Slashdot Mirror
How To Get 39 Megapixels From a 53-Year-Old Camera
G3ckoG33k writes "An article at The Register Hardware describes how Hasselblad film cameras dating back to 1957 can be given a new life using a digital back to get images at a super resolution of 39 megapixels. From the article: 'The CFV-39 digital back allows you to get those cameras out from the last century and use the V-System cameras with their beautiful glass once again, it simply fits in place of where the roll film used to be. Hasselblads have never been inexpensive, but talk about a return on investment. Here is a manufacturer looking after a fiercely loyal user-base and along with it offering what could be seen as the ultimate green camera system.' Oh, by the way most pictures taken during the Apollo space program in the 1960s were taken with Hasselblad." Hasselblad's been making digital backs for quite a while now, but this one's very impressive in speed (and cost — "only" about $14,000) compared to earlier models.
Film. You know, that cellulose acetate image capture and storage medium that uses silver halides? You might remember it from "last century".
Why not just shoot a $4 roll of film, and scan it on a $200 flatbed scanner at a mere 2400DPI for a fat 30 megapixel image, plus you have an in-camera archival backup slide, which can later be drum-scanned at an even higher resolution if needed?
And you don't even need batteries.
It's nice to see a capability like this being added to such an old design. Personally I'd like to see a camera manufacturer or third party come out with digital versions of old manual focus SLR greats like the K1000, or produce reasonably priced digital backs for them.
I've got news for Mr. Santayana: we're doomed to repeat the past no matter what. That's what it is to be alive.
One thing you just cannot physically get with small lenses and small CCD-areas like in you phone is plenty of light without too much distortions. There's a reason there's a DSLR market. And i you want to to make a moving picture, you're gonna have to settle with even lesser amounts of light per frame/photo per unit area, which is why almost any good movie camera is an oversized machine on wheels with cannons (not the brand!) for lenses. Obviously there's a good enough for people like you and me, but Hasselsblads are targeted at the high end of high end, for the cases in which physics leaves you no other choice.
I'd like to see a hack of old movie cameras. If someone would replace the film cartridge area with a cheap, off-the-shelf elctronic video system, that would be awesome.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
I routinely shoot the other way around: old Pentax and Nikon lenses on my DSLR (Canon Digital Rebel series), with suitable lens adapters. The best adapters are the M42 to EOS adapters, which let you use Pentax screwmount lenses. The digital imaging doesn't cut you any slack, a crummy lens makes crummy pictures, while a good lens makes good pictures. Plus all that old-fashioned lens flare, cool bokeh, and more. Fun.
The Nikon adapters aren't as solid. Maybe it's the fault of my cheap Ebay adapter. Nikon made some amazing lenses in the F2/F3 era.
Forget automation, of course: stop down metering, manual focus.
...laura
Not to mention that a scanned image will never achieve the same quality as a born-digital picture. Also, convenience. If you take hundreds of shots, and factor in the time spent in getting them processed, then scanned, you'll be loosing a lot (compare to just plug in your camera and there are your pictures).
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Sure, Hasselblad might have been used for the US space program... but Nikon inherited that mantle.
There's a Nikon camera on the moon *right now* - because one of the lunar astronauts accidentally left it behind.
Although that's not the only Nikon in space: NASA has used Nikon cameras on the Space Shuttle for 30 years (yes, it is that old) - and currently uses the D3s on the Space Shuttle and International Space Station. According to the press release, there are 35 lenses in orbit right now.
I really happy if Nikon can produce Digital Back CCD for Nikon F4, the best Nikon SLR camera I ever use. Or, the new DSLR based on Nikon F4 body. Really love the buttons and switches.
It's always a little cool and crushing to see someone actually doing the things I talk about. I've actually been thinking that It needs to be a generic 35mm digital back. There ought to be plenty of room for a substantial battery and memory/processing with those two big spaces either side of the area of exposure.
Here's to people who actually follow through on those nifty ideas which seem to float around looking for a patch of fertile motivation.
ivan
Like to brew? Want to talk about it? Brattlebrew: groups.yahoo.com/group/brattlebrew
I often just turn my resolution down on my consumer grade camera.
The 8 MP (or is it 10?) just gives more white noise. No point, unless you want to fill up your hard drive, and slow down online backups.