NL2377
*scratches head*
As a Student in Engineering, and a Passionist of photography, It only seems natural for me to do this...
As a summer project, I plan on Developing my own rangefinder camera... From the ground up... well, not really.
After having owned cameras of all sorts, SLRs, PNS, Medium Format, Large Format, and rangefinders galore (Kiev, Fed, Zorki, Bessa, Leica, Moskva, Canon, etc... ) I have found different things that I like and appreciate about the individual systems, but I have YET to find one that holds all of the qualities that I wish for...
The Basic Conceptual Ideas behind the Project:
-long baselength rangefinder (as I have recently grown to love with my Kiev)
-UNIVERSAL mounting system... (adapters that will allow M , LTM, and C mount lenses)
-Rangefinder focusing controlled by the camera body rather than lens helicoils (also based off of contax/nikon/kiev concept)
-Focusing Ring on the camera itself. (this will be oversized, allowing for adapter mounts and more precise focusing)
-Manual film drive, with optional low profile motordrive. (I'm thinking some sort of rechargable lithium pack to keep size down...)
-Mechanical Cloth Curtain shutter (Leica, fed, zorki, etc...)
-Speeds of 1/15-1/1000 + B (look into a way to achieve 1/125th sync speed...) I never use anything lower than 1/15, so I wouldnt have it on there unless it's all ready incorporated into the shutter system of anther camera.)
-Framelines: What for??? 50mm is all I need.
-Multiple Rangefinder patches.(or just one really big one!) Having used many SLRs with autofocus selection points, I feel that having multiple patches, or just one much larger rangefinder will help in the aid of taking photographs much more efficiently time wise rather then having to point at the subject, and then compose.
Other Thoughs:
-A vertical plane shutter (possibly from a manual nikon body) allows for easier installation, higher sync speeds, less prone loss in shutterspeed times, etc... I would likely install a manual cloth "darkslide" in order to keep from light leaks.
-possibly an electronic shutter / in camera motordrive for the use of AE (this would take some R&D, but Im sure I could figure out how to make it work.) I've got several nikon 8008s that I could butcher for this)
I am still in the R&D stage of this, (figuring out exactly what I want implemented in the camera) but after that I will hit the ground running... CNC machining a body that allows for the components to be installed and removed easily for maintainence. as in: Camera chassis will have installation slots for shutter apparatus and film base plate, as well as for the focusing mechanism.
Top plate will be completely removable (rangefinder and all) as the rangefinder will be connected to the focusing mechanism by rack and pinion, or other means of EASILY removable transport... etc, etc...
Size and weight aren't a terrible concern for me because I plan on sometime in the future, also making a compact rangefinder with a leaf shutter, probably using the internals of an olympus Stylus Epic, having the outer portions made of an alloy of some sort that allows the camera to look of older decent, but perform like a modern day.
So What do you think???
As a summer project, I plan on Developing my own rangefinder camera... From the ground up... well, not really.
After having owned cameras of all sorts, SLRs, PNS, Medium Format, Large Format, and rangefinders galore (Kiev, Fed, Zorki, Bessa, Leica, Moskva, Canon, etc... ) I have found different things that I like and appreciate about the individual systems, but I have YET to find one that holds all of the qualities that I wish for...
The Basic Conceptual Ideas behind the Project:
-long baselength rangefinder (as I have recently grown to love with my Kiev)
-UNIVERSAL mounting system... (adapters that will allow M , LTM, and C mount lenses)
-Rangefinder focusing controlled by the camera body rather than lens helicoils (also based off of contax/nikon/kiev concept)
-Focusing Ring on the camera itself. (this will be oversized, allowing for adapter mounts and more precise focusing)
-Manual film drive, with optional low profile motordrive. (I'm thinking some sort of rechargable lithium pack to keep size down...)
-Mechanical Cloth Curtain shutter (Leica, fed, zorki, etc...)
