Digital back on classic 35mm cameras?

Noticed <a href="http://www.nippon-

camera.com/shoseki/2105.html">this</a href> in a magazine rack the

other day.<br>

Browsed through the magazine but not knowing Japanese I don't know

if it's a photo of an actual working setup or just a fun montage.

<br>

It looks like a Leaf back on an old Signet camera.

No photo comes through for me just a page of charactors

Mark, you have to set your encoding to Japanese.

 

Yes, that is a Leaf digital back on a Signet 35 camera. Isn't the sensor on a leaf back larger than 35mm? Or are they making one for 35mm.

 

Seems sort of dumb to make it for a camera that has a one-of-a-kind back and was last made in the 1950s.

For all those having trouble viewing the page, the image is <b><a href="http://www.nippon-camera.com/shoseki/2105.jpg">here</a></b>. Can anyone translate the Japanese text?

Google translator is not much help:

 

Word of the cover very old it was recently in the auction and bid successfully the camera. It is the Special Interest Group net which from the time before has become matter of concern. It can make above expecting and with the good camera, already desired function has almost been attached and, you are surprised to the good quality of material feeling. Of course also being taken being exceedingly good, furthermore parenthesis I I. Now the camera of the aluminum molding how so it is not. When the Leaf of the digital back which is used always in this is attached, perhaps the other camera it stops entering anymore. Ishikawa healthy ?F

I don't know, but that digital back is $17,000. If I had $17k laying around, I wouldn't be worrying about Wardflex TLRs.

It's not that much about if it's 1K or 20K - it's about if this is truly a working setup and if so if it's generic enough to be used on other classic cameras - now or down the road.

<br>

I'd like to see - and am expecting to see - something like this in the future but ofcourse the differences in camera design (different kind of backs, hinges, dimension, etc) would make it very difficult to manufacture generic backs - but who knows. Maybe we're seing a glimpse of the digital-classic-film-camera here :)

I can see a serious problem trying to actually *use* the attached camera with that back on it -- there's no way to actually get your eye to the viewfinder in order to either focus or compose. Presumably there's a real-time display included with the digital back, but what's the point? What's gained over loading the camera with film, and getting a CD burned with the images when you get the film processed at the local mini-lab?

 

And what's gained in converting a classic camera that might have cost as much as a few hundred dollars with a multi-kilobuck digital back that makes the camera awkward to carry and can't begin to make full use of the quality of the lens (or is someone going to tell me the Leaf back can pull 20+ megapixels out of a 35 mm frame)?

Donald, you're right. That would really turn almost any camera in a true point and shoot.

I don't think the text is what you want (if you're looking for info about the digital back).

 

It says: "Recently I won a very old camera in an auction. It's a Signet I've had my eye on for a long time. It's a much more capable camera than I had anticipated, has all the features I want and I was surprised by its high build quality. Of course it's also good at taking pictures and looks cool. They don't make aluminum cameras like this anymore. If I put the Leaf digital back I always use on this camera I don't think I'll need any other camera. Ishikawa Yasuhiko."

"Since founding 1951, all information of the photograph equipment and material whose progress is considerable as a 綜 combination information magazine of the image equipment and material, it conveyed the camera almanac, to the reader accurately and quickly. It added also the digital camera, made the easy to see comprehensive image magazine. You measure the silver salt camera, the lens, the photo accessory and the digital camera and the peripheral device and the being completed dividing, you publish everything of the image equipment and material which presently is marketed including the introduction of the new product which is thorough, for purchasing the actual equipment and material in order to be useful as a catalog merit of the product, using chart group and the photograph which standardized efficiency, use and price etc. mainly, to be understood you explain easily."

 

 

See, obvious to the most casual observer

 

tim in san jose

"the old Signet 35" is a camera designed for the military; in the civilian dress. It has 50 ball bearings balls in the focus helix. It is an extremely robust camrera. The weak area is the shutter. The shutter was upgraded in the field by changing the two slow speed pawls inside. Many have gunk and are abit clunky or not working today; or were never upgraded. The lens on the Signet 35 is an extremely fine lens; one of the finest lenses ever made by Kodak. It is a 4 element 3 group "Tessar"; in this Ektar. My two samples are equal to my two Summicrons or Nikkors; when the lens is at say F8. Alot of cameras in the field today have not been checked for alignment since built 1/2 century ago; so your results maybe less than par. The military wanted a robust 35mm camera; that didnt have the folding feature; which gets warped and bent when abused; and causes focusing errors. These cameras were 95 dollars in the early to mid 1950's; not small pocket change. 95 dollars in 1951 is like 665 dollars in todays money.