Musing about weird camera equipment

[yockenwaithe]

<p>SO I was thinking about some weird camera stuff that seem like they might be useful but in reality probably wouldn't be. For instance, what if someone made a pentaprism for a TLR so you don't have to use it as a waist level camera? Or a movie camera with two buttons [one for single exposures and one for continuous filming]? What about a 35mm camera with a back that allows it to use Polaroid packfilm? Or even a camera with a rotating set of film spools so you can change the type of film without having to carry around several cameras?</p>

<p>Anyone else want to add some bad/unusual ideas because I find this very thought provoking for some reason</p>

[Sandy Vongries]

<p>A couple of these existed -- there was an eye level finder -- porrofinder? for the C 330 system. <br>

Nikon made a back for the F system -- Speed Magny, that would take either Polaroid type 57 or, I think 4x5 film.</p>

 

[yockenwaithe]

<p>Wow the Speed Magny looks terribly unwieldy, I can't imagine trying to take pictures with such a device strapped to a camera</p>

[AJG]

<p>Rollei made eye level pentaprism finders for their later TLR models, and Zeiss made interchangeable film backs for later model Contaflex and Contarex cameras. Not exactly a rotating set of film spools, but it was possible to change film mid roll to a different type. Interchangeable backs for 35 mm never took off in the market place, probably due to expense and mechanical complexity, while they were very common for medium format professional cameras. </p>

[Sandy Vongries]

<p>Actually, with better 35mm cameras, I did it with Nikon & Leica, you could change films. You would rewind till the leader just disengaged, write the number of exposures on the leader, and change films. When you wanted to resume with the original cassette, you would reload, find a darkish place, put the lens cap on, set to highest shutter speed, and shoot to the recorded number, plus one. If you loaded consistently, it worked, but was kind of a pain.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

Contax promised but never delivered a camera with interchangeable film and digital backs in a 35 mm environment. It is

stock in trade for medium format cameras, such as Hasselblad. If digital cameras were limited to ISO 400 (sorry, Leica

and Hasselblad) and memory cards with a 36 frame capacity, who would miss film?

[Jochen_S]

<p>Thera was a real pentaprism for the Mamiya TLRs too. - The Pentamirror was metered though. - Polaback for Nikon F3 exist; its unfortunately just one tiny 35mm exposure per sheet.</p>

 

[pmind]

<p>Not a 35mm, but the Mamiya 6 & 7 had an adapter kit that allowed you to shoot 35mm film in addition to 120/220. I really loved my Mamiya 6MF.</p>

[Charles_Webster]

<p>My Bolex 16mm motion picture camera had a shutter release for continuous run and for single frame, so you could do animation.</p>

 

[yockenwaithe]

<p>So does my Filmo and my Bell & Howell, but it's always one switch. I was thinking wouldn't it be weird if there were two switches, one for each function?</p>

[donald_miller5]

<p>How about a device that can rotate filters so you can change them while looking through view finder (probably exists). Or a neutral density filter with a material that will respond to electric voltage and vary density.</p>

[yockenwaithe]

<p>Sort of like a filter wheel but for full sized cameras? That actually might be a good idea to make if someone hasn't already [i know I'd buy one], or are you talking like a filter/viewfinder combo for rangefinders? That might also be a good idea [don't know how well it would work with PL filters though]</p>

[dave_s]

<p>I think the bottom line is that all of these existed, in individual cameras at least. They were all good ideas and had their purpose.</p>

<p>One thing I sometimes wanted was a quarter-20 tripod screw on the left side of my 35mm cameras, for taking verticals. My Century and Speed Graphics have this, and it's a useful feature. On a 35mm camera, there would have to be a workaround so it didn't impede the latch (or hinge).</p>

<p>Of course, RRS makes an aftermarket clamp that does much the same thing, and Canon-- perhaps others, too-- made the Canon Camera Holders F through F4 for their different FD cameras.</p>

[Sandy Vongries]

<p>The 1000 mm (and 2000mm) Reflex Nikkor has a built in filter wheel. </p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Not weird, just rare: There was a Contax SLR not so long ago that had a ceramic back plate and vacuum system that make the film sit absolutely flat in the film plane, thereby improving on film image sharpness.</p>

<p>The close up attachment for my Mamiya 6 MF camera had an inbuilt magnifier for the VF image.</p>

<p>The bellows for my Yashica-Contax SLRs had both front and back tilt of the bellows standards, allowing some perspective alteration and increase of DOF.</p>

<p>My Sunpak 622 flash has interchangeable heads for everything from bare bulb, 360 degree diffuser, zoom heads, tilt heads, O-ring flash for macro close ups and infra red flash head, all at a fairly reasonable price.</p>

<p>Long ago I had a second hand Mamiya Super 23 MF camera (a huge beast) that had a tilting back to allow DOF improvement and possible attachment of a Polaroid back as well as 6x6, 6x7 and 6x9 roll film backs.</p>

<p> </p>

[Bill C]

Hi, as mentioned, a lot of things have been done, or could be when the technology reaches the point where it is feasible. I see in your bio

that you have (had?) a Leica M2; are you familiar with the Visoflex [sp?] that converts it into an SLR?

 

Polaroid back for a 35mm camera? I had one custom built (on behalf of my employer) way back when, but you wouldn't want to use it on

the go - it was too bulky. We used it for in-house testing of a long-roll studio camera. The reason for the bulk was in order to enlarge the

image; the back was probably 8 or 9 inches deep.

