On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 20:07:35 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

On 26/07/2015 19:21, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 15:23:26 +0100, Davey wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 12:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:43:19 +0100, Davey wrote:

My first reaction would be to disable anything that took control
away from me.

Agreed. I've got a 1977 Nikon F2 and I've no plans to change it. At
least half the enjoyment is fumbling around with things like shutter
speed, aperture, depth of field and focus AFAIC.

To me, the perfect gift would be a digital pack to fit onto my Olympus
OM-2 to replace the 35mm film.

I have a hankering for a similar 'upgrade' for my venerable Chinon CX
SLR. The only downside being its use of the Pentax M42 lens adapter
mount rather than the later, more popular, bayonet style mount.

TBH, I'm disappointed that no enterprising company has come up with a
digital 'film back' adapter kit to revitalise pretty well just about
every film SLR camera that's ever existed.

There was one a long time ago, it didn't sell very well.
The electronics were in the "cassette" and the sensor in the film
"tongue".


Triggering an 'exposure event' could easily be achieved by using an
integrated microphone to detect the 'sonic signature' of whatever film
SLR you cared to name (perhaps even implemented by using a 'training
algorithm' - even very very quiet models such as that Olympus OM-2 will
still produce enough sound level to act as a trigger - the mic *will*
be internal so should get a clear enough sonic signature even with the
quietest of cameras).

Why?, you get light on the sensor when the shutter opens and you use
that as the trigger.

There may well be usage cases where using such a technique may not be
appropriate or quite possibly fail to capture what the photographer
intended.



I guess we'll have to wait for full frame sensors to become
sufficiently
commonplace with the most expensive of DSLRs before they're likely to
be commoditised sufficiently to make it an economically viable
proposition.

The biggest problem is that old style lenses aren't very good compared
to modern digital ones. Even something like a four thirds digital will
exceed what an old film SLR and lens can achieve.

Even back in the seventies, 35mm SLR lenses could outperform the linear
resolution of even low speed high contrast monochrome film by about an
order of magnitude (50 line pairs per mm versus 500 line pairs of a good
quality standard lens at F1.4 or F2).

To put this in context, it would be fair to say that a full frame
200Mpxel sensor wouldn't be wasted on such a fixed focal length lens
(zoom lenses of the day, otoh, might well disappoint, but that's zoom
lenses of the day, taking advantage of the limits of film).

--
Johnny B Good