Nekochan Net

Official Chat Channel: #nekochan // irc.nekochan.net
It is currently Wed Jul 30, 2014 3:17 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Forum rules


No politics, please.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
Unread postPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:07 am
Posts: 4226
Location: Rosario / Santa Fe / República Argentina
http://re35.net/

_________________
Oh!, let me write that!

https://www.facebook.com/GeekTronix
https://geekli.st/GeekTronixShop
https://www.rebelmouse.com/GeekTronixShop/
http://twitter.com/GeekTronixShop
http://www.youtube.com/GeekTronixStream


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Posts: 9471
GeneratriX wrote:
http://re35.net/

Not entirely too good to be true ... this product does exist. It's just for medium format Hasselblads, I think Mamiya, maybe Minolta ?

If this were 1975 the product would exist for 35 mm cameras as well .... but nowadays, if you can't get rich beyond your wildest dreams in 3.7 weeks, forget it. The job-creating vampires have sucked all the blood out of our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2011 9:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:28 pm
Posts: 545
Location: Boston
Digital backs for 6x6 and 645 cameras have existed since the early 2000s, brands were Leaf, Imacon, and Kodak DCS Pro. No "flexible sensor technology" of course.

_________________
:PI: :O2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indigo2IMP:


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 9:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:07 am
Posts: 4226
Location: Rosario / Santa Fe / República Argentina
@hamei and @robespierre:

...I've started with photography at my 7 years old age ...and at some point used to own Pentacon Six, Rollei, Leica, Nikon, etc... so, yes; of course, I know very well from digital backs, the first Hasselblad's offering the option, all the expectation around Nikon's F3 with their awaited Kodak DCS-100 digital back (hey!, look at eBay!), and all the rest... including the frustrated "SiliconFilm"

The link on my post above was of course a prank for the Fools Day Joke, but it is not an extreme impossible.

But please, don't confuse the more traditional (and already doable years ago) digital back for medium and big format cameras, with what I'd call "The Digital Film Roll Dongle" that every analog camera lover wants since ever! :)

Some more advanced concept illustration is shown here: Digital Film Concept Could Resurrect Dead Film Cameras, and it looks even more doable for the actual state of the art on engineering and technology.

In fact, I'm almost convinced that if some kick-ass R+D lab were enough interested to jump into these market designing a real product, it would be already in production at some corner from Asia with big sales around! :)

Of course, there are some key points to take care of, but I think none of them impossible. The Flex Sensor is not required at all, and most part of analog SLR's are plenty of room between the frame and the pressure plate to house a traditional sensor just removing the spring system (and probably the plate itself in some models); another points to take care are of course: film speed (or sensibility) codification for cameras including some degree of electronics; form factor; etc.

You know, what I want to state is: -it already IS doable, and could be done... but not as some specifical item for a high-end camera model or two, but for every standard 35mm (135) camera around.

And yup... I know I'm being naive! :D

_________________
Oh!, let me write that!

https://www.facebook.com/GeekTronix
https://geekli.st/GeekTronixShop
https://www.rebelmouse.com/GeekTronixShop/
http://twitter.com/GeekTronixShop
http://www.youtube.com/GeekTronixStream


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 12:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:12 pm
Posts: 2779
Location: Kentucky, USA
I have a data back for my xd11 that can print the date or other messages on the film. wouldn't be too hard to do up a digital back for 35mm cameras. As a matter of fact, I'm surprised they don't exist already.

One problem is that ancient glass is not nearly good enough for focus to be on par with a modern DSLR. I can see this as a nice novelty, and for the right price, maybe a 5-8mp sensor or so would be pretty nifty.

_________________
Image (Xavi: 8x3.0ghz) Image (Messi: 2x1.4ghz)


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:40 am
Posts: 158
Location: Albany, OR USA
guardian452 wrote:
One problem is that ancient glass is not nearly good enough for focus to be on par with a modern DSLR.

I agree with this. I have several older Nikkor lenses, but most of them are inferior to the better DX lenses that I have when paired with my D40. The only one that works really well is the 105mm AI-s macro lens, which has extremely high-quality optics.

