A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Digital back for F3?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 10th 05, 08:45 PM
Aaron Blacksmith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Digital back for F3?

Is there any powerful digital back for F3? It would be a splendid thing for
all F3-owners. Besides, the F3 is a far better camera than the toys that are
sold today.
Aaron


  #2  
Old May 10th 05, 09:00 PM
UrbanVoyeur
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Aaron Blacksmith wrote:
Is there any powerful digital back for F3? It would be a splendid thing for
all F3-owners. Besides, the F3 is a far better camera than the toys that are
sold today.
Aaron


Better than the F5? F6? D2x? In what way?

--

J

www.urbanvoyeur.com
  #3  
Old May 10th 05, 09:03 PM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Aaron Blacksmith wrote:
Is there any powerful digital back for F3? It would be a splendid thing for
all F3-owners. Besides, the F3 is a far better camera than the toys that are
sold today.


Depends which. The F5, F6, EOS-1v and Maxxum 9 are certainly better
bodies than the F3.

To date the only 35mm cameras that have backs available are the Leica R8
and R9. At that the backs aren't on the shelves yet, but should be
shortly, assuming Leica survive the Extraordinary General Meeting of
shareholders later this month.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
  #4  
Old May 10th 05, 11:20 PM
Philip Homburg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
UrbanVoyeur wrote:
Aaron Blacksmith wrote:
Is there any powerful digital back for F3? It would be a splendid thing for
all F3-owners. Besides, the F3 is a far better camera than the toys that are
sold today.
Aaron

Better than the F5? F6? D2x? In what way?


The F3 is supposed to be the only Nikon camera that has a light meter
that works with shift lenses even when they are shifted.

Compared to the F5, etc. the F3 also has center-weighted light metering
with all finders.

Other than that, the F4 is the camera that gets the most out of manual
focus Nikkors.

I like the handling of the F3+MD4, but Nikon made far too many mistakes
designing the F3 (the way the light meter is unreadable in low light
situations is probably the worst feature, but switching off the light
meter readout when a flash is detected is a close second, having a dead
camera when the batteries in your motor drive are dead is another brillant
design feature, then there the lack of a switch on the MF-18 to rewind the
film completely).


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
  #5  
Old May 11th 05, 03:03 AM
DoN. Nichols
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:
Aaron Blacksmith wrote:
Is there any powerful digital back for F3? It would be a splendid thing for
all F3-owners. Besides, the F3 is a far better camera than the toys that are
sold today.


Depends which. The F5, F6, EOS-1v and Maxxum 9 are certainly better
bodies than the F3.

To date the only 35mm cameras that have backs available are the Leica R8
and R9. At that the backs aren't on the shelves yet, but should be
shortly, assuming Leica survive the Extraordinary General Meeting of
shareholders later this month.


Well ... it depends on available from *whom*. :-)

Kodak made a back to convert the N90s to a 1.3MP digital for the
AP -- called the NC2000e/c -- and several other variants for other
markets. I've got two of these -- one with a N90s body, and one with a
plain N90 body.

I think that they're still making backs to convert the N90s (and
perhaps others) to digital.

I think that the N90(s) was selected because of the 10-pin
connector on the front of the body, giving easy interconnection to the
various information in the camera, including frame numbers, and easier
integration between the camera body and the digital back. I'm not sure
what other Nikon film bodies may have this connector, if any. But if
any others do, and if they have the tripod socket in the same physical
location, it might be possible to put this back on one of the other
bodies.

But -- at 1.3 MP, it is not particularly attractive today, other
than the fact that it can work with any of the AI lenses with full
metering (unlike the D70).

But it also has no image display (just a tiny display which
displays the count of photo space remaining in the storage media, and
the SCSI ID when interfacing it -- plus a pie chart to give you an idea
what percentage of your media is already in use. So -- no chimping.

Oh yes -- it also has a rather awkward RAW format, and nothing
else, so you are stuck needing the plugin from Kodak to convert the
images to either jpegs, or to PhotoShop's own internal format.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
  #6  
Old May 11th 05, 07:17 AM
David Dyer-Bennet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Gisle Hannemyr writes:

AFAIK, the last back Kodak made for the N90s was the 6 Mpx DCS 460
(in 1995). If anyone know of a newer digital back for the Nikon
N90s - then I am /very/ interested.

The current crop of Kodak DSLRs are based on the Nikon F80 (DCS Pro
SLR/n, F-mount), or the Sigma SD10 (DCS Pro SLR/c, EF-mount) - but
the newers cameras are rebuilds - it is no longer a "digital back"
that has been adapted to replace the film back as was the case with
the older cameras.

If you want a Kodak DSLR with a Nikon Fx body, then the DCS 660 or DCS
760 are the models to get. Both are based upon Nikon's F5 body, and
have the same 6.3 Mpx sensor with 1.3x crop.


