The electrical elements of the Lux rely on Arduino IDE and components from adafruit, like Trinket, a tiny microcontroller that's not much bigger than a quarter.
My Pentax 6x7 system has been collecting dust since the late 90's and I still have 120 film in my freezer so I think i'll pass on a DIY project ;) It does look like a fun project though.
> it accepts 120 roll film.
I wish makers have actually tried to build a digital camera...
I gather the sensor and the IC are the problem - but that's precisely the challenge: to try to replicate at home the expensive manufacturing processes.
Dynaxx,Your opinion about site content is relavent, as are everyone's opinions. In this case, however, an apology was wise given the assertion (untrue) that no one, except perhaps children, are interested in non-camera/gear related content. I am a professional, and an academic, who enjoys seeing a variety of content. Such material(s) lends context and provide example of the application of technology. I enjoy and learn from reviews featured here very much. But I don't know how many times it need be repeated that this is not exclusively a review site. Should it have ever been one, I am one member that hopes it does not return to that. Admittedly, a number of others - I count you among these members - appear to disagree. Fine. But I ask that all individuals of that opinion please observe respectfully that they are not entitled to dictate content, and should abstain from making illogical claims or insulting staff.
I am sorry - my comment addresses the previous post.
I agree with everything you say and I too enjoy a variety of content ( apart from the occasional obvious "filler" material that needs much tighter editorial filtering for a site like this ) like the financial performance of camera/optics companies. I don't want nor expect DPR to be limited to reviews but the lost opportunity to review a very special new camera ( correctly described as "groundbreaking" by JaimeA ) is just self-destructive.
I think the principle used here is what can make a cheap camera cheaper and better. Just look at the highlights for example in the samples, keep in mind the lesser quality (stray) of the lens used here.Imagine using the same film in a high quality medium format camera.Digital is for ease of use and ease of editing... also for speed!
Dear Mr. Britton, Apologies for my tirade of today. At the time of Phil Askey (yes, we go that far back) it was possible to get a prompt review of new cameras. Even at that time, those reviews were unique, as they not only gave actual figures and comparisons, but also commented and instructed on aspects of the use of the cameras and, crucially, discussed their quirks. They were, as today, an invaluable decision and teaching aid. Of course, the reviews were not as sophisticated as they currently are. DPR is still our favorite site for the thoroughness of the analysis and the friendliness of the approach. On that count, our circle feels that certain groundbreaking new equipment needs to be addressed in a more timely fashion. You see, we have grown dependent of the very high quality of your reporting and the sincerity of your advice. Thank you.
@ JaimeA: Very nice writing! @ dpreview: I second JaimeA
No apologies are necessary, JaimeA ; DPR's policy in allocating resources to new camera reviews has baffled and frustrated many of us in recent times. The glib response from Barney Britton indicates they will continue their patronising attitude to the site followers ( whose contributions add at least as much value as the DPR journalists ) who, in their mind, have no right to know why the review of a groundbreaking camera is given low priority.
I do indeed remember when Phil made this site stand out a mile! And the reviews came in a fairly prompt fashion. Now, at times it takes ages (some cameras are just dropped like hot potatoes — prompting comments about Amazon breathing down DPR's neck from us readers). The staff is far bigger than ever before, and there are far fewer players in the camera business, but something seem to be amiss. Too many staff meetings interfering, I'd say, like all corporate behemoths of today!
Nice to see the choices of medium to create ones vision continuously grow.
There is something called actuality and momentum in the news. The story and reviews for the full-frame Sony A7r and A7 have by now appeared practically everywhere, including DxO, an affiliate. Apart from inconclusive “first impressions” we get no review in DPR. Nevertheless we see this inane news that no professional or amateur cares to know (except perhaps children). Michael Reichmann reported his impressions in October of last year; DxO Mark published a detailed review and ratings (2nd in 249 cameras) also in October. I got my camera in November. I suggest you do not publish anything more about the A7r and avoid the ridicule; by now it is old, stale news.
Did you read the A7R "review" in DxO? It is actually shorter and less information than the first impressions review here. It is basically just a screenshot of the DxO score for the camera plus some screenshots of their comparison tool, comparing to other cameras.
I am an amateur (of the non-child variety, no less), and I very much care for this sort of news. And note that news is not a review and reviews aren't news.
If you've already bought the camera, why are you so desperate for a review? Surely the only evaluation of your purchase should be your own experience and the photos you create, not the opinions and test results of a website?
Amazon management probably doesn't care much about DPR so they likely have the freedom to do things at their own pace... Probably a very different mindset from a smaller review website that has to constantly fight for readership, relevance, and revenue... Just a thought...
Apart from being a worse choice than a Nikon D800E in almost every category except size, what's to say about the A7r?
A7 A7R review will be on the site early next week. Believe me when I say that this general interest news story did not delay it by one iota.
