Reading mode: Light Dark

Digital Back for Canon film Cameras???

Go to last post
P

Photo Talk

Well-known member
Messages
155
Reaction score
0
Location
AU
With Mamiya introducing digital backs for their film cameras, what is stopping the likes of canon doing the same thing.

I love My EOS 3 Camera, but I don't use it anymore beause of it being a film camera.

Do you think digital backs for Canon film cameras could eventually be made available?
 
There was "e-Film" trying to do something a long time ago and it seemed to die. I think it was going t cost as much if not more than a digital SLR.
--
May the light be with you
Stop global whining
Stupid should hurt
 
William Massey Photo said:
I don't understand how that could be better than just having a normal digital camera.
Click to expand...
I love the 45 eye focusing system on my EOS 3, which doesn't exist anymore. It will be a nice thing to have it again in the future using my existing camera with a digital back.
 
This type of solution would probably be very expensive, and it is not likely any would risk to make this type of sensor, because the marked would be all too small.

It would only be in your dreams. .....

buy a dslr and live without the special focus features of the EOS 3.
 
... a 5dmk2, a set of mini screw drivers & a very fine tip soldering iron ;-)

... I doubt if we will ever see an interchangeable digital back for Canon SLR's......there is more chance that we will see a digital version of the Eos 3 (3D).....I had (have) an Eos 5 film camera which featured the lesser eye control AF, I am still unsure why Canon did not progress with the eye control feature, it did seem to work.
 
...the digital back for old Canon film cameras that the original poster mentioned, or the '3D' (digital version if Eos 3 film camera - or something v.close to it) that I mentioned......or both?
 
There are a number of issues involved.
  1. The camera body is designed so that the film pressed flat right to the focal plane of the camera. Digital sensors have an IR filter, AA filter, and Bayer filter all on top of the actual sensitive surface, all that glass would have to be in front of the focal plane, and may risk bumping into the shutter. If your sensor is behind your focal plane, you'd never be able to focus on infinity. Theoretically special micro-lenses might be a work around but that would make it more expensive to manufacture.
  2. Even if you overcome the issues above, the back would be much larger as it would need it's own power supply (batteries take up a bit of space, and the size of a 35mm canister might only give you 100 or so shots on a charge) and memory (if you can do without having removable media, it's not so much an issue, but trying to find a place to put an SD card is difficult.
  3. The digital sensor needs communication to the camera as to when to turn on and off. In newer MF bodies there is an electrical connection. In older bodies you had to connect the back to the flash sync (but even then there were some latency issues, and using that method with a focal plane shutter would limit you to only shooting below X-Sync speed.)
  4. How many people would buy such a device? Unless there are 50,000 potential buyers out there, the cost is going to be so high that it would be more economical to buy a new digital SLR, reducing further the number of potential buyers, further increasing the cost. I'm fairly Certain more 5D Mk IIs were sold than EOS 3s.
Though if you have $10-20 million, we may be able to talk about doing some R&D.
--
~K
 
Well, as an after market item it will not prove very successful or cheap. Look at Leica's attempt and subsequent failure. The ideal would be to make a digital body with all the latest AF and metering refinements and make it with the possibility of a changeable digital back. It would be a blessing. You buy the expensive body but it will no longer be obsolete. You could either change it yourself or the manufacturer could. It would be a great pro consumer thing to do but I will not hold my breath.
--

All the best,
Rocco Galatioto

http://galatiotophoto.blogspot.com
 
The economics don't make any sense at all. The resulting camera would be heavier than a DSLR, cost much, much more, and provide less integrated functionality.

Kevin
 
putting a digital sensor into the glorious little T90 and shooting with some manual primes?

My god, I'd jump at the chance.

seriously.
 
Amen to that. I have 2 of them and lens to 800. I would give my left youknowhat for a digital back for them.
--
May the light be with you
Stop global whining
Stupid should hurt
 
Just like in a laptop computer you can replace the graphics card. They should make digital dSLR cameras modular so that you can have a collection of lenses and sensors.

If that was the way that dSLRs were, you’d see a variety of specialized sensors, and you could use them just like different types of film.

But we’ll never see that because Canon wants to sell you a compete camera body with every new sensor.
 
Seriously you'd be willing to pay $8K for a digital back to put on a T90?

Why?
  • It would be bulkier and heavier than a purpose built DSLR, and the functionality would be all over the place. Set the ISO on the T90 for metering, then remember to set it again on the back.
  • You're eating up batteries in the T90 winding film that isn't there, and then more batteries in the digital back.
  • You'd probably have to use an angle finder because the back would be so bulky you couldn't get your face close to the viewfinder.
I shot with a T90 for 20 years but wouldn't go back to it from my 5DII, there's simply no aspect of the equation that makes sense.

Kevin
 
Edward In Toronto said:
Just like in a laptop computer you can replace the graphics card. They should make digital dSLR cameras modular so that you can have a collection of lenses and sensors.

If that was the way that dSLRs were, you’d see a variety of specialized sensors, and you could use them just like different types of film.

But we’ll never see that because Canon wants to sell you a compete camera body with every new sensor.
Click to expand...
Last time I checked, you can't replace the graphics card in your laptop, its embedded in the main board, but maybe you can on your desktop.

Seriously, though. To make a body that would allow changing the sensor & support electronics would be much more expensive than a high end DSLR that is integrated. It would also be bulkier & present more sealing & alignment problems.

The interconnections are another issue. With it all integrated, the signal paths are short an there effects on the highbandwidth signals are well controlled. Now you have to support those data rates across a flex circuit & connector?

Then of course there is the reliability issue with interconnects. You do realize one of the most unreliable parts in most electronic designs is the interconnects. Cables, pins, sockets.

Then what about AF, you want that modular too?
There is no practicality or economic reason to pursue such a design & product.

So that would have to always make this sensor package backwards compatible withe some "mother body". Like that technology would never change. How about the the Digic or other named ASIC that would constantly be evolving for higher Mp sensors, faster DMA rates, higher resolution A/D converters etc.

The Rico design, while novel & niche, won't make much of an impact I predict will not last.
--
'A bad idea in search of a good cause is..
just a bad idea' ... me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top