_________________
:Onyx2: 4x400MHz R12K Onyx2 IR2, 5GB RAM
:1600SW: :Indigo2IMP: R10K Indigo2 MaxIMPACT, 4 TRAMS, 768MB RAM, 2x9GB HD, CD-ROM, Phobos G160
Black Cardinal


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 3:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:07 am
Posts: 4226
Location: Rosario / Santa Fe / República Argentina
Black Cardinal wrote:
guardian452 wrote:
One problem is that ancient glass is not nearly good enough for focus to be on par with a modern DSLR.

I agree with this. I have several older Nikkor lenses, but most of them are inferior to the better DX lenses that I have when paired with my D40. The only one that works really well is the 105mm AI-s macro lens, which has extremely high-quality optics.


Sorry, but that's simply wrong! :)

The problem is not the lens quality (which for most part of the vintage gear is outstanding) but the optical arrangement choosed for each objective that you could use. Many modern image capture devices require almost exclusively some kind of arrangements and geometries very uncommon for the analog days, as for example Aspherical Lenses and others.

That to not mention the chromatic correction required to extract the most from each capture device, which is included in the form of optical filters, either inside or outside the boundaries of the lens arrangement.

But in any case, it is not a case of optical quality at all. The problem is the way in which the focus is required for film and the way in which the focus is required for a semiconductor capture device.

All in all, I know exactly what you talk about. When I've tried all my Nikon Series E lenses with the Nikon D5000 I was heavily disappointed... the images resulted green'ish, opaque, and with some slight lack of focus. But after the shock, with a bit more of work, you can manually create a profile for each lens, and you can obtain images same as good as with the original VR lenses, and in many cases even better.

My point is... would not be cool to be able to use a "The Digital Film Roll Dongle" with this?

Attachment:
1954-Voigtlander-Vitessa-N.jpg
1954-Voigtlander-Vitessa-N.jpg [ 96.25 KiB | Viewed 708 times ]


EDIT: typo.

_________________
Oh!, let me write that!

https://www.facebook.com/GeekTronix
https://geekli.st/GeekTronixShop
https://www.rebelmouse.com/GeekTronixShop/
http://twitter.com/GeekTronixShop
http://www.youtube.com/GeekTronixStream


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:35 am
Posts: 2076
Location: Vienna, Austria
GeneratriX wrote:
My point is... would not be cool to be able to use a "The Digital Film Roll Dongle" with this?
Would be simply too good to be true. I currently shoot with 2 Nikon D2Xs but I have 3 F5 Limited Edition sitting around collecting dust [and no way to sell them]. If there would be such a dongle for them, I'd certainly be happy. But, of course, that will never happen. For all purposes, analog is dead as can be. None of the big manufacturers have any intention to revive it in any way. RIP analog :o

_________________
"Sometimes we sit and think, but sometimes we just sit"


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:07 am
Posts: 4226
Location: Rosario / Santa Fe / República Argentina
Oskar45 wrote:
Would be simply too good to be true. I currently shoot with 2 Nikon D2Xs


Yup, I remember when you talked me about such a purchase! :)

Oskar45 wrote:
but I have 3 F5 Limited Edition sitting around collecting dust [and no way to sell them].


What a crime! That's top quality cream.

Oskar45 wrote:
If there would be such a dongle for them, I'd certainly be happy. But, of course, that will never happen.


Well, I guess you can never be completely sure... but most part of the chances are, of course, that your statement is right.

Oskar45 wrote:
For all purposes, analog is dead as can be. None of the big manufacturers have any intention to revive it in any way. RIP analog :o


That's sad, but again is coincident with reality. I guess it is way cheaper to design an all brand-new beast, as they did with all the available DSLR offer, than design a fully compatable dongle for which they are not to sure how many buyers will be... or even worst, they are not sure where it would conduct the commerical/marketing trends.

Of course you can still acquire 135 film rolls, development, printing, and such for your F5 LE kit... but prices are not too competitive, and we don't know for how much time it will be available. I guess it also worth for Contax, Leica, Rollei, and the rest of high-end stuff around. I still think that this is a plain crime against many things.

But anyway, I'll keep optimistic about that. I'm sure that at some corner from this planet some dark scientist is designing such a digital implant! :D

_________________
Oh!, let me write that!

https://www.facebook.com/GeekTronix
https://geekli.st/GeekTronixShop
https://www.rebelmouse.com/GeekTronixShop/
http://twitter.com/GeekTronixShop
http://www.youtube.com/GeekTronixStream


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:12 pm
Posts: 2779
Location: Kentucky, USA
Quote:
I guess it is way cheaper to design an all brand-new beast, as they did with all the available DSLR offer
it's not just cheaper. it's far superior than any hacked-in sensor would be. The film bodies are primarily designed to hold and advance the film in addition to the shutter, lens mount, light sensor, etc. So if you don't have any film to advance all you are really using is the shutter...

