turning traditional cameras into digital cameras

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Dan Jacobson, Oct 30, 2004.

  1. Dan Jacobson

    Dan Jacobson Guest

    Sorry that this has surely been discussed already, but what were the
    conclusions about turning traditional cameras into digital cameras by
    Say, sliding a sensor pad where the film goes. Perhaps the shutter
    would be kept on "bulb", replaced by software.

    Or is turning traditional cameras into digital cameras never worth the fuss?
     
    Dan Jacobson, Oct 30, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dan Jacobson

    dj_nme Guest

    Dan Jacobson wrote:

    > Sorry that this has surely been discussed already, but what were the
    > conclusions about turning traditional cameras into digital cameras by
    > Say, sliding a sensor pad where the film goes. Perhaps the shutter
    > would be kept on "bulb", replaced by software.
    >
    > Or is turning traditional cameras into digital cameras never worth the fuss?


    I don't think that this realy a good idea to try.

    Assuming that you are a a tinkerer in a shed/garage/home workshop, there
    are more than a few hurdles to adapting a a camera to digital.

    - The first is that if you wanted to use that electronincs straight out
    of an existing digicam, you would have to pay a fairly large amount of
    money for a high megapixel camera to justify the conversion.
    - Secondly, most digicam sensors are quite small (see
    http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/Sensor_Sizes_01.htm
    ) and would have a large crop-factor of around 4 (eg: a 50mm film lens
    would become a 200mm when used with the digital sensor).
    - Thirdly, most of the higher resolution (and high cost) digicams have
    reasonably good optics on them already which are optimised for the
    sensor and probably have a good zoom range and moderate distortion to
    start with.
    - Forthly, you film camera would need to gutted completely and would
    probably have the lens-mount as the only re-usable part.
    - Fifthly, it would be nessesary to build mounting systems to house the
    inards of a digicam inside the body of your (now dead) film camera and
    making sure everything is aligned properly is no easy task. It is very
    easy to have something slightly askew by accident.

    Just some of my thoughts on the subject.....
     
    dj_nme, Oct 31, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 06:35:52 +0800, Dan Jacobson <> wrote:

    >Sorry that this has surely been discussed already, but what were the
    >conclusions about turning traditional cameras into digital cameras by
    >Say, sliding a sensor pad where the film goes. Perhaps the shutter
    >would be kept on "bulb", replaced by software.


    Many years ago, I saw in an electronics magazine, and device which was the size
    of a 35mm roll of film with some film protruding, which fitted in a regular
    camera. From above, it looked like a letter 'P', and it had a sensor where the
    film would be.

    Nothing ever came of it, which is a shame as I thought it was quite a clever
    idea actually.

    --
    Chris Pollard


    CG Internet café, Tagum City, Philippines
    http://www.cginternet.net
     
    Christopher Pollard, Oct 31, 2004
    #3
  4. Dan Jacobson

    Matt Ion Guest

    Christopher Pollard wrote:
    > On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 06:35:52 +0800, Dan Jacobson <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Sorry that this has surely been discussed already, but what were the
    >>conclusions about turning traditional cameras into digital cameras by
    >>Say, sliding a sensor pad where the film goes. Perhaps the shutter
    >>would be kept on "bulb", replaced by software.

    >
    >
    > Many years ago, I saw in an electronics magazine, and device which was the size
    > of a 35mm roll of film with some film protruding, which fitted in a regular
    > camera. From above, it looked like a letter 'P', and it had a sensor where the
    > film would be.
    >
    > Nothing ever came of it, which is a shame as I thought it was quite a clever
    > idea actually.


    The website still exists - http://www.siliconfilm.com/

    I don't think it's been updated in several years; they must've paid
    upfront for the domain name for 10 years or so.
     
