[reh321]

I'm Back's Digital Backs for Old 35mm Cameras Are Now In Production

There is a model compatible with the Spotmatic.

Supposedly coming to Photokina.

To me, it seems the inventor has missed the point. We want a digital back or insert with which we will use the original camera controls (ALL of them), and which does not substantially increase the size of the camera.

This is one small step, I guess, and it seems at least to be one step ahead of ihagee etc's vaporware.

Fortunately they're not tempting me with a version for my Super Program, but if they did, I'd never degrade it by attaching such an ugly thing to it.

[tvdtvdtvd]

I've been following this guy, hoping he'll re-engineer the concept to be more practical. His insistence to keep the FF
field of view, with the resultant translation mess to bring the image to the sensor below the camera, is just a kludgy &#%@*&.
He should have splurged for the FF sensor and charged accordingly or allowed for a cropped image that doesn't go through
all that translation.

Someday someone will crack this nut and I'll be waiting in line, cash in hand for a digital back for my MX. But this isn't it.

[Digitalis]

The concept of digital backs worked for medium format - because many of those camera were designed with interchangeable backs in the first place - 35mm film cameras seldom had that faculty*. Medium format cameras save for certain models from Pentax, Mamiya, and panoramic camera manufacturers suck as Fuji, Noblex and Linhof simply could not be adapted for such backs as the sensors weren't big enough.

The concept of a Digital back for 35mm film cameras will always be a kludgy solution, the Leica Digital Modul-R proved that.



*and then it was only for date printing backs which were never all that popular.

[ChrisPlatt]

How about a film back for digital cameras?
Feel free to send me money!

Chris

[Digitalis]

How about a film back for digital cameras?

How about a Polaroid back for 35mm film cameras?

[RonHendriks1966]

Wouldn't it be cool if someone came up with a kickstarter project where you flip your K-1ii into an analoge camera so could put old school film in your camera.


@Chris you are the smarter one

[Lord Lucan]

Reminds me a bit of the old Polaroid film backs for the Hasselblad cameras.

Well Polaroid backs were meant for on-the-spot checking of lighting etc in a studio before shooting film. I suppose that could be a possible use for this digital back too. I don't think that is what the inventor had in mind though - it is just hipsterism gone out of control.

---

Last edited by Lord Lucan; 09-22-2018 at 05:24 AM. Reason: Typo

[StiffLegged]

I'm Back's Digital Backs for Old 35mm Cameras Are Now In Production

There is a model compatible with the Spotmatic.

Anyone putting one of these monstrosities on a Spotmatic can take the laughter coming their way, the muppets.

[Kerrowdown]

and that would be a good thing

agree. Please don’t cannibalize any LXs

I don't think any cannibalisation is required... the LXs are so modular is probably a straight fit, that can turned back to original at moments notice.

[disconnekt]

If I wanted a digital back for a film camera I'd get a Hasselblad, and if I wanted a dslr that looked like a film camera I'd get a Fuji. The "DB for 35mm film camera's" idea may have worked 20 years ago, but not today.

[leekil]

If I wanted a digital back for a film camera I'd get a Hasselblad, and if I wanted a dslr that looked like a film camera I'd get a Fuji. The "DB for 35mm film camera's" idea may have worked 20 years ago, but not today.

It might, if it actually fit inside the camera and had decent quality. But many people have tried to produce such a thing, and so far no one has succeeded.

[LennyBloke]

Around 20 years ago the Imagek EFS-1 introduced the concept of a digital film cassette that could be used in virtually any 35mm SLR film camera. Looked as though it was going to revolutionise the industry, but it never materialised....
http://www.epi-centre.com/reports/imagek.html

[Lord Lucan]

... the Imagek EFS-1 introduced the concept of a digital film cassette .... Looked as though it was going to revolutionise the industry, but it never materialised....

That is because it was really rather pointless, even 20 years ago, and would have been too expensive. The technical problems are such that it would end up costing more than an equivalent digital camera body. That would be one with few functions because without modifying the camera heavily there could be no controls on the digital insert.

[LennyBloke]

That is because it was really rather pointless, even 20 years ago, and would have been too expensive. The technical problems are such that it would end up costing more than an equivalent digital camera body. That would be one with few functions because without modifying the camera heavily there could be no controls on the digital insert.

....or did they get bought out by others you had an interest in ensuring that a whole new production of hardware kept the money rolling in to the "big boys"

...insert conspiracy theory here.... [Conspiracy] !

[brofkand]

The plus of a 35mm SLR is the size to me. There is no full frame digital SLR as small as the Pentax MX, or even the MZ-S - that I'm aware of, anyway.

The desire was a "drop-in" universal 35mm to digital adapter. You'd just drop in a digital sensor that was the size of a 35mm cassette and the camera would be none the wiser. The technology for something like that either will never exist, or is too expensive to be viable.

This looks like the old Kodak digital SLRs from 25 years ago - when they would take Nikon F5's and bolt on a digital tumor to them. Not compelling to me.