OK you got yours ... now where's ours?

[Dave Wilkinson]

That's my current "main" digicam, Dave. Other than a slow-ish buffer, it holds its own rather well, and I like how it handles. I even shot a few recent gigs with it.

- Barrett

Damn it!...Barrett, that's made me feel worse still!....off to look at Ebay now!😡
Dave.

 

[IK13]

I've been whining for a FF DSLR the size of my OM for a while. 4/3, micro 4/3 ...thanks, but no thanks. Size matters as far as I'm concerned and 4/3 just doesn't quite cut it for me. And even the 4/3 dslrs are larger than then the OM...

 

[BillBingham2]

I think what Keith is saying is give us a minimalist option. No LCD on the back. A dial for ISO setting and a small LCD (without back lighting) to display for number of pictures left on the card. Perhaps a warning of low battery would be nice. No other circuitry, keep it simple and small. No jpg conversions, no displays of images. It should add the amount of size a RapidWinder II does to an M or perhaps an old Winder 2 did to an OM. Run off something simple, small and available, say a DB60 battery.

Replace the back and screw into the tripod socket. This design would work for Nikon F, F2, OMs, I think some Canons and many others. Talk about killing a segment of the DSLRs out there. It’s a green product as it reuses existing cameras and lenses.
What Kodak did early on was like this but much bigger. More recent was small but added way too much circuitry and an LCD with ballooned the size. Look at what they put into a GRD or X1, take out the parts we do not want and it just gets smaller.
I really wish I had some seed money. I bet it could come to market for OMs and Nikons in just under a year with the right funding.

Keith, is this what you’re looking for?

B2 (;->

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

I think what Keith is saying is give us a minimalist option. No LCD on the back. A dial for ISO setting and a small LCD (without back lighting) to display for number of pictures left on the card. Perhaps a warning of low battery would be nice. No other circuitry, keep it simple and small. No jpg conversions, no displays of images. It should add the amount of size a RapidWinder II does to an M or perhaps an old Winder 2 did to an OM. Run off something simple, small and available, say a DB60 battery.

Replace the back and screw into the tripod socket. This design would work for Nikon F, F2, OMs, I think some Canons and many others. Talk about killing a segment of the DSLRs out there. It’s a green product as it reuses existing cameras and lenses.
What Kodak did early on was like this but much bigger. More recent was small but added way too much circuitry and an LCD with ballooned the size. Look at what they put into a GRD or X1, take out the parts we do not want and it just gets smaller.
I really wish I had some seed money. I bet it could come to market for OMs and Nikons in just under a year with the right funding.

Keith, is this what you’re looking for?

B2 (;->

It is me! - but I don't think those corporate bigwigs want us still usng those old metal contraptions!
Dave.

 

[Benjamin]

It's been a boring day ... just finished an eight day stint in the city yesterday but no work today! 😱

What do you do, if you don't mind my asking, Keith?

 

[reala_fan]

That's my current "main" digicam, Dave. Other than a slow-ish buffer, it holds its own rather well, and I like how it handles. I even shot a few recent gigs with it.

- Barrett

Yes!! The Olympus C-8080 is a heck of a camera.

You cannot beat the handling and "feel" of the camera. It's IQ is really gorgous as well.

I still use mine on a regular basis.

The JPG engine and Auto White Balance is superb on the 8080 as well.

I have long said "if it had a manual zoom ring and a logical manual focus system", that it would have been "perfect".

I was really hoping Olympus would have made a C-9090 based on the same great body/build and given us the larger buffer, manual zoom and focus rings, a 1 meg pixel EVF, and faster AF.

 

[Frankie]

......To get a full frame DSLR I have to buy a monstrocity of a camera that looks more like a cut down PC that's been painted black! I want something about the size of an OM-1 or Nikon F with manual focus and I don't give a damn if it can't shoot eight frames per second......
🙂

It seems the time has come for someone [perhaps myself] to make a retrofit kit for any 35mm cameras.

A simple kit comprise of:

• A CCD/circuitry package that fit within the space occupied by the pressure plate;
• A battery that fit within the film cartridge chamber;
• A SD or mini- or micro-SD chamber that clips onto the take-up spool.

No LCD [set up the camera via an iPod, iPhone or PC], no new motor...use your thumb. Shoot only RAW at maximum resolution, no JPEG no reduced image size...no nothing. SD cards are cheap.

No automatic anything, no idiotic million scene modes, no histogram and no chimping. When in doubt, bracket...film/processing is free.

The reality is: most CCD is rated at ~ISO 100, but with ~4 stops latitude on the under-exposure side...hence claims of ISO 1600 and beyond [with electronic boosting, thus noise]. Is that not enough? Which one of you had push processed film beyond ISO 1600?

Film/processing/scanning in my locale cost ~$1 or more per shot. Would you not prepaid years of supply/services for $500 by buying such a kit?

 

[BillBingham2]

We need an on/off switch. Shoot and store to the card at 2 frames per second. Perhaps a small red LED when the unit is busy storing the data to the card.

B2 (;->

 

[BillBingham2]

I would hope in mass the price point would be around the $500 but think we might be around $800 for a FF chip. I'd be OK with that for a street price.

From a design perspective you never want to take the back off (cleaner sensor) so I think the small add on to the bottom for battery and SD card would be better.

Wonder if anyone at State Street is listening?

B2 (;->

 

[gnarayan]

It seems the time has come for someone [perhaps myself] to make a retrofit kit for any 35mm cameras.

A simple kit comprise of:

• A CCD/circuitry package that fit within the space occupied by the pressure plate;
• A battery that fit within the film cartridge chamber;
• A SD or mini- or micro-SD chamber that clips onto the take-up spool.

