/183266933171

In another time, I'd have snapped it up—I have a Nikon F to play with. But without film being available, I'd have to convert it to Instax Wide or 6x9, or something like that, which would make it entirely too costly to play with. I didn't pay that much for the Nikon F, including the complete overhaul I had done to it.

No, this new toy is a much better deal. 🙂

G

 

[farlymac]

I bought a Speed Magny last year so I could mount one of my busted F's on it for display. Came in the original box, too, and looks like it was never used. It was something I had planned to do before Fuji killed pack film, so I went ahead with it even if it would only be for nostalgia sake. The price was right.


Over on PetaPixel they were riffing on how hard it would be to use the viewfinder (with one "expert" pointing out the two ports in the center of the rear of the Leica M, which just happen to be the flash ports), but at least on the Nikons and other SLRs you'd be able to use an angle finder. Is there not one also for the M?


PF

 

[Godfrey]

...
Over on PetaPixel they were riffing on how hard it would be to use the viewfinder (with one "expert" pointing out the two ports in the center of the rear of the Leica M, which just happen to be the flash ports), but at least on the Nikons and other SLRs you'd be able to use an angle finder. Is there not one also for the M?

It's not going to be all that hard, particularly with the Leica M. I don't listen to all that nonsense. I've managed to get my eye close enough to do what's needed with nearly any weird stuff hanging off and around the camera. Inconvenient, perhaps, but not hard.

G

 

[zuiko85]

Mirror image though, with only one reflection. Just where are all these extra backs going to be found. Are they buying up a bunch of old cameras and stripping off the backs?

 

[Godfrey]

An update went to backers this morning. It had pictures showing the optics—which look good! all glass, multicoated and such—and fitment on a Leica M. The device is not as bulky as many seem to fear ... and, particularly on a Leica M, it looks like there will be no problem at all getting your eye to the viewfinder.

I tell ya, if they do a good job on the implementation, this is going to be a fun thing to shoot with. They've made it to 70% of their funding goal already...

Yes, the image will be left-right reversed. So what? Ever spent any time looking into a Rolleiflex or Hasselblad waist level finder? If you need it flipped, well, scan and flip it. Not a big deal at all, far as I'm concerned. 😀

G

 

[olo530]

I don't know how much of a concern it really is, but I think it's worth pointing out:
1. Light loss - 3 stops. Turns ISO 800 into ISO 100
2. "Maximum effective aperture: f/4 (If using aperture larger than f/4, the incoming light value will remain at f/4"

 

[retinax]

I don't know how much of a concern it really is, but I think it's worth pointing out:
1. Light loss - 3 stops. Turns ISO 800 into ISO 100
2. "Maximum effective aperture: f/4 (If using aperture larger than f/4, the incoming light value will remain at f/4"

1. Is inevitable. If an image is being enlarged, it will get darker. The bokeh crowd will love that part.



2. I don't understand how that can happen. Anybody?


It sounds like a neat toy. A much more flexible way to shoot Instax. If it used instax wide, I would be tempted to back a kickstarter for the first time. Like this it's too small for my taste, and not even using cheaper instax mini, but the expensive instax square film...


and.. has anybody found info about which cameras it will work with? They only seem to list brands, but not specific models, which doesn't make sense. Backs differ.

 

[Oren Grad]

and.. has anybody found info about which cameras it will work with? They only seem to list brands, but not specific models, which doesn't make sense. Backs differ.

Scroll down on the campaign page. They do list the specific models.

 

[taemo]

I'm still on the fence on supporting this. Wouldn't mind giving this a try but I've had 50% success rate on Kickstarter (2 Kickstarters, still havent received my Ferrania film) and feel like I'm not losing much by paying full price later on once succesfull.
Plus I have the Mint RF70 on its way already later this year to keep me Instax happy.

Also I still can't make up my mind between a back for my M3 or Pentax MX

 

[Godfrey]

I don't know how much of a concern it really is, but I think it's worth pointing out:
1. Light loss - 3 stops. Turns ISO 800 into ISO 100
2. "Maximum effective aperture: f/4 (If using aperture larger than f/4, the incoming light value will remain at f/4"

Instax films are designed to operate with relatively slow lenses, which is just fine for their medium-size format.

To your point #1: Consider that the standard lens on most Instax cameras has an f/12 maximum lens opening (my Lomo Instant Square has a 95mm f/10 lens), I don't think light losses are much of an issue with any 35mm camera used as a host. Even an f/4 lens would net f/11 anyway with a three stop light loss. And even an f/11 lens on 2.4x2.4 inch format can produce nice out of focus blur at modest focusing distances.

What your point #2 means is that setting a fast 50mm lens to anything larger than f/4 nets no further increase in light going to the film due to the 'secondary iris' effect of the back's optical system. So, effectively, you've got a camera with an f/11 or smaller lens regardless what you put on the front of it, which is right in line with what Instax films were designed to operate best with.

I walked around my condo and backyard doing readings with a Sekonic light meter set to ISO 800, f/11 aperture priority reading. Outdoors, the exposures ranged from 1/125 to 1/1000 on this sunny day, from deep shade to open sun. Indoors (my living room, office, with large windows and blinds half open), I found I could cover most exposures with 1/8 to 1/30 second exposure times. Of course, most instant film like to have a little flash fill to manage contrasty circumstances in bright light, and that same little flash will help bring shutter times into a nice hand-holdable range.

G