The real problem is that sensors available to hobbyists are quite low-end. They can just make bad digital pics; losing both the magic of film and the fidelity of digital. Old film lenses are only usable if you get a crop factor of 2x (m4/3 size) or less, so that you can use a 40mm (as found in many inexpensive rangefinders such as the Electro 35) as an 80mm - not great for typical use but usable.
I am actually quite surprised why in all these years, no one has made somewhat affordable ($100-400) larger sensors available for the hobbyist market. Given that there are a couple of small Chinese manufacturers making m4/3 bodies, it's surprising that no one is servicing this small (but not necessarily unviable) market. More likely is the availability of a 1" sensor at a much lower cost since ~1" sensors have started appearing on phones. That'd make a wide 24mm lens a 65mm normal lens. That would be on the far end of usable, but anything smaller is just a stale experiment for the wider audience. But of course - any experiment can be quite rewarding for whoever is doing it.
[1]: https://casualphotophile.com/2022/05/19/digi-swap-im-back-re...
I've been using a resin printer to print adapter rings to go from various old lenses salvaged from a box of thrift store 1960's East German cameras to adapt their lenses (many times they were non-removable lenses too, so not always easy) to an EOS ring to be able to shoot with them with a modern sensor.
Sometimes the results are wonderful. You get the old aberration, soft focus, bit of distortion when I don't get things aligned right.. it's fun and I'm not ruining anything of value really.
Pretty simple answer: only one company makes good CMOS sensors -- Sony.
And they don't give a shit about hobbyists and can sell as many sensors as they can roll of the line as it is.
I, for example, would love to mod a Hasselblad medium format cameras so that it could digitally adjust light etc so I could use it as a point and shoot, but with beautiful quality output.
But your linked output discusses getting worse quality photos through the addition of digital sensors. Why?
Imagine running 110 film through a hassy, it would look crap, and only capture a tiny window of what you normally do, because the "sensor" is tiny.
That's basically the problem, the sensor size of hobbyist camera modules is tiny, even smaller than 110 film.
They do make medium format digital backs, but they are expensive, even by hasselblad standards.
The problem is that a raw CCD/CMOS sensor output generally looks shite. I work at a place that experiments with novel sensors, and we have a device that uses off the shelf CMOS sensors for redacted camera sensors. They are the same type of sensors that are used in previous high end phones. However the raw images just look shit. Part of it is the lens, part of it is that we are not interested in making "good" looking images, but accurate images.
Maybe you just need a modern digital light meter for your Hasselblad? I've added something like one of these to a Yashica with good results:
I believe they are not keeping pace with regard to resolutions we expect these days? Perhaps a small sensor as well. I don't know since I have not investigated in the past decade.
The magenta hue you see in the outdoor shots is characteristic of photos taken using a sensor with no IR blocking filter (also known as a hot mirror).
I really liked the project info regarding shutter speeds etc, and I'm considering trying this out with a Nikon FE2 I don't really like and picked up for £100 some years ago, but I suspect even these cameras have gone up in price. I might make another pinhole camera for the RPI sensor, that can be done with an old body cap and any camera-like box.
My current personal favorite "vintage" camera is an F2 with non-metering prism, type H full-field microprism viewing screen, and 50mm f/1.2 lens (still a current[3] Nikon product!), mostly because it has the clearest, brightest, largest viewfinder image I've ever seen on a 35mm camera.
[1] Other than flashes and optional electronic metering prisms.
[2] The only exceptions I'm aware of are the PC-E tilt/shift lenses, which have "soft" physical aperture rings that still require electronics, and therefore power supplied via the lens mount, to actually stop down the lens.
Also, my claim only fully applies to non-metering F2 viewfinders; metering prisms protrude a bit from the front of the camera body and interfere with the mounting and/or operation of certain lenses (including, I believe, all PC lenses).
[3] https://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Le...
Then again, the first generation of pocketable mirrorless cameras with APS-C sized sensors (which are much bigger & high quality than those found in pocket cameras, or the one used in the article’s hack) should be pretty accessible right now… ie Fuji x-t10, canon m1/2/3. The Canon M1 also takes Magic Lantern which adds raw video ! (Albeit with a significant crop factor).
Yeah the APS-C cameras definitely has better sensors (even accounting for the better highlight falloff from the older CCD sensors), but personally the appeal of digicams is to replace my small pocket film cameras, so those are just slightly too big. (I do still have an original x100 kicking around too.)
Cool project!
See e.g. https://casualphotophile.com/2022/05/19/digi-swap-im-back-re...
It's significantly smaller than a 35mm film area, it should avoid some of the lens edge spherical abberation and coma issues but also has less light falling on it maybe.
It looked to be fixed shutter speed variable aperture? Tying it to the flash trigger event was smart, if I recall correctly flash tended to fixed shutter speed for logical reasons.
Great project. I loved how it was non destructive.
I’m glad about the plan to open source it, and hope an M3 version comes along, too.
The only thing that leicas have is that they are small range finders. Almost everything else is hype or just expense. Even compared to other film cameras at the end of the film era (90s)
Granted there are some specialist 1f< lenses that are interesting, but not at that price.
A recent fujifilm X digital rangefinder will probably beat the pants off a leica.
But.
The point of a hobby is not saving money, the point of a hobby is to enjoy doing what you are doing, even if to all the world it's patent nonsense.
