turning traditional cameras into digital cameras

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 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/?/Glos...r_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.....

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/?/Glos...r_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.....

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 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.

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.

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
...
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?

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

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

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