    Matt Ion, Oct 31, 2004
    #4
  5. Dan Jacobson

    Hugh Jorgan Guest

    If you could overcome all the other problems mentioned, the huge advantage
    would be that you have easy access to clean your CCD!
    --
    Hugh Jorgan

    "Dan Jacobson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Sorry that this has surely been discussed already, but what were the
    > conclusions about turning traditional cameras into digital cameras by
    > Say, sliding a sensor pad where the film goes. Perhaps the shutter
    > would be kept on "bulb", replaced by software.
    >
    > Or is turning traditional cameras into digital cameras never worth the

    fuss?
     
    Hugh Jorgan, Oct 31, 2004
    #5
  6. On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:46:42 GMT, Matt Ion <> wrote:

    >The website still exists - http://www.siliconfilm.com/


    That looks like it. Although I'm not inspired by the number '320' next to the
    image... Is that the resolution?

    --
    Chris Pollard


    CG Internet café, Tagum City, Philippines
    http://www.cginternet.net
     
    Christopher Pollard, Oct 31, 2004
    #6
  7. On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:02:13 +0800, Christopher Pollard <>
    wrote:

    >That looks like it. Although I'm not inspired by the number '320' next to the
    >image... Is that the resolution?


    Having read further, it's not. it's 4.2MP.

    --
    Chris Pollard


    CG Internet café, Tagum City, Philippines
    http://www.cginternet.net
     
    Christopher Pollard, Oct 31, 2004
    #7
  8. Dan Jacobson

    dj_nme Guest

    Christopher Pollard wrote:
    > On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 17:02:13 +0800, Christopher Pollard <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    >>That looks like it. Although I'm not inspired by the number '320' next to the
    >>image... Is that the resolution?

    >
    >
    > Having read further, it's not. it's 4.2MP.
    >


    It is also vapourware.
    Has been promised for years and never eventuated.
    siliconfilm seems to have folded, at least I rember something about this
    early last year or at least some-one posted about it hear then.
     
    dj_nme, Oct 31, 2004
    #8
  9. Dan Jacobson

    Jim Townsend Guest

    Dan Jacobson wrote:

    > Sorry that this has surely been discussed already, but what were the
    > conclusions about turning traditional cameras into digital cameras by
    > Say, sliding a sensor pad where the film goes. Perhaps the shutter
    > would be kept on "bulb", replaced by software.
    >
    > Or is turning traditional cameras into digital cameras never worth the fuss?


    Digital backs have been available for Medium format for some time.

    Leica will be selling a digital back to fit couple of their 35mm models.

    http://www.leica-camera.com/produkte/rsystem/digitalmodul/index_e.html

    The link to the now defunct Silicon Film has been posted.

    Digital backs would probably be popular if there were a demand for them,
    but with the dropping cost of digital cameras, it's probably cheaper to
    just buy a film and a digital body if you want both :)
     
    Jim Townsend, Oct 31, 2004
    #9
  10. Dan Jacobson

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Digital backs have been around for high end cameras for some time.
    Likely cheaper to buy a new DSLR, though.

    Phil

    Dan Jacobson wrote:
    > Sorry that this has surely been discussed already, but what were the
    > conclusions about turning traditional cameras into digital cameras by
    > Say, sliding a sensor pad where the film goes. Perhaps the shutter
    > would be kept on "bulb", replaced by software.
    >
    > Or is turning traditional cameras into digital cameras never worth the fuss?
     
    Phil Wheeler, Oct 31, 2004
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Bob Salomon

    Kodak to Stop Selling Traditional Cameras in U.S.

    Bob Salomon, Jan 13, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    639
    Robert
    Jan 14, 2004
  2. Glenn Jacobs

    Digital Versus Traditional Cameras

    Glenn Jacobs, Oct 7, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    339
    Glenn Jacobs
    Oct 8, 2004
  3. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    400
  4. Turning film cameras into digital cameras

    , Apr 7, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    112
    Views:
    2,577
    Bill Funk
    May 8, 2007
  5. UKJobHunter

    Turning your Digital Camera into web cam

    UKJobHunter, Jun 18, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    338
    Bob Horvath
    Jun 20, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page