View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:20 pm Post subject: Took 'em long enough |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
I'm placing this post in the "Film SLR" area because the film SLR is the platform in which this technology is realized.
https://petapixel.com/2017/10/17/im-back-new-digital-back-old-35mm-cameras/
I posted a recommendation: plan on developing a 24mp sensor for this piece of technology. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DigiChromeEd
Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland
|
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DigiChromeEd wrote:
Interesting, but what's wrong with using film cameras as they were intended to be used, with film. If you want it digitised you can have it scanned to disc at the development stage. Anyway, as far as I can see, the quality of the end result is no where near good enough. _________________ "I've got a Nikon camera, I like to take a photograph" - Paul Simon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Sciolist
Joined: 29 Mar 2017 Posts: 1445 Location: Scotland
Expire: 2021-04-16
|
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sciolist wrote:
That's the most usable iteration of this technology I've seen to date. Good luck to them. It looks fun. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
I agree with both you guys. It's quality leaves a lot to be desired. And it's an important first step.
I like the idea of being able to use a film camera with a digital sensor because it could end up being a more economical means of producing full frame digital images. That is, if this back's sensor is gonna be full frame. If it isn't then there's little point to the exercise, I feel. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TrueLoveOne
Joined: 30 Sep 2012 Posts: 1840 Location: Netherlands
Expire: 2013-12-24
|
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
TrueLoveOne wrote:
Their second kickstarter never made it : https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/samellos/im-backtm-pro-low-cost-digital-back-for-35mm-analo?ref=41n4jh
The official I'm Back website is also gone........ this will never be reality i guess.
About the sensor: it's a Panasonic 10.9mm diagonal (2/3" type, for P&S cams, crop 3,93), which is very small. The outcome however is called "full-frame" or "no crop factor" because it takes a picture of a focusing screen that is in place of the filmplane and has the size of full-frame.
But it's not a size that you'd want for editing.....
Also, from their own campaign text: "thanks to the focusing screen the images gain a “retro” feel since it creates small granules on the picture".
You'd better buy a second hand Sony A7 if you want high quality full-frame shots from your old lenses......
And shoot film cameras with what they were made for: film!! It's really great!
Cheers, René! _________________ My Flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chantalrene/
Sony A7, Canon 5D mkII, Minolta 7D + RD3000 and some more.....
Minolta and Konica collector.... slowly selling all the other stuff! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
René, for the past 35 years or so, when I want to take full frame photos, I use a 35mm camera. I can't afford even a used A7 -- or 5D for that matter. Maybe one day soon. Until then, though I still have fun shooting with film. I just wish it wasn't so expensive now.
Thanks for explaining how this "I'm Back" gizmo works. I'm afraid the tech would have to be entirely different before I'd be willing to buy one. But at least it's gotten people thinking of the possibility again. I've been waiting since 2000 for somebody to come up with a working method for using an SLR for digital work. Maybe one of these days. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TrueLoveOne
Joined: 30 Sep 2012 Posts: 1840 Location: Netherlands
Expire: 2013-12-24
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
TrueLoveOne wrote:
@Cooltouch : I shoot film as well, develop them myself as well. It's great and it slows me down. Wish i had more time for it to do some experiments though....
Fwiw: a second hand 5D gives quite some options for using old glass, i.e. M42 / Contax-Yashica / Olympus / Nikon. Not as much versatility as an A7, but it's a start! Over here in the Netherlands their prices have gone below the 300 euro mark, so that would not be a lot more than a complete "I'm back" set would have cost you.
I'm not familiar with pricing in your country, but it might be worth considering to look out for a 5D !
Cheers! _________________ My Flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chantalrene/
Sony A7, Canon 5D mkII, Minolta 7D + RD3000 and some more.....
Minolta and Konica collector.... slowly selling all the other stuff! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
I too do all my own film developing now, mostly because it's saving me a lot of money.
Even at the cheaper prices that Canon 5Ds are selling for these days, it's more than I can afford. And besides, if I were going to buy an EOS DSLR, it would be at least a 5D Mk II, which sells for about double what the 5D sells for. The 5D doesn't have Live View, which is a deal breaker to me. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TrueLoveOne
Joined: 30 Sep 2012 Posts: 1840 Location: Netherlands
Expire: 2013-12-24
|
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
TrueLoveOne wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
at least a 5D Mk II, which sells for about double what the 5D sells for. The 5D doesn't have Live View, which is a deal breaker to me. |
I went from the 5D to the 5DII. I (have) never use(d) live-view!
To be honest: using live view (which is the only option) with the A7 in darker surroundings when you plan on using (remote) flashes is nearly impossible. Both viewfinder and screen remain completely dark when you have set the correct aperture and shutter for flash. Because the camera does not know you are going to flash, live view then shows what it will record without the flashes: darkness!
Ymmv but i prefer to see my composition and focus area in the viewfinder.
That is, among others, why i keep both systems next to each other. They both have their purposes, but for me they cannot serve all aspects of what i want on their own. _________________ My Flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chantalrene/
Sony A7, Canon 5D mkII, Minolta 7D + RD3000 and some more.....
Minolta and Konica collector.... slowly selling all the other stuff! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mr G
Joined: 27 Jan 2014 Posts: 187 Location: London & Essex
|
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mr G wrote:
Hi guys, interesting, trying to keep up with the latest digital is nigh on impossible from a cost perspective. However medium format has never been cheaper, would rather buy an ETRS kit with change to spare, and have the negs scanned than a 5d mk 1 or 2. Often these have been hammered on the shutter counts and you have to pay a premium on those with low actuations. _________________ EVEN A BLIND SQUIRREL FINDS A NUT NOW AND THEN! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pete
Joined: 01 Feb 2011 Posts: 240 Location: Denver, San Jose
|
Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2018 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pete wrote:
I liked the 'RE-35' idea but it too was vaporware. It is not about being cheaper or economical but just being able to use a collection of classic film cameras and make digital images right in the camera. I currently use a Nikon Df with my collection of Nikon MF lenses. It would be awesome to be able to use my FM2n as digital but not with a huge accessory hanging down. Before the digital age we used to say "If you want slides shoot slide film and if you want prints shoot print film". I guess the same can apply to film and digital images...
Pete _________________ "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly!!!"
www.pete.3rdtrick.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
TrueLoveOne
Joined: 30 Sep 2012 Posts: 1840 Location: Netherlands
Expire: 2013-12-24
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TrueLoveOne wrote:
At first i didn't really believe what i was seeing and checked the date twice..... but it's true: they're back in again and this time they even reached their goal!
So i guess it will be possible to use your old SLR for simple digital pics after all!
Here it is: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/samellos/im-back-pro-low-cost-35mm-digital-back
Cheers, René! _________________ My Flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chantalrene/
Sony A7, Canon 5D mkII, Minolta 7D + RD3000 and some more.....
Minolta and Konica collector.... slowly selling all the other stuff! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Teemō
Joined: 07 Apr 2016 Posts: 586 Location: Australia
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Teemō wrote:
I'm not sure why they didn't just cost the size of cheap, low-resolution Full Frame sensors in the first place and give people exactly what they want, and exactly what this product is intended to be.
No, it wouldn't have been cheap - but then cameras never have been. If you can buy entire Full Frame DSLRs second-hand on Ebay now for less than $300 then surely they could have sourced current-production sensors in 12-24MP range for the same sort of money.
I suppose the engineering idea is somewhat flawed in that the sensor capture must sync with the physical camera system - shutter and lightmeter, in order to match the shutter speed and exposure. That is surely the barrier to this product ever possibly existing, not the potential cost. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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 vote in polls in this forum
|