If you want to shoot film, get a film camera. Camera stores still sell and develop film. If you want to shoot digital, get a digital camera. I can see one of these potential adapters as a novelty/toy but no more.

Quote:
Sorry, but that's simply wrong!

The problem is not the lens quality (which for most part of the vintage gear is outstanding) but the optical arrangement choosed for each objective that you could use. Many modern image capture devices require almost exclusively some kind of arrangements and geometries very uncommon for the analog days, as for example Aspherical Lenses and others.
you just proved my point. well, not so much fundamental design, as aspherics have been around for hundreds of years, but better manufacturing tolerance, and a never ending increase of megapixels, make a much sharper lens. I will argue that an older lens may have other aspects that are better (bokeh, natural softness, etc).

_________________
Image (Xavi: 8x3.0ghz) Image (Messi: 2x1.4ghz)


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:07 am
Posts: 4226
Location: Rosario / Santa Fe / República Argentina
@guardian452:

Possibly... we are coincidents for a few key-points... but not 100% in concordance for all.

[TROLL MODE]

Film will not last too much. Excluding maybe Fujifilm, that will produce chemical products for maybe five years more or so, I can't see any of the rest producing it for more than a few months or a couple years if the customers base persist enough.

Well... I'm totally sure that the proud buyers for Contax G2, Leica M7, Nikon F5, Zeiss Ikon M, and all the rest of high-end gear owners will be glad to trash all their stuff then... :?

[/TROLL MODE]

The devil is in the details...

...if you happen to mimic the 135 film roll enough well to fit the bill, with the required degree of quality, all your points will become quickly unsubstantiated.

You strongly need to separate the term "Requirements" from the term "Quality", since both are not the same. Film structure "requires" a different approach to each wavelenght range to focus every color component equally well along the deeps of the substrate and their different coating layers. Digital sensor structure "requires" less from the lenses, in the sense that the color components are distributed along a 2D matrix where deep does not play a roll and you always keep your lens slightly "out of focus" to be able to cover each triad with the same visual information.

The disphase between different wavelenghts required for film is, at the worst of the cases, easily fixable with a custom made filter... and you probably could not tell that these thing is there before to rach the 40 MPixels or more...

Even more; many traditional lenses are well known for their "flat approach" without any kind of wavelenght correction for color films; including some models from Canon, Carl Zeiss, and some others... and most part of them are between the more collectable and desireable lenses for daily use over the world... so, as you can see, that's not a big problem for artists, hobbyists, professionals, etc...

You're right in that you could plainly use some brand-new DSLR or hybrid camera to mount one of these lenses, or plainly buy brand-new lenses too. But that's not fun. There is a vintage lover crowd anxious to keep shooting with their Nikkor's, Summicron's, Takumar's, and all the rest... mounted into a vintage body, no matter what! :)

Peace! ;)
And don't worry... there is no way to stop it. This gadget will be done, sooner or later.

EDIT: typo.

_________________
Oh!, let me write that!

https://www.facebook.com/GeekTronix
https://geekli.st/GeekTronixShop
https://www.rebelmouse.com/GeekTronixShop/
http://twitter.com/GeekTronixShop
http://www.youtube.com/GeekTronixStream


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Fri Dec 02, 2011 4:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:07 am
Posts: 4226
Location: Rosario / Santa Fe / República Argentina
Well, you know... a bit like the philosophy behind "Old Horse. New(er) Tricks." from Hasselblad.

Just like that, excepting that instead of the classically removable digital back for medium format, a completely brand-new gadget thing oriented to create the best "Digital Film Roll Dongle" around, just for all those 35mm classics.