 

Are you familiar with the old 3D cameras, such as Nimslo, that could be printed onto paper with a plastic lenticular lens array over it? Very

cool system, but more of a gimmick. My company (employer) once owned the rights for professional use in the US, and you could actually

get these done in certain chain studio locations in the eastern U.S. We had a satellite processing lab in that area that did the printing.

 

How about this one. Are you familiar with green-screen technology, where you photograph a subject in front of a green background, then a

computer strips out the BG and lets you swap in another? Lots of issues, mainly problems getting a clean cutout around hair and green

"bleed" into the subject. For a solution, how about a special camera that can take two photos in rapid sequence - first a shot of the subject,

then almost instantly, a shot of a flash-illuminated white background making a silhouette of the subject. So the camera makes its own

mask with no green color issues. It's been done; a big school picture outfit in your home state developed such a system. It's done with what

they call an interline CCD sensor that can shift a main image into a protected storage area in a few microseconds - hundreds of times

quicker than the duration of an electronic flash. (Not a secret, they got a patent.) Another way to put in your own background at the time of shooting is known as "front projection;" we ran trial systems in several studios. I'm sure you can find info about systems online. (If you think you understand it, you probably don't. But if you say I think I get it, but that can't possibly work, then you probably get it. The key is the high-gain retroreflectng background.)

 

Something I think could be really useful today is something we looked into way back when, a heads-up display whereby the photographer

could see the framing of the camera while looking at the subject. Probably just a matter of time until they do this with Google Glass, or

similar (if they haven't already).

[yockenwaithe]

<p>I have seen the Visoflex, it is one of the pieces of camera equipment I really want [it's not terribly expensive either]. I thought it was the funniest thing, turning a traditionally clean smooth Leica into a brute of an SLR. I've also heard of similar cameras to the Nimslo [the 4 lens stereo-looking ones] that take 3d pictures [i thought it was sort of gimmicky too, but children would probably love the pictures].<br>

I bet nikon/canon may already be looking into something along the lines of framing without looking at the camera, or maybe even remotely controlling the settings too.</p>

[John Seaman]

<p>Bill C wrote "a heads-up display whereby the photographer could see the framing of the camera while looking at the subject" - I've got a Voigtlander Kontur frame finder. You look at the scene to be photographed through one eye, and into the shoe mounted finder through the other, when a bright line is seen suspended, defining the frame to be captured.</p>

<p>I guess that all these weird ideas, and many more, have already been thought of, and implemented, probably many times during the history of photography.</p><div></div>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Leica marketed a bast late which had mounts for two spare lenses. Perfect for a stroll with the mandatory 35/50/90 combination. There was also a turret for three lenses, and a rapid wind lever, also in the base plate.</p>

<p>Truth is often stranger than fiction.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>I've used the Leica base plate for a single additional lens to be carried, but sold it as it is too easy to forget it is there and cream an attached lens on a table top, door frame or other unexpected object, while shooting with the camera mounted lens. They also made a simple double ended back cap so one could put two lenses together and then use a Calumet soft wrap or other to cover them and readily stow the two lenses in a case. </p>

<p>Earlier Leica RF M-mount lenses often had front optical units that could be unscrewed as a unit from the helical focussing tube, so they could be mounted on the Visoflex with its focussing unit or attached to Belllows-2 for even closer Macro photography.</p>

[Sandy Vongries]

<p>If I recall, the Leica film advance lever base was called a Leicavit. I think it came on an M 2 that was marketed toward the press.</p>

[Bill C]

[John] "I guess that all these weird ideas, and many more, have already been thought of, and implemented, probably many times during the

history of photography."

 

I'm sure an awful lot of ideas have simply been waiting for technologies to get to the point where they are feasible. For example, I

understand that the "cell phone" was "invented" not too long after World War II; it just wasn't feasible using vacuum tube technology. Other

things just aren't thought of until someone tries to find some practical use for some oddball discovery. Or just to solve some sort of

problem that came with the new tech.

 

An example of solving a problem was with the old long-roll portrait cameras. If you shoot a lot of different people on a 100 foot roll, how do

you keep track of who's who? You could waste a frame shooting a slate periodically, but then someone invented a "numbering device" that

would actually expose a number in the gap between frames.The way the subject was linked was that you had a set of prenumbered "sitting

cards." The customer filled out their contact info on the card, the corner of the card (with the number) was inserted into the numbering

device, and when the photo was taken, an internal lens system photographs the number. Now this same problem exists with digital

cameras. Several cameras have had the ability to use barcode readers, and as each subject comes up, a preprinted barcode can be

scanned. Or the camera can be tethered to a computer, and software does the bookkeeping.

[Matthew Currie]

<p>Not reading every word this time around, but I don't think anyone mentioned that the APS film system featured the ability to swap partially shot rolls.</p>

<p>Bill C's mention of keeping track of photographs reminds one also of the old Kodak "Autographic" films which allowed a user to write a note on the back, which would end up on the negative. Not terribly successful, it seems, as it was discontinued in the 1930's. </p>

[yockenwaithe]

<p>I think APS film in general is just all sorts of weird [this is just me]. It certainly did have it's uses though.<br>

The film thing makes me think of IR color film. While not especially 'weird' and actually quite useful, it could create some exotic landscapes out of a normal forest</p>

[DavidTriplett]

<p>Sandy, I used the re-wind trick a lot back in the day. The trick to this trick, as I recall, was to carefully listen to hear when the bitter end of the fill disengaged from the spool. Missing this would leave one with a fully re-wound roll of partially exposed film.</p>

<p>The close sister to this process was doing a double exposure the hard way: Take the first exposure, press and hold the rewind release, crank the film advance/shutter cocker, release the release, take the 2nd exposure, and then advance the film. Interesting but sometimes bizarre results.</p>