-Speeds of 1/15-1/1000 + B (look into a way to achieve 1/125th sync speed...) I never use anything lower than 1/15, so I wouldnt have it on there unless it's all ready incorporated into the shutter system of anther camera.)
-Framelines: What for??? 50mm is all I need.
-Multiple Rangefinder patches.(or just one really big one!) Having used many SLRs with autofocus selection points, I feel that having multiple patches, or just one much larger rangefinder will help in the aid of taking photographs much more efficiently time wise rather then having to point at the subject, and then compose.
Other Thoughs:
-A vertical plane shutter (possibly from a manual nikon body) allows for easier installation, higher sync speeds, less prone loss in shutterspeed times, etc... I would likely install a manual cloth "darkslide" in order to keep from light leaks.
-possibly an electronic shutter / in camera motordrive for the use of AE (this would take some R&D, but Im sure I could figure out how to make it work.) I've got several nikon 8008s that I could butcher for this)
I am still in the R&D stage of this, (figuring out exactly what I want implemented in the camera) but after that I will hit the ground running... CNC machining a body that allows for the components to be installed and removed easily for maintainence. as in: Camera chassis will have installation slots for shutter apparatus and film base plate, as well as for the focusing mechanism.
Top plate will be completely removable (rangefinder and all) as the rangefinder will be connected to the focusing mechanism by rack and pinion, or other means of EASILY removable transport... etc, etc...
Size and weight aren't a terrible concern for me because I plan on sometime in the future, also making a compact rangefinder with a leaf shutter, probably using the internals of an olympus Stylus Epic, having the outer portions made of an alloy of some sort that allows the camera to look of older decent, but perform like a modern day.
So What do you think???
doitashimash1te
Well-known
Great initiative! I wish you good luck and if you need any assistance whatsoever please drop a line.
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Neat! I applaud your effort... and hope that your prototype gets picked by some promising industry! 
Now... is there any special deal for RFF members when it comes to marketing? We could be walking advertisements of the Nickofinder Special!
Now, seriously speaking... Good luck and go for it!
Now... is there any special deal for RFF members when it comes to marketing? We could be walking advertisements of the Nickofinder Special!
Now, seriously speaking... Good luck and go for it!
photogdave
Shops local
NL2377 said:
I like this idea best!
Otherwise I like your concept but for me I would want frame lines for wider lenses and a shutter with a higher top speed. One of the things I dislike about Leica...
NL2377
*scratches head*
SolaresLarrave, I've got another project that I'm working on (prototype is waiting to be machined as we speak...) and there will definately be a special deal on those ;-)
Thanks, doitashimash1te!
Ah, yes... I agree with you... only beening able to use 1/1000 can be very restrictive when using 400 or higher speed film in the camera, which is why I'm also considering using an electronic vertical shutter from, say an n8008.
I may end up doing the olympus version first, as it will be much less work involved, and will give me a better idea of what I will need down the road.
Thanks, doitashimash1te!
photogdave said:
Ah, yes... I agree with you... only beening able to use 1/1000 can be very restrictive when using 400 or higher speed film in the camera, which is why I'm also considering using an electronic vertical shutter from, say an n8008.
I may end up doing the olympus version first, as it will be much less work involved, and will give me a better idea of what I will need down the road.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
i also thought / asked some time ago about the rangefinder patch, about why can't it consist of more or one larger one.
The problem is, if you get a really large one, you will never get the stuff to overlap in the patch, because only a part of the subject will be in focus. In case of multiple patches, the vf gets cluttered and, unless they are really small (meaning difficult to focus), the total vf area that is messed up by non-overlapping doubke images out of focus, will be considerable.
Otherwise, i hope it works out good luck! and keep us uptodate.
The problem is, if you get a really large one, you will never get the stuff to overlap in the patch, because only a part of the subject will be in focus. In case of multiple patches, the vf gets cluttered and, unless they are really small (meaning difficult to focus), the total vf area that is messed up by non-overlapping doubke images out of focus, will be considerable.
