Creagerj
Incidental Artist
The Open Source Camera Project
The idea came to me a while ago, and I think it is worth sharing…
If you are completely satisfied with what the camera industry currently has to offer this probably isn’t the thread for you. However if you feel that maybe a camera could be more, or perhaps some old concepts should be revisited, please read on.
A camera is a camera; it takes a picture, that’s it. Still there is a lot more to a camera than its intended purpose. Beyond the simple task of taking a picture, a camera should inspire. It should be intuitive, simple, and reliable. It should just feel right.
I am the first to agree that there are plenty of manufacturers that offer this, at least to a degree. I am aware that Nikon, Canon, Leica, Minolta, Sony, Contax, Hasselblad, Olympus, and almost every other major camera company has at some point made a system that can (with enough money) do anything that one could need. However there is always room for improvement.
My Vision:
My vision is to include anyone who wants to contribute in a collaborative design of a new camera. There are however a few things that this camera should be:
1. A rangefinder
2. Accepts M mount lenses
3. 35mm film format (but there is no reason that it could accept a digital back)
4. Simple, intuitive, reliable
When conceptualizing really focus on SIMPLE, and INTUITIVE. I see no reason why we shouldn’t look in the past for some great ideas that never really took off. Also, we should try to take the best features from our favorite cameras and incorporate them in the design of the new camera.
I don’t see any reason why we couldn’t determine what the camera should be and have some renderings of what the camera should look like. Maybe even some models. Working prototypes are prohibitively complex and expensive and likely are not feasible. However that doesn’t mean that we couldn’t have a great camera design on paper at least. The best part would be the fact that it would be a design with contributions from a large mind pool.
Think of it as an exercise in democratic design. Besides being open design, I think we should also vote on what components and features will stay and what will go for our final design.
Original post
An idea came to me today that I think is worth sharing. Cameras never really have everything that we want, and sometimes not everything that we need. That is why I propose that we design an "Open Source" camera(s) (maybe). This would allow anyone who wants to contribute to the design of their ideal camera do so. The idea is that allowing hundreds possibly thousands of minds to contribute to the design will result in a much better camera as opposed to a small design team building a camera.
There will be a couple of contentions for the design:
1. The camera is a Rangefinder
2. The camera will accept interchangeable M mount lenses
3. The camera will use 35mm film
What say you?
The idea came to me a while ago, and I think it is worth sharing…
If you are completely satisfied with what the camera industry currently has to offer this probably isn’t the thread for you. However if you feel that maybe a camera could be more, or perhaps some old concepts should be revisited, please read on.
A camera is a camera; it takes a picture, that’s it. Still there is a lot more to a camera than its intended purpose. Beyond the simple task of taking a picture, a camera should inspire. It should be intuitive, simple, and reliable. It should just feel right.
I am the first to agree that there are plenty of manufacturers that offer this, at least to a degree. I am aware that Nikon, Canon, Leica, Minolta, Sony, Contax, Hasselblad, Olympus, and almost every other major camera company has at some point made a system that can (with enough money) do anything that one could need. However there is always room for improvement.
My Vision:
My vision is to include anyone who wants to contribute in a collaborative design of a new camera. There are however a few things that this camera should be:
1. A rangefinder
2. Accepts M mount lenses
3. 35mm film format (but there is no reason that it could accept a digital back)
4. Simple, intuitive, reliable
When conceptualizing really focus on SIMPLE, and INTUITIVE. I see no reason why we shouldn’t look in the past for some great ideas that never really took off. Also, we should try to take the best features from our favorite cameras and incorporate them in the design of the new camera.
I don’t see any reason why we couldn’t determine what the camera should be and have some renderings of what the camera should look like. Maybe even some models. Working prototypes are prohibitively complex and expensive and likely are not feasible. However that doesn’t mean that we couldn’t have a great camera design on paper at least. The best part would be the fact that it would be a design with contributions from a large mind pool.
Think of it as an exercise in democratic design. Besides being open design, I think we should also vote on what components and features will stay and what will go for our final design.
Original post
An idea came to me today that I think is worth sharing. Cameras never really have everything that we want, and sometimes not everything that we need. That is why I propose that we design an "Open Source" camera(s) (maybe). This would allow anyone who wants to contribute to the design of their ideal camera do so. The idea is that allowing hundreds possibly thousands of minds to contribute to the design will result in a much better camera as opposed to a small design team building a camera.
There will be a couple of contentions for the design:
1. The camera is a Rangefinder
2. The camera will accept interchangeable M mount lenses
3. The camera will use 35mm film
What say you?
Last edited:
The camera will have a matching S-Mount adapter and a Contax Mount adapter with the cam cut for perfect focus near and far.
Oh. I've described my M3...
Oh. I've described my M3...
santino
FSU gear head
interchangeable backs
Bryce
Well-known
I'm sure they would've used an M mount had it existed at the time, but otherwise here is your open source camera:
http://www.prairienet.org/b-wallen/BN_Photo/KodakEktra1.htm
http://www.prairienet.org/b-wallen/BN_Photo/KodakEktra1.htm
R
Roberto
Guest
Creagerj said:
The idea by itself is great.. but:
1. Open source code works because you do not need high precision machinery to build it
2. You can develop open source code in collaboration with many ppl using common repositories
3. You do not need factories and million bucks invested in material procurement
So.. in my opinion, a community may try writing requirements for a camera, but the difficult part will be finding someone to build it.
The usual steps are:
1. Hear the "voice of the customer" (fine.. we are the customer)
2. Translate it into technical requirements (fine.. I'm sure we'll easily find couple of engineers lurking around)
3. Design it (uhmm.. so and so, we need skilled engineers here)
4. Build a prototype (ouch
here we need bucks)I'll be more than happy to actively support phases 1 through 3 :angel:
Rob.
