Digital/Analogue Full Frame Hybrid

[Cholentpot]

I can by an excellent film camera for less than $50 and a perfectly usable DSLR for $300. If the price is very high and I'm really not being offered anything new, I don't think I'd buy anything.

Now, if you can make the holy grail digital 35mm 'film' sensor that pops into the back of any 35mm SLR, I'd pay a heckofalot of money for that. I doesn't even need an LCD. You can sell the LCD attachment as an upgrade.

35mm sensor, SD card, battery and the camera functions as regular.

 

[Oren Grad]

Yes, the Fuji Instax films are practically begging for adaptors to all sorts of nice cameras! I can't understand why Fujifilm hasn't done this already.

I wish they would, too. But their Instax business is structured around selling millions of inexpensive party-cams to casual users and making money off the film, not a few hundred or even a few thousand expensive adapter widgets to highly-demanding specialist users.

 

[4season]

Rather than a hybrid camera, I'd like a really good 35mm film Sony FE-mount camera. Besides giving me access to native lenses, I also have a bunch of adapters for other mounts. A half-frame 35mm Micro 4/3rds body wouldn't be bad either.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I can by an excellent film camera for less than $50 and a perfectly usable DSLR for $300. If the price is very high and I'm really not being offered anything new, I don't think I'd buy anything.

This is pretty much the answer for me as well. 35mm SLRs are small. Even in the film era, it wasn’t unusual to carry 2 or 3 of them loaded with different film or with different lenses mounted, so the idea of carrying a DSLR and a film body is not so strange, and they aren’t very expensive either. Considering the market for a convertible system, I suspect most potential users would already have both film and digital bodies, as I do, if they’re interested in that sort of thing.

 

[Lee Rust]

I wish they would, too. But their Instax business is structured around selling millions of inexpensive party-cams to casual users and making money off the film, not a few hundred or even a few thousand expensive adapter widgets to highly-demanding specialist users.

Fujifilm makes high-end cameras too... why not high-end Instax adaptors? There'd be no competition with the party-cam market and more Instax film would get sold, especially the larger sizes. Where's the downside? I know, there aren't any other Fuji film cameras to interface with, so that's a no-go, but it seems like the same sort of closed-loop corporate mindset that took Kodak down. Let us not overlook the irony in Kodak's origination of Instax technology.

 

[Cholentpot]

This is pretty much the answer for me as well. 35mm SLRs are small. Even in the film era, it wasn’t unusual to carry 2 or 3 of them loaded with different film or with different lenses mounted, so the idea of carrying a DSLR and a film body is not so strange, and they aren’t very expensive either. Considering the market for a convertible system, I suspect most potential users would already have both film and digital bodies, as I do, if they’re interested in that sort of thing.

I carry a SLR loaded with one kind of film and a point and shoot with another.

A month or so a go I was at an event. I had on me a TLR, DSLR, half-frame point and shoot, and a 16mm subcompact. I could have carried more cameras I'm sure...

 

[jtk]

There is such a camera, called a Hasselblad. It uses both film and digital backs.

...but virtually nobody bought them and, obviously, Hasselblad quit both film cameras and scanners.