Otherwise, i hope it works out
good luck! and keep us uptodate.Spyderman
Well-known
LTM and M mount? OK, but why the C mount? these are for movie cameras with smaller film frame... or did you mean C for Contax ?
a mechanical or electronic shutter from Copal might be better idea than butchering cameras... that way the manufacture of the camera might be repeatable... here is their site: http://www.nidec-copal.com/02/03.html
framelines might not be interesting to you, but you could however use non-projected but etched framelines just like one of the Nikon RFs where all framelines are visible at all times...
Good luck! God bless you!
a mechanical or electronic shutter from Copal might be better idea than butchering cameras... that way the manufacture of the camera might be repeatable... here is their site: http://www.nidec-copal.com/02/03.html
framelines might not be interesting to you, but you could however use non-projected but etched framelines just like one of the Nikon RFs where all framelines are visible at all times...
Good luck! God bless you!
Last edited:
NL2377
*scratches head*
Pherdinand said:i also thought / asked some time ago about the rangefinder patch, about why can't it consist of more or one larger one.
The problem is, if you get a really large one, you will never get the stuff to overlap in the patch, because only a part of the subject will be in focus. In case of multiple patches, the vf gets cluttered and, unless they are really small (meaning difficult to focus), the total vf area that is messed up by non-overlapping doubke images out of focus, will be considerable.
Otherwise, i hope it works out
I have observed both of those situations, and having come from using TLRs and SLRs as well, the shallow depth of field, while not the "same" concept in viewing, is similar in my eyes...
If I know what I am looking for when Im shooting then I dont feel that this would be a problem, besides, I can always cover up the rangefinder patch w/ my finger ;-)
Maybe perhaps, just a wider rangefinder patch would be sufficient, as it would aid in focusing composition, while still allowing for the tops and bottom of the viewer image to be clean and clear from the RF image. Thanks for your input!
MadMan2k
Well-known
If you could make a camera the exact same size and shape as a regular Leica M body, with the same viewfinder framelines and stuff, but with SLR type focusing where the image in the viewfinder reflected the DOF of the lens, that would be perfect. It might not be possible, but it sure would be cool.
Why would you want the focusing ring on the camera itself? Wouldn't that put the lens too far out from the film plane, and make the camera thicker than it had to be?
Why would you want the focusing ring on the camera itself? Wouldn't that put the lens too far out from the film plane, and make the camera thicker than it had to be?
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
Nick, this is really pretty cool. I am impressed at your "why not?" attitude! But don't try to do too much here -- like the multiple RF patches. If the "big 4" (and Cosina now) haven't done this, I think we all can get along fine without it. But a wider patch is a good idea. I also like Spyderman's etched framelines idea, especially if parallax corrected.
The focusing ring on the camera -- this seems like an extra complication. Again, it might be a real "blank slate" idea but might be too much. Is this like a Contax/Nikon/Kiev internal mount?
But do what you want -- it's your idea and the credit will go to you. I'm sure a bunch of us will be interested in kicking in something for the tooling and manufacturing if it comes to that (and I bet some folks can find a factory in China to make it).
The focusing ring on the camera -- this seems like an extra complication. Again, it might be a real "blank slate" idea but might be too much. Is this like a Contax/Nikon/Kiev internal mount?
But do what you want -- it's your idea and the credit will go to you. I'm sure a bunch of us will be interested in kicking in something for the tooling and manufacturing if it comes to that (and I bet some folks can find a factory in China to make it).
NL2377
*scratches head*
MadMan2k said:
It would sure be possible, The only way that I can think of, off the top of my head, would be to have a reflex mirror and prism located internally... but it would be dim (especially when you are stopped down...) and then at that point, you might as well be carrying an SLR... there wouldnt be any difference other then a rangefinder patch on the camera. Now, giving an SLR a rangefinder patch, that's an idea!
