There have apparently be a few attempts at doing a kind of digital film
replacement unit, but has usually turned out to have a number of
unexpected difficulties and complications getting it to work in a
variety of cameras. One of the first problems to deal with is the
spacing between where the film can goes and where the sensor needs to be
is not a standard distance. Then there is the need to provide feedback
to the film advance detection systems that count sprocket holes etc -
again with sensors in a variety of places. Then there is the difficulty
of keeping the sensor clean.
The lens is probably worth more than the camera body as long as it hasnt
got a lot of dirt or worse still fungus in it.
Check eBay for what they are fetching.
I sell 35mm cameras and lenses regularly in my local charity shop or on
eBay. Nikon lenses are always in demand but there is a good niche market
for most (not APS) film cameras and 35mm, 120, 127 and even 110 film is
Come on, Harry. You could have just looked on Ebay.
These film cameras are AFAIK still required equipment for photography
students, so that alone should support a market in them. But a growing
number of people are going back to film for b/w usage, using classic,
high quality cameras and developing tanks for the negs but doing the rest
via film scanners and image editors and computer photo printers. A kind
of retro movement similar to the rise in interest in vinyl records.
Why would photography students be required to learn using film? Learning is
about experimentation and seeing what happens if you get it wrong, and
digital has the big advantage over film that all your photos are free, so
there is encouragement to experiment. OK, so you don't learn about
film-specific things like increased grain with increased film speed,
reciprocity failure (*), push-processing to increase contrast, effect on
contrast of a print of under- or over-exposing a negative - but then you
only *need* to know about those things if you are using film.
As long as your camera has manual or semi-auto settings (ie that you don't
just use auto-everything mode all the time) then you can learn the
principles of photography more quickly and much more cheaply with a digital
(*) With film, very short or very long shutter speeds mean that the rule
"double the aperture and half the shutter speed gives the same exposure" is
no longer true - and with colour film the effect is different for the
various colour-sensitive layers, so you get a colour cast.
I'd have thought that adjustments would be needed only once, and that would
be that. OK you would need some access if you wanted to get the memory card
out of course, but apart from the inconvenience of no display, something we
never had before digital anyway, its a minor issue I'd have thought.
Software could make the response film like, that only leaves the wind on
problem. Does this really affect anything?
It does with the motor wind built into lots of the more recent film SLRs.
The reality is you would probably have to build multiple models to fit
various cameras, and even then you would not get all the features of a
true digital camera like being able to check and review what you have
just taken immediately. (although a wireless link to a phone could make
up for some of the limitations and actually add some capabilities the
digital SLRs don't have like a remote viewfinder)
I had several Canon cameras ... you could change the back for a 'data
back' allowing you to superimpose numbers & text onto negative as pic taken.
Feasible to evolve that to a fullframe digital sensor ... but why would
you want it ?
Camera software has come on amazingly since 35mm days, to get that you
need more modern lenses and the new electronic bodies - so market to
sell 'digital' conversion is very very small.
Plus manufacturers have a vested interest in selling new product - they
would rather you buy a new camera.
Nope. Some photo degree courses still require
possession ofa 35mm film camera.
I still have my Pentax MX that I bought 2nd hand in
1986, well used with nice brassy corners and a dent
in the pentaprism. It's been around the world,
spent 2 years in Fiji, all across the Pacific and
through South America. A pair of 1,5V silver oxide
cells last for ages. Accepts all the pre-digital
pentax lens (M42, K, Ka, KaF).
And I also have a Pentax LX, the best technical
camera by far. When loaded with Kodachrome 25
(RIP), (in sunny climes), nothing can touch it.
You can take pictures under moonlight on a tripod
because it reads the light bouncing back off the
film and just shuts the second blind when enough
light has hit the film. Has the whole range of
changeable prisms and viewfinders, plus a winder
and it cost me £169 in London Camera exchange
for home-developed B&W, it's just too valuable to
I might get a Pentax K1 (full frame) which looks
like it could be the Pentax replacement for the LX
and I can use all my lenses.
I was curious to see if you can still get APS film - no; discontinued in 2011, although there are still labs who will print from them.
APS always seemed like a solution to a non-existent problem; a bit like the MiniDisk. The panorama mode was really rubbish, just a very severe crop of a single frame.
Garbage in, Garbage out.
Idiots with digital SLRs dont bother think about what they
are doing, theyjust blast away and then use a computer
to select the pics they want and then have a fiddle with
photoshop just for good measure.
Might just as well use an iPhone.