Digital camera back (Page 2): There were several ideas on how to replace the 35mm film canister with an electronic canister with the sensor sticking out of it where the film would be...

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

scubadoc wrote:

Back in the day when Kodak announced the first digital camera, there was a move to produce camera backs for film cameras that placed a sensor in the place of the film plane. I think Hasselblad may have produced some extremely expensive versions. Whatever happened to this idea? I would still love to use my decades old Canon New F1-N as well as my beloved EOS 3.

There were several ideas on how to replace the 35mm film canister with an electronic canister with the sensor sticking out of it where the film would be for the image. They were all treated more as an accessory more than a truely workable solution.

Harry0 Loc: Gardena, Cal

BebuLamar wrote:

Yup! The digital back Leica made for the R cameras cost about the same as their M-8. So the back for 35mm generally would cost the same as a digital camera of the same capability.

Yes.
Think about it.
It is not just a part. It is an almost whole digital camera.
Cameras with replaceable backs would be easy. it's pre setup. But still expensive.
But it still is a digital camera that fits inside another camera.
Do you reeaally want to use those old lenses? Buy a compatible "new" camera and adapter.
I keep a Canon 6mp and a 1913 Kodak- "one of these days" I plan to insert the Canon, just because.
I think using the back side of the viewing screen is a cop out-
I'd not be getting the effect of the lens I'd be doing this for.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

rmalarz wrote:

Apparently, they are selling them at B and H.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1438714-REG/im_back_ibp_i_m_back_pro_n_a.html/?ap=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI5tvR5-Gt5QIVAxx9Ch1peAY1EAQYASABEgJPTfD_BwE

--Bob

With some convoluted method of projecting the image from the focus screen to a 1/2.3” sensor. I’ll pass.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

scubadoc wrote:

Back in the day when Kodak announced the first digital camera, there was a move to produce camera backs for film cameras that placed a sensor in the place of the film plane. I think Hasselblad may have produced some extremely expensive versions. Whatever happened to this idea? I would still love to use my decades old Canon New F1-N as well as my beloved EOS 3.

You answered your own question, and I quote you, "extremely expensive versions".
Steven Sasson invented the world's first digital camera while working at Eastman Kodak in 1975. It weighed around 8 pounds (3.6kg) and shot a mere 0.01MP. It's crazy to think how far we've come since those early days. We've gone from 30 images on a delicate cassette to thousands on something as small as a fingernail.
Want to see it,
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS869US869&q=first+digital+camera+kodak+1975&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjN5tfy7a_lAhUQi6wKHY-ZDekQsAR6BAgEEAE&biw=1476&bih=706

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

rmalarz wrote:

Occasionally, I've seen articles about someone in England who is developing a back for the Nikon F that is digital. I've never seen anything past the article, which included a photograph of the prototype of the back. This was probably 15 years, or so, ago.
--Bob

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak_DCS_100

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

scubadoc wrote:

Back in the day when Kodak announced the first digital camera, there was a move to produce camera backs for film cameras that placed a sensor in the place of the film plane. I think Hasselblad may have produced some extremely expensive versions. Whatever happened to this idea? I would still love to use my decades old Canon New F1-N as well as my beloved EOS 3.

I remember those things ! FRANKEN-Cameras I called them. Ugly add-ons that just looked horrible and ill-conceived at the time , and I never bought one. They just never became popular because digital models were poping-up and things were getting better.

No more 14 hr days in the dark room just to get a doz. good prints from 50 assorted ones and thinking I had a good day and trying not to waste the paper supply that always seems to be low or the glossy & not the Matt finish I needed...,,or the fixer was dirty and stained the prints....GOOD RIDENS !

I still shoot fim though I process nothing myself and I am so thrilled to own several digital cameras and my life is better because of them and this web site.

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

scubadoc wrote:

Back in the day when Kodak announced the first digital camera, there was a move to produce camera backs for film cameras that placed a sensor in the place of the film plane. I think Hasselblad may have produced some extremely expensive versions. Whatever happened to this idea? I would still love to use my decades old Canon New F1-N as well as my beloved EOS 3.