No, not at all... 80% of the internals of the camera are useless space (I'm of course over-exagerating this...) but the helicoid could be partially internal/external (Just like contax) but there would be an extention of the ring in order to allow for focusing... the reason behind this, is so that one can use different lens mounts with just a simple adapter. I will have to research this some more, though... as different lenses may have different registration signatures in regards to the distance to and from infinity. If anyone knows of this, do let me know... particularly between Contax mount, M mount, and LTM.
NL2377
*scratches head*
Spyderman said:
Thanks, yes... I meant Contax mount.
In regards to the shutters, if it were to come down to it, and the camera was such a success that there would be other interested parties etc... then I would look further into it, but for now, it would be much easier to butcher one camera for some of its internal components then to try and develop something intricate (gear train mechanisms, Internal circuits, etc...) when there are already so many things that I have to do to make it work in the first place! Thanks for the heads up, though...
as far as the framelines are concerned, that would be great, but in focusing, the framelines would need to move (read parrallax correction) and a 90mm frameline moves so much that you would quite literally loose half of your image you were composing unless you compensated mentally. I'll leave the parrellax stuff up to leica ;-)
NL2377
*scratches head*
KoNickon said:
Thanks. The more and more I think about it, while it would be unique and different (and not all that hard to create) the multiple RF patches would be cumbersome in the image plane... I'll surely try it out a couple of ways.. but the wide patch is seeming more practicle than the other...
dmr
Registered Abuser
Uh, (do I dare mention this on the wish list?) how about a digital back? Seriously. { ducking, running, hiding }
sjw617
Panoramist
Maybe a medium format version?
NL2377
*scratches head*
dmr said:Uh, (do I dare mention this on the wish list?) how about a digital back? Seriously. { ducking, running, hiding }
Hahhaha. as fun and entertaining as that sounds... I do not have the knowledge, nor the know-how in order to incorporate something of that intensity. I could, though, design it so that a digital back could be easily and readily installed on the camera... It's actually a relatively simple concept... which is why leica pissed me off with the M8.
The M7 has all of the bells and whistles there, the only thing that is missing, is the ability to easily incorporate a digital back. How hard would it have been? easy as pi!!!
Seriously, hear me out on this one... all one would need to do, is make a removable film plane... you know, that peice of metal that the film runs along when youre loading the camera... and the digital back could slide right in its place. it could hold the electronics and the battery/memory card in the bottom, just as adding a rapidwinder would do.
Here, I'll even draw a picture for you in the next post!
NL2377
*scratches head*
Bottom view of camera:
....____________________________________________
.../========./____Removable Film Plate__\.======\
../===================================\
.(====================================)
..\===================================/
...\==================================/
....\__________________________________________/
....................................|=========|
....................................|=========|
....................................|=========|
....................................|=========|
..................................|______________|
Digital Back insert top view (view of insert only, not the electronics attached):
......................./____Digital Back Insert__\
....____________________________________________
.../========./____Removable Film Plate__\.======\
../===================================\
.(====================================)
..\===================================/
...\==================================/
....\__________________________________________/
....................................|=========|
....................................|=========|
....................................|=========|
....................................|=========|
..................................|______________|
Digital Back insert top view (view of insert only, not the electronics attached):
......................./____Digital Back Insert__\
NL2377
*scratches head*
sjw617 said:
A medium format manual rangefinder??? Could be done, I suppose... I'd have to use quite a larger camera though... I've got a mamiya 6x45 that i could use the curtains for... that would be fun.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
Nicholas,
I've got nothing to contribute here but enthusiasm!
I think cameras(or any machine) are answers to specific questions and that better cameras answer those questions well.
In your original post you stated the "questions" you are trying to answer pretty well. So,I can't wait to see how your "answers" turn out!
Keep us posted about your progress, please!
Rob
I've got nothing to contribute here but enthusiasm!
I think cameras(or any machine) are answers to specific questions and that better cameras answer those questions well.
In your original post you stated the "questions" you are trying to answer pretty well. So,I can't wait to see how your "answers" turn out!
Keep us posted about your progress, please!
Rob