That would be fun! And even more if any company can do it for less than Euro 12400 + VAI per unit! :)

_________________
Oh!, let me write that!

https://www.facebook.com/GeekTronix
https://geekli.st/GeekTronixShop
https://www.rebelmouse.com/GeekTronixShop/
http://twitter.com/GeekTronixShop
http://www.youtube.com/GeekTronixStream


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2011 10:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:28 pm
Posts: 545
Location: Boston
I don't think this "concept" is realistically possible... keep in mind that there is no standard width for 35mm cameras, so the distance of the shutter window from the 135 canister is not a standard either. There is no way for the camera to command the electronics to begin and end light gathering, so standard image sensor designs would not get the control signals they require. In fact there is no way for any connection to the outside world, for power, status messages, or anything else, it would all be self-contained. The cylindrical packaging is about the most difficult to design and assemble circuit boards inside, especially when the device needs its own batteries there too. And the types of cameras pictured in the re35 site wouldn't work anyway: Nikon F3, for example, requires film or something with the exact reflectance of film in order for its light meter to work (light is bounced off the film surface).

_________________
:PI: :O2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indigo2IMP:


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2011 12:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 1:07 am
Posts: 4226
Location: Rosario / Santa Fe / República Argentina
robespierre wrote:
I don't think this "concept" is realistically possible... keep in mind that there is no standard width for 35mm cameras, so the distance of the shutter window from the 135 canister is not a standard either


Easily solvable using some of the heavy-duty flex cables available to stablish a two-parts-body canister.
And of course you know that the flexible image sensor is already on the way to the big market:

Characterization of flexible image sensor arrays with bulk heterojunction organic photodiodes
New Light Sensor Mimicks Eye for Superior Camera Performance
Scientists develop flexible sensor to allow simple zoom
The study of fixing field curvature by flexible image sensor array

Okay, it is not the same thing that would be required to mimic a 35mm film, but you could not tell that it is not possible.

robespierre wrote:
There is no way for the camera to command the electronics to begin and end light gathering, so standard image sensor designs would not get the control signals they require.


Are you sure? ...and how do you think works the Sinar's solution?
Curious? :) ...it is way simple, and almost every camera has one of those "ports": the flash sync connector!

robespierre wrote:
In fact there is no way for any connection to the outside world, for power, status messages, or anything else, it would all be self-contained.


Again wrong! What about Bluetooth? If you REALLY think that such status info is required, you could add Bluetooth capabilities to use some kind of pager-format display/monitor to show the basic parameters.

robespierre wrote:
The cylindrical packaging is about the most difficult to design and assemble circuit boards inside, especially when the device needs its own batteries there too.


Oh!, come on! ...military techies are using such kind of technology since ages! :lol:
...but if you don't want to discuss it, just look the commerical park:

Flexible PCBs
FPC
Laser Cut Flexible PCB
Rigid Flexible PCB

...just pick your most comfortable SMT package size, and you're on the way! :)

robespierre wrote:
And the types of cameras pictured in the re35 site wouldn't work anyway: Nikon F3, for example, requires film or something with the exact reflectance of film in order for its light meter to work (light is bounced off the film surface).


Yes, but this is just the case for Nikon F3, an excellent machine but no too popular and not so big in terms of global sales compared with the rest of 35mm gear if you join every camera model produced by every company along the history...

...all in all, I would not tell that this is an unsolvable problem, but probably just one of the more difficult ones. You know, you could just improve your sensor to mimic the reflectance from a given well known film... which could probably by the way benefit also all the rest of cameras, having the closer thing to the real one.

In fact going even beyond all of that, I'm starting to think that you could even have a use for all those spiral-spring-loaded mechanisms around! You know: use a dynamo with them to store the cinetic energy, like the BigShot does, reducing the cells/batteries consumption! :P

Giving another take over this latest point, you could replace the dynamo with a miniature piezo recovering the energy from the film-advance sprocket.

EDIT: several typos. Added more info.

_________________
Oh!, let me write that!

https://www.facebook.com/GeekTronix
https://geekli.st/GeekTronixShop
https://www.rebelmouse.com/GeekTronixShop/
http://twitter.com/GeekTronixShop
http://www.youtube.com/GeekTronixStream


Top
 Profile  
 
Unread postPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:29 pm
Posts: 4258
Location: Kamloops, BC
Hmm.
this looks like one of those random products that I actually would throw large sums of money at to buy.
Developing film in the closet these days is so damn expensive. You could probably pay off the adapter in about 20 real development cycles, assuming you are constantly buying chemicals at a single price.

_________________
:Crimson: :Onyx: :O2000: :O200: :O200: :PI: :Indigo: :Indigo: :Indigo: :Octane: :O2: :1600SW: :Indigo2: :Indigo2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indigo2IMP: :Indy: :Indy: :Indy: :Cube:

Image <-------- A very happy forum member.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group