I have no interest in a 120 roll film camera either, but reading about it and realizing that other people do is indeed interesting. I like to "broaden my horizons" and perhaps there are 120 film and composure techniques that can help me improve my photography skills. So I'm glad to see dpreview publishing off-beat stories like this. If I don't want to read them, I click through to something else. Simple.
Your post is off topic.
You claim to be old institution, but do not care for film? Grow up. Using film abd getting it right will teach you more than a review of a. Camera you already own will.
"...see this inane news that no professional or amateur cares to know (except maybe children)."
You should apologize. This comment embodies both ignorance and arrogance, as well as a supports the stereotype that many photographers are rigid technophiles. You, of course, do not speak for anyone other than yourself (except perhaps those in this "circle" you mention). I enjoy most content here, tangential or otherwise. It is an all-to-sad mistake that you and others make about content: ignoring that many members, of all types, enjoy a diversity of content to accompany camera and gear reviews. And, once again, the implication is aired that these types of news items slow the delivery of "proper" reviews - this, despite staff on numerous ocasions explaining that no such relationship or effect exists.
What is this "film" that they speak of?
just google it
It's the CMOS/CCD sensor of the 20th Century. ;-)
The original digital medium.
Sadly, Internet people just don't know what sarcasm is.
I much prefer Do It Yourself over $pend It Yourself. Much respect to you for standing against the tide in the name of film. Doing what others will either agree with ... or insult because they lack the ingenuity and creativity.
It's cool that he did it. Personally, I'd just grab an old used TLR and refurbish it.
I also don't have a 3D printer; those aren't too common.
Image on slide 5, is that flare? Or is that just the lens?
Pity that the lens is just a single element one. This keeps the camera in the 'loom' world. Doublet or triplet would make the camera much better image taker and not just a cool gimmick.
But I do appreciate the project.
It's open source, go ahead and add the designs you want to see. :)
That lens seems to strike a better balance of dreamy/in-focus than a lot of the nasty lomo lenses.
Sounds better that than paying money to lomo for their plastic kits.
first diy camera I see with an electronic shutter, really nice project!
It's an interesting project, an accomplishment if built, but you can buy old cameras for song today. I've seen working TLRs like the Yashica's going for $25 each so if you goal is photography with film, you can get there faster. What would be interesting would be a high resolution DIY real monochrome camera that doesn't cost $10000 like Leica's M. The first digital camera I owned was a low-rez CCD astrocamera I built with boards and plans designed by the former editor of "Astronomy" magazine.
It's not for those who want "fast" but rather those who want something self-build, and by that: unique.
Unique within the circle who build them, but not unique to the individual unless they change the design.
look at that, someone has done this already With a cheap web-cam sensor he got microscopic results. It is very simple, buy a camera an put a sensor in.
Not exactly the kind of set-up I was thinking of. A 22mp monochrome Kodak sensor in an SLR body would be great, but a Herculean task to get to work. Having global shutters on larger sensors would be a godsend as this would greatly simplify the design of custom bodies.
I must admit having researched the possibility of a DIY monochrome digital camera.
There are plenty of monochrome industrial vision cameras/modules that would be a good starting point, but if you want anything better than a basic webcam resolution, you end up with something costing more than 1000€. And an industrial camera based on Leica 's MM Kodak KAI16000 CCD costs over 10,000$!
I keep looking though ;-)
It would be cheaper to find and gut a pre-existing camera that shows up as surplus. Then, trying to find/figure out how to re-house it so it could be used primarily as a still image camera. There are expensive development kits sold by companies to develop these kinds of things.
Better to make such a thing than watching the TV every evening.
Definitely watching TV is much better than spending so much time and effort on something as worthless as this.
@Press CorrespondentInstead, you can build something useful yourself rather than watching TV. It is even much better...
Karroly...you'll find people who lack any artistic vision like to post to stir things up. Just ignore Mr. press.
Looks like Kodak Brownie Junior from 30's
Cool project. Most here will not understand why anyone would do such a thing.
Would be smart, if it had a mamiya or hasselblad mount. With 120 roll film, perhaps someone could better buy Mamiya 645, Mamiya rb67, Hasselblad or Zenza Bronica.
"You making photos with a loudspeaker?! Cool"
iPhone was yesterday, today we making 5.1-photos!
An electronic box camera? Jesus wept.
He wept with joy that someone, somewhere, is putting their brain to use. Innovation (however simple or apparently redundant) is a wonderful thing.
Probably one of the reasons that Kodak went down the pan was their lack of a digital back for the Box Brownie :(.
And I must have the wrong Bible as there's no mention of photography in it!
"And I must have the wrong Bible as there's no mention of photography in it!"
On the contrary; there was a guys saying "thous shalt not take photos of me or I shall come after you"... or something along those lines.
The photographers Bible verse:
Matthew 5:16 ESV
In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.