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
Interchangeable backs is something I would like to see as well. Bryce, great link. I hadn't really heard of the Ektra.
Its true that building a prototype is probably not very feasible, but I see no reason why we couldn't develop a working design. This is just for fun.
Its true that building a prototype is probably not very feasible, but I see no reason why we couldn't develop a working design. This is just for fun.
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Bryce said:
What a brilliant and fascinating camera ... thanks for posting that link. I'd never heard of it until now!
that camera's worthy of it's own thread!
Bryce
Well-known
Joe-
I posted the link about the Ektra not because it was built by "democratic engineering" (it wasn't) but because it was about the first thing to be made that was intended to have attachments to use under just about any circumstances. So what ever you needed it to do, it could- given enough money and the availability of attachments.
Later, M series Leicas, even late screw mount ones, and just about all Japanese SLR systems did the same thing.
Am I missing the point?
I posted the link about the Ektra not because it was built by "democratic engineering" (it wasn't) but because it was about the first thing to be made that was intended to have attachments to use under just about any circumstances. So what ever you needed it to do, it could- given enough money and the availability of attachments.
Later, M series Leicas, even late screw mount ones, and just about all Japanese SLR systems did the same thing.
Am I missing the point?
Bryce
Well-known
Keith-
From what I've gathered, the Ektra was a flop (and not now widely known of) because it was:
•Outrageously expensive
•Made in and sold in countries that were about to be at war with one another
and last but not least,
•Over complicated, bulky and failure prone.
Otherwise it seems like it was a pretty good idea.
From what I've gathered, the Ektra was a flop (and not now widely known of) because it was:
•Outrageously expensive
•Made in and sold in countries that were about to be at war with one another
and last but not least,
•Over complicated, bulky and failure prone.
Otherwise it seems like it was a pretty good idea.
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
The closest to a perfect camera that I know is the Leica M6. Just alter the battery compartment so that it easier to open.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Bryce said:
I would have to imagine that it would have been a nightmare to manufacture and service so it's not surprising that it had it's 'issues!'
Morca007
Matt
While it's a nice idea, open source precision manufacturing won't be a reality until we get home CNC machines, aka 3d material printers.
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
The Open Source Camera Project
The idea came to me a while ago, and I think it is worth sharing…
If you are completely satisfied with what the camera industry currently has to offer this probably isn’t the thread for you. However if you feel that maybe a camera could be more, or perhaps some old concepts should be revisited, please read on.
A camera is a camera; it takes a picture, that’s it. Still there is a lot more to a camera than its intended purpose. Beyond the simple task of taking a picture, a camera should inspire. It should be intuitive, simple, and reliable. It should just feel right.
I am the first to agree that there are plenty of manufacturers that offer this, at least to a degree. I am aware that Nikon, Canon, Leica, Minolta, Sony, Contax, Hasselblad, Olympus, and almost every other major camera company has at some point made a system that can (with enough money) do anything that one could need. However there is always room for improvement.
My Vision:
My vision is to include anyone who wants to contribute in a collaborative design of a new camera. There are however a few things that this camera should be:
1. A rangefinder
2. Accepts M mount lenses
3. 35mm film format (but there is no reason that it could accept a digital back)
4. Simple, intuitive, reliable
When conceptualizing really focus on SIMPLE, and INTUITIVE. I see no reason why we shouldn’t look in the past for some great ideas that never really took off. Also, we should try to take the best features from our favorite cameras and incorporate them in the design of the new camera.
I don’t see any reason why we couldn’t determine what the camera should be and have some renderings of what the camera should look like. Maybe even some models. Working prototypes are prohibitively complex and expensive and likely are not feasible. However that doesn’t mean that we couldn’t have a great camera design on paper at least. The best part would be the fact that it would be a design with contributions from a large mind pool.
Think of it as an exercise in democratic design. Besides being open design, I think we should also vote on what components and features will stay and what will go for our final design.
The idea came to me a while ago, and I think it is worth sharing…
If you are completely satisfied with what the camera industry currently has to offer this probably isn’t the thread for you. However if you feel that maybe a camera could be more, or perhaps some old concepts should be revisited, please read on.
A camera is a camera; it takes a picture, that’s it. Still there is a lot more to a camera than its intended purpose. Beyond the simple task of taking a picture, a camera should inspire. It should be intuitive, simple, and reliable. It should just feel right.
I am the first to agree that there are plenty of manufacturers that offer this, at least to a degree. I am aware that Nikon, Canon, Leica, Minolta, Sony, Contax, Hasselblad, Olympus, and almost every other major camera company has at some point made a system that can (with enough money) do anything that one could need. However there is always room for improvement.
My Vision:
My vision is to include anyone who wants to contribute in a collaborative design of a new camera. There are however a few things that this camera should be:
1. A rangefinder
2. Accepts M mount lenses
3. 35mm film format (but there is no reason that it could accept a digital back)
4. Simple, intuitive, reliable
When conceptualizing really focus on SIMPLE, and INTUITIVE. I see no reason why we shouldn’t look in the past for some great ideas that never really took off. Also, we should try to take the best features from our favorite cameras and incorporate them in the design of the new camera.
I don’t see any reason why we couldn’t determine what the camera should be and have some renderings of what the camera should look like. Maybe even some models. Working prototypes are prohibitively complex and expensive and likely are not feasible. However that doesn’t mean that we couldn’t have a great camera design on paper at least. The best part would be the fact that it would be a design with contributions from a large mind pool.
Think of it as an exercise in democratic design. Besides being open design, I think we should also vote on what components and features will stay and what will go for our final design.