Depth of Field Adapter on Steroids

ProfHankD wrote:

fferreres wrote:

ProfHankD wrote:

fferreres wrote:

I think the discontinued cameras are a dead end. What will happen is the rig is liked by many, will make some hoard these old cameras. Not ideal, but definitely would be fun to watch, and a great case study for an economics course in supply/demand.

Worst case, they'd spend $250 for a new ELPH 360HS, which isn't discontinued. However, I think you are GROSSLY UNDERESTIMATING how many old PowerShots are out there. There are probably 50 models supported by CHDK, manufactured over a period of nearly two decades, that should fit this mount.

I wasn't aware CHDK could run many models of these cameras, so if there are new (and old) this would be a sound choice.

The stable build of CHDK currently supports an incredible 210 distinct PowerShot models, with between 1 and 4 different base firmware per model. About 50 of those have essentially identical physical dimensions for the lens assembly to fit this; most others could be accommodated with minor tweaks to the 3D-printed mount portion of Faboky (which is an interchangeable part, about 1/3 of the total print time).

Part of the reason Canon has made so many models is that they like to dominate store displays, and more models help them do that. So, they make per-model development cost very low through reuse of most of the same parts for periods of a decade or more. In fact, that's why CHDK can support so many models: the porting effort isn't terrible when models are so similar.

There's always the chance to have other people adapt to something else, but it seems to me it'd be perfect if there's vast numbers, and much better with a model in production.

I thought the $240 Canon ELPH 360HS was the exact same size as the ELPH 180, but it turns out it is slightly larger . That's enough difference that it would need the mounting plate shifted downward by about 4mm, although the opening for the lens looks to be the same dimensions. I can easily accommodate that with a different version of mount portion. Perhaps I'll make it a customizer pull-down to select the supported camera model? The only bad thing about that is I should probably buy one of the ELPH 360HS to test fit with, because that's the current-production cheapest choice.

I notice nobody has said anything about the idea of using a CLIQ to make it a camera directly producing little prints...

When things run into issues is when there's limited supply. For example, I recall this particular scanner (battery operated and 8x11 iirc) that was used as a back, who sold for next to nothing, and after the project go some traction you could not find one for less than $300.

That scanner was a rather rare product to begin with; it didn't sell well, and that's why they went out of business. In contrast, Canon has been building a ton of PowerShots for two decades. It's not a high-profit-margin product, so they are now cutting back, but the fixed-lens market is still something like 20% of all cameras, and I'd bet more than half of those are Canon PowerShots...

Well maybe they could make the PowerShot Hank Edition! Aparently, some people applied this concept to 35mm cameras, like I'm Back, with 35mm screen and a smaller sensor.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1438714-REG/im_back_ibp_i_m_back_pro_n_a.html

It's funny to watch, but at the begining, whatever model works for the camera is more than enough. Having 10 people build it is enough for many pics to show up and get some wondering.