It was the lenses, even back then...Especially, back then, Don’t you agree? The “camera-backs” idea for old film cameras still sounds like a great idea...But, unlikely to come to fruition. IMHO...RJM

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

rmalarz wrote:

Apparently, they are selling them at B and H.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1438714-REG/im_back_ibp_i_m_back_pro_n_a.html/?ap=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI5tvR5-Gt5QIVAxx9Ch1peAY1EAQYASABEgJPTfD_BwE

--Bob

Here too: https://www.instructables.com/id/Convert-35mm-SLR-Film-Camera-to-Digital/

nadelewitz Loc: Ithaca NY

The whole point of a SIMPLE digital recorder for a film camera, to me, would be to have the SIMPLICITY of wonderful classic film cameras. How can you beat a Canon AE-1, AE-1P, A-1, F1, Nikon F, F2, F3, various Minoltas, Olympus OM1, OM2, etc as fine picture-taking machines uncluttered by too-complicated computerization and feature sets?

Just a flat back with sensor inside, display on outside, with the electronics,a couple of buttons for viewing the shots and a memory card slot all contained in a battery-grip-sized attachment.

It's real nice that Hasselblad owners have a real useful choice , but they can afford the Hasselblad price of ownership.

The problem with making this accessible for us peons is the variety of camera backs it would take to make us all happy. The biggest group of cameras I can think of that could use the same back is the Canon A family. That would do it for me.

nikonbrain Loc: Crystal River Florida

scubadoc wrote:

Back in the day when Kodak announced the first digital camera, there was a move to produce camera backs for film cameras that placed a sensor in the place of the film plane. I think Hasselblad may have produced some extremely expensive versions. Whatever happened to this idea? I would still love to use my decades old Canon New F1-N as well as my beloved EOS 3.

Ya Trouble is they are only 1 or 2 megapixels I looked at 1 at a swap meet for photography and found one with a Nikon attached I believe a F2 . Man they just took a extra back and mounted a sensor on it no protections and wires running to a din plug on the back you had to be teathered to the electronic converter . Only a handful of years ago I believe it was early phase 1 backs on the mamiya 645D had to be teathered to a laptop . I saw them on ebay....update it seems I saw a start up of a company building backs for some camera brands mostly medium format inexpensively...

analogman

Are you guys kidding? While all of us think the idea has a great deal of merit the camera makers have heart palpitations just thinking about it. For one or two their business model would drastically change. For others the need for new technical people and industry could eliminate them from business. And lastly there are the naysayers who will complain about the industry moving backwards.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

analogman wrote:

Are you guys kidding? While all of us think the idea has a great deal of merit the camera makers have heart palpitations just thinking about it. For one or two their business model would drastically change. For others the need for new technical people and industry could eliminate them from business. And lastly there are the naysayers who will complain about the industry moving backwards.

I don't think the idea has a great deal of merit. I don't think enough people want a 35mm digital back for film cameras to make it profitable to produce them at a reasonable price. It's certainly not something I would want for my film cameras when I have very good digital cameras.

dick ranez

I don't want a digital back. The one for the Leica was excellent as far as it went, but like most Leica items it was severely overpriced. What I want is a "dumbed down" digital body with a native FD of AIS mount. I don't care about video, or image stabilization, or whatever - just a body with adjustable shutter speed that will use older lenses. High ISO would be nice, but if it topped out at 800 it would be OK.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

here is a link to some other concepts:
https://www.diyphotography.net/pseudo-film-canister-plans-succeed-others-failed-bringing-digital-sensors-35mm-bodies/

BebuLamar

Harry0 wrote:

Yes. br Think about it. br It is not just a part. ... (show quote)

I do want to use my old lenses but I don't have to buy any adapter nor digital back. All my Nikkors work just fine on my current DSLR.