View Single Post
  #63  
Old May 1st 07, 03:56 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.misc,rec.photo.misc,rec.photo.digital,uk.rec.photo.misc
Bill Funk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,500
Default Turning film cameras into digital cameras

On Tue, 1 May 2007 08:36:44 +0200, (Philip Homburg)
wrote:

Obviously, there no point in making a product that nobody wants to buy.

But suppose that you can make a 'digital film' that fits lots of Nikon and
Canon bodies.

Are you just going going to wait until can make something that fits all
35mm cameras ever produced? Or are you just going to ship when the
market is big enough to support the product you can make?


Let's suppose you could solve the problem of actually fitting a sensor
between the current camera's back and shutter.
You will still need to do some modifications to the camera to allow
communication between the camera and the insert.
Then, there's the problems of where to put the battery, how to get rid
of heat, and storage/retrieval of the images.

How would one determine the size of the market? I don't think there
are enough owners of cameras who would seriously want to spend for the
insert plus the mods needed, when DSLRs that are much more capable
already exist at what may well be the same or lower cost. (But I could
be wrong.)

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign office
stopped using her maiden name last week and now
simply refers to her as Hillary Clinton. She's
completely dropped the name Rodham. It's a sure
sign that one of her brothers is about to get
indicted again.