I think I want the DCS-660M, actually. Except none seem to be for
sale anywhere; which probably means that if one *were* available it'd
be out of my price range. I'd also like to verify that it actually
*gets* the considerably improved sensitivity that absence of the color
filters ought to give it.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/
  #7  
Old May 11th 05, 10:50 AM
Aaron Blacksmith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think F3 has the optimal functionality when you want a MF camera. The
quality is outstanding (only the F2 and the Leicas). A digital back with a
full size sensor would make it superior. Then it's a matter of taste if you
prefer the F4-F5-F6. When I say "toys" I refer to all the DSLR's below the
professional models, e.g. D70, 10D, 100D, 20D and all the digital crap from
Pentax, Minolta and Olympus.


"UrbanVoyeur" wrote in message
...
Aaron Blacksmith wrote:
Is there any powerful digital back for F3? It would be a splendid thing
for all F3-owners. Besides, the F3 is a far better camera than the toys
that are sold today.
Aaron

Better than the F5? F6? D2x? In what way?

--

J

www.urbanvoyeur.com



  #8  
Old May 12th 05, 12:18 AM
DoN. Nichols
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Aaron Blacksmith wrote:
I think F3 has the optimal functionality when you want a MF camera. The
quality is outstanding (only the F2 and the Leicas). A digital back with a
full size sensor would make it superior.


Is the F3 a MF camera? I thought that it was a 35mm SLR, like
the rest of the F series from Nikon.

Perhaps I should point out why you are unlikely to find a
full-frame digital back for an unmodified 35mm film camera.

1) The film camera must have a physical frame very close to
the film plane. At a greater distance, the edges of the image
would be blurred, and you also need physical support of the film
to hold it flat.

2) A sensor must have readout connections -- which are made along
the edges, and a protective cover, which is a millimeter or two
above the surface of the sensor (and is often also an
anti-aliasing filter).

3) A full-frame sensor thus must have the readout connections
outside of the frame, and the protective cover/anti-aliasing
filter would thus hit the physical frame of the film support,
thus forcing the sensor back and out of focus.

4) All conversions which I have seen (mainly the NC2000e/c which
was a Kodak conversion of the N90s to digital for the AP) have
the sensor rigidly mounted to the back, and projecting into the
physical frame of the film support and guides. If it were full
frame, this would not be possible.

5) Thus -- for a full frame sensor, you would need to machine away
part of the film support -- which is also support for the focal
plane shutter. At this point, you have an F3 (or whatever other
camera) which is no longer capable of using film.

If anyone knows that my suggestions and opinions above are
wrong, please correct me. Otherwise, please amend your suggestions to
accept a less than full frame sensor, or a destructively modified (e.g.
non-reversible) camera body no longer capable of using film.

For MF cameras like the Hasselblad, the film plane is part of
the removable back, so a full-frame sensor is possible in a special back
with those, with no modification to the body. (Though you might need
some additional mechanical or electrical linkages to tell the focal
plane when to transfer the image from the sensor to bufferer memory, and
finally to the media of choice.) I believe that the presence of the
10-pin connector on the Nikon N90s was why it was used as the starting
point for several conversions by Kodak.

How much could the F3 body relay to the back for inclusion in
the exif data?

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
  #9  
Old May 12th 05, 03:52 AM
David Dyer-Bennet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Gisle Hannemyr writes:

David Dyer-Bennet writes:
I think I want the DCS-660M, actually. Except none seem to be for
sale anywhere; which probably means that if one *were* available
it'd be out of my price range.


So we are two. I would actually settle for a DCS 460m, but that
one is just as elusive. I'm even desperate enough to consider
(but so far just consider) getting a Sigma SD10 for B&W work.

Apart from the Sigma SD9 and SD10, and the vintage Kodaks - do there
exist any other DSLR that do not have a Bayer colour mask in front of
the sensor?


Not yet, to my knowledge. The SD10 would presumably have the (minor)
resolution advantage, but I don't believe it has the sensitivity
advantage, which is the main benefit I'm hoping for.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/
  #10  
Old May 12th 05, 10:56 AM
Philip Homburg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
DoN. Nichols wrote:
5) Thus -- for a full frame sensor, you would need to machine away
part of the film support -- which is also support for the focal
plane shutter. At this point, you have an F3 (or whatever other
camera) which is no longer capable of using film.


Mounted slides are not full-frame either. Losing a millimeter or so should
be no problem.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bulk Loading 120 film? Alan Smithee In The Darkroom 19 April 29th 05 01:38 PM
digital back on MF vs digital 35mm? ColdCanuck Digital Photography 12 January 15th 05 12:00 AM
NYT article - GPS tagging of digital photos Alan Browne Digital Photography 4 December 22nd 04 08:36 AM
Digital Imaging vs. (Digital and Film) Photography Bob Monaghan Medium Format Photography Equipment 9 June 19th 04 05:48 PM
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? Michael Weinstein, M.D. In The Darkroom 13 January 24th 04 10:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.