| Author | Post |
|---|
jk
|
This looks interesting for those of us with film Nikons in our cupboards.
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/samellos/im-backtm-pro-low-cost-digital-back-for-35mm-analo?nr
|
Robert
|
From what I can see the image quality of these kits is abysmal, the massive appendage under the camera seems excessive, completely dominating the camera. Total wast of money in my opinion.
Better buying the occasional roll of film and enjoying the old cameras as they were designed to be. It's easy enough to convert film to digital if so desired.
This should have been done when digital first appeared but of course the camera manufacturers wanted to integrate digital totally into the camera for a complete package, which as it turned out it seems to me was a sensible move. Maybe with medium format it would have been good but the cost scalability wouldn't have worked. Just look at what Hasselblad pass off as 'medium format' today and the price!
However, it left us, the users in the position of funding the development, as manufacturers rolled out tiny incremental improvements over time as they conquered the challenges one by one. They still are but I think they are now moving beyond providing the users NEEDS into the realms of fantasy with the sensitivity and definition available. Somehow the manufacturers seem to have engendered an insatiable lust for ever increasing ISO and pixel counts. Way beyond what was available with even the very best of film cameras (in any format).
I'm not saying we should stop improving, I'm just saying for most needs we are already 'there' and that improvements beyond what is now the norm are very optional, not 'must have'. Instead of a horse and cart, we don't ALL need a Bugatti Veyron in the garage, something much less exotic gets the job done very nicely.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugatti_Veyron
|
jk
|
Would need to see price of this unit and also it it worked with my F3 before I parted with my cash.
This solution is not as elegant as the Silicon Film eFilm solution.
|
Robert
|
Not really familiar with these kick-start sites but this screenshot from the I'm Back page seems to give a clue on pricing. At least they don't seem to be very ambitious with their pricing, probably reflecting the quality of the images they show from the back.
|
TomOC
|
I've paid my dues in Kickstarter projects.
If the product is even remotely good, they will sell through normal channels eventually. Most KS things I've ordered have been delayed delayed delayed and a piece of *#>t when I finally got it.
the best tip off that you've been had is when you start getting a steady stream of Great News emails, that all the founders went to the factory today to pick out the proper color (or texture or whatever).
Nope, nope, Nope...any emails from KS are now handled quite nicely by my spam filter 
|
Eric
| Joined: | Thu Apr 19th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
TomOC wrote:
I've paid my dues in Kickstarter projects.
If the product is even remotely good, they will sell through normal channels eventually. Most KS things I've ordered have been delayed delayed delayed and a piece of *#>t when I finally got it.
the best tip off that you've been had is when you start getting a steady stream of Great News emails, that all the founders went to the factory today to pick out the proper color (or texture or whatever).
Nope, nope, Nope...any emails from KS are now handled quite nicely by my spam filter
So you are still undecided Tom?
|
jk
|
Well I will wait for the product to hit the market.
|
amazing50
|
jk wrote:
Well I will wait for the product to hit the market.
Don't hold your breath
|
jk
|
Yes I wont be. The original eFilm product from SiliconFilm never made it to market.
|
amazing50
|
Most of the old glass won't hold up to modern sensors, so any high res adapter would be of limited use.
Any retro fit system would still be bogged down by shutter ****ing, etc. and probably be slow and clumsy to operate.
|
Robert
|
amazing50 wrote:
Any retro fit system would still be bogged down by shutter ****ing, etc. and probably be slow and clumsy to operate.
Possibly why the makers specify 'Bulb' shutter setting must be available. Probably electronic shutter?
|
jk
|
What I would really like is a similar product for a Hasselblad.
|
Robert
|
Didn't the 'Leaf' back fit the 500C? Don't think it was full frame though.
I seem to remember some way of using a scanner with a plate camera to make large format images. Bit like a narrow slit focal plane shutter in principle. OK for static subjects I guess.
|
highlander
|
I'm sure PhaseOne made a back for the 500C as well. I looked at buying one but it was cheaper, then, to buy a house!
|
amazing50
|
I ordered a Hasselblad to Nikon adapter from China a few years ago.
It is totally manual and uses M setting on all Nikon SLR's and A or M on on the Dxxx cameras.
Haven't tested it on the D850 yet to see how the lenses preform with 45 MP.
|
jk
|
Seems like there is some progress being made!
http://imback.eu/home/project-progress/
|
Robert
|
Interesting when Nikon have just announced the Z...
Not that they will be much competition for each other!
Thanks for bumping the thread, I had completely forgotten it.
|
jk
|
I would love a unit to use on my Nikon F3.
|
GeoffR
|
I like the idea but! A while back I was asked to test a Pentax ME Super to see if it was worth selling. I tested it against one of my F5 bodies with a 24-70 f2.8 lens. It is only when using a modern AF-S lens on an older camera that one can see just how slow the F5's AF really is. The metering may have been state-of-the-art in 2006 but the D3 and D4 comfortably out perform it today. Let's not talk about frame rate, or focus points.
The idea is attractive but why bother a current generation DSLR will be better in almost every respect.
As far as I am concerned the best use for a film body is to shoot film.
|
jk
|
I would expect this item to anything useful for day to day use. For me it seems like a quaint technology that allows people to use a film camera.
I dont think that film holds much attraction for me these days.
|
amazing50
|
The device is basically a digital camera capturing the projected image of the lens on a ground glass.
Could get the same effect by taking a shot off the back of a large format camera.
My next project ... a Grafnikon
|
jk
|
Yes exactly. Why havent others thought of this before? Instead they used exposed charged sensors that required cleaning and AA filters and pentaprisms and mirror boxes. Is a question of over engineered or complicated due to not seeing the wood for the trees?
|
GeoffR
|
I would not wish to detract from the simplicity of the idea, I simply question whether the market still exists for such a device given the limitations imposed upon it by the original film camera. I accept that there may well be a small number of people who want a digital back for a manual focus camera, the number of people who have called for a Digital FM2 suggests that they exist. However, digital SLRs are now cheap and high performing devices, does this device match the image quality available when these film cameras were current?
I am impressed by the out of the box thinking but unconvinced that I actually need one.
|
jk
|
Well it seems to have fledged!
https://www.dpreview.com/news/7113780578/i-m-back-digital-back-for-analog-slrs-is-now-in-production
|
amazing50
|
Because it fledged doesn't guarantee it will soar with the eagles.
|