No LCD [set up the camera via an iPod, iPhone or PC], no new motor...use your thumb. Shoot only RAW at maximum resolution, no JPEG no reduced image size...no nothing. SD cards are cheap. No automatic anything, no idiotic million scene modes, no histogram and no chimping.

This is the perfect project for the Dream Pink Perfume Farting Flying Pony engineering company!

These guys tried it - turned out they made a very mini pixely pony with a tendency to look a bit green. It was put out to pasture along with the company, because it never quite worked as nicely as the regular digital ponies.

These guys tried it too - it ended up looking like a bloated pony hippo. Not many liked the bloated pony hippo, and the entire line of ponies was retired.

 

[BillBingham2]

They tried for too much too early in the technology maturity cycle.

KISS, few buttons, two controls (on/off and ISO) and not much else. They were fighting the DSLR market.

We will open up a new market segment.

B2 (;->

 

[wgerrard]

I suspect it could be done, given sufficient resources. But, who's gonna write or buy the software? Which old RF's/SLR's do you design and build for? Could you realistically build back plates, etc., to fit old Leicas, Canon, Nikons, Minoltas, etc?

Another approach: An electronic film "emulsion", rather than a chemical emulsion, that generates a digital image when it is "developed". Digital components can be made in amazingly tiny constructs, and folks like Intel are already looking at DNA-based and biology-based chips. I know it sounds far fetched, but I believe someone a few years ago produced a flexible piece of electronic "paper' capable of displaying text and images at 300 dpi.

Still, it's the money thing that would make or break such a thing. Break it, most likely.

 

[BillBingham2]

A key design point is to put the logic and stuff in the Rapidwinder sized box and nothing but the sensor in the camera back. You attach the bottom first to the camera and then the back goes on and plugs into the bottom. The electrical magic all happens in the bottom and the camera backs just hold the sensor and the connector to the electronics. All the bottoms are the same, the backs are then made to fit OM, F2, F3, etc. Nikon F and S2/3/P (rangefinder users) have a different approach as they have a unique bottom (have to scavenge parts from dead Fs) but the same basic idea could work for M backs as well.

B2 (;->

 

[Michael Da Re]

I kinda like my crop sensor DSLR, as it extends my tele lenses

Mabelsound, This is kind of misleading. It doesn't really extend your lens. For instants when I use my OM 50mm lens on my E-500 it's still only a 50mm focal length but the 2x crop factor let's you see what you would see if you used a 100mm lens on your film camera, but it doesn't bring the subject any closer to you if I'm explaining that right.

Michael

 

[alt4852]

My bet is on the next iteration of the Canon Rebel being FF. Of course, the T1i just came out so the next iteration will still be a couple years off.

the rebel series refreshes roughly every 18 months.. and i can pretty much guarantee you that it will never become FF. canon has shown their commitment to the EF-S mount once again with the 7D, and they won't render all of their EF-S lenses useless just because people want FF cameras. rebels are made to be affordable, and FF sensors are not cheap.

 

[wgerrard]

In fact, I suspect the Rebel will not go FF even when or if FF sensors become cheap. Canon needs a reason for people to buy their top of the line models.

 

[Keith]

What do you do, if you don't mind my asking, Keith?

I'm what's known as an 'art slave!' I work part time for a sculptor who does a fair few public art projects in public parks, developments etc. We just spent eight very hard days installing his latest creation in a small inner city park. It comprised twenty steel poles set in the ground and painted red and spread throughout the area! link

I help him with fabrication in his studio and also the final instals ... it's part time and often involves me doing a lot of menial donkey work but I love it! 😀

 

[Benjamin]

...it's part time and often involves me doing a lot of menial donkey work but I love it! 😀

Well if you do what you love.. 🙄

 

[italy74]

My FM3a has the same robust appeal of the D700 but weights almost half... and it's remarkably smaller. I guess it has more or less the same size of the new M9 so it means that something within that specs can be done. Ok, having the mirror THAT's the real problem but even fitting that you can't add 0,5 kg !!!

 

[Frankie]

They tried for too much too early in the technology maturity cycle.

KISS, few buttons, two controls (on/off and ISO) and not much else. They were fighting the DSLR market.

We will open up a new market segment.

B2 (;->

I am aware of SiliconFilm and agreed they started too early.

The fact that Leica failed in the R-back proves nothing.

KISS is my mantra and I had no intention of making the back interchangeable with the film back.

I had long been thinking of doing one of my Nikon F, F2 or FM first...all with removable back and easy to pop out pressure plate, and convenient for cutting an opening...if necessary.

The Leica M's are also doable, the hinged back removed is all the space needed...imagine just re-attaching with the CCD-package.

The retrofit kit is universal in that:

1. CCD-package must fit the 24x36mm frame size.
2. The battery must not be bigger than a 135 cartridge.
3. The mini-, micro- or standard SD holder sizes are long fixed...and easily fitted within the take-up spool space [I tried].
4. Circuit boards with flexible cabling are...flexible [at worst, contained in a small base mounted box no bigger than the TomA's RapidWinder...via the tripod screw].

Kodak sells CCD to anyone, so does Dalsa. CCD larger than 24x36mm are available. So what if a few rows of pixels are wasted.

I am not new in the retrofitting business. Just ask Wild-Heerbrugg (now also called Leica) how much revenue was lost because their stereo plotters each costing the price of a good house in their respective era were retrofitted; which also retarded the sales of their new (1980's) $32 million investment computer controlled analytical stereo plotter each costing $250k++.

I was there.