Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

iPhone DSLR Prototype 1.0

timothy posted about 4 years ago | from the too-bad-pentax-rules dept.

Hardware Hacking 172

An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt: "Here are Photos/Pictures of my iPhone DSLR Prototype 1.0. This is my first attempt at putting together an iPhone DSLR. You might ask 'Why pair an iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, or iPhone 4 with a DSLR lens?' Why not!" Prototype or not, it's a cool project.

cancel ×

172 comments

you were slashdotted (0, Offtopic)

iPhr0stByt3 (1278060) | about 4 years ago | (#32921202)

site unavailable in 5...4...3...2...1...

Re:you were slashdotted (0, Offtopic)

cK-Gunslinger (443452) | about 4 years ago | (#32921228)

I think it happened at 4.87, actually..

Re:you were slashdotted (0, Offtopic)

pavera (320634) | about 4 years ago | (#32921230)

more like 5...4...

Re:you were slashdotted (5, Funny)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | about 4 years ago | (#32921904)

So I take it the iPhone DSLR was actually hosting TFA? Because it's still down 1.5 hours later. It's in the Google Cache [googleusercontent.com] , though.

Pro-tip: before posting your iPhone-hosted website on Slashdot, take your finger off the antenna.

This post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921204)

was shot on the iphone dslr
first

uh, samples? (3, Insightful)

SoupGuru (723634) | about 4 years ago | (#32921206)

So, where are the goods? I mean, pics of an iPhone with a big lens strapped on are cool, I guess.... but I was kind of hoping for what the results of that unholy union are.

Re:uh, samples? (1)

InvisibleBacon (1698438) | about 4 years ago | (#32921258)

Yeah I'm already skeptical that this would produce good results.. Not having any samples doesn't help much.

Re:uh, samples? (5, Informative)

SETIGuy (33768) | about 4 years ago | (#32921666)

You don't need to be skeptical. This will produce crappy results. You're still pushing the light through a tiny dirty lens and a tiny aperture. The iphone's autofocus will be fighting your attempts to get the focus you want (unless there's a way to turn off autofocus). The iphone 4 may be a nifty point and shoot camera, but it's not SLR quality regardless of the number of pixels.

I'd title this one "I don't know anything about optics or photography, but I can machine a bracket out of aluminum."

Re:uh, samples? (2, Interesting)

Xiterion (809456) | about 4 years ago | (#32922832)

I wasn't aware there was any autofocusing going on inside cell phone cameras? I thought they simply used their incredibly small aperture and corresponding large f ratio to get a really deep field. Consequently the optical system is very slow, leading to their abysmal low light performance.

Re:uh, samples? (2, Informative)

trapnest (1608791) | about 4 years ago | (#32922962)

I don't know about the iPhone 4, but the T-Mobile G1 has a mechanical (probably magnetic, the way optical drives focus) autofocus. You can hear it when you go to take a photo.

Re:uh, samples? (2, Informative)

cheater512 (783349) | about 4 years ago | (#32923178)

The stunning camera in the N900 also has a real focus. Sometimes it actually makes a thunk noise.
Also you can alter the focus settings with two taps.

Re:uh, samples? (3, Informative)

Lev13than (581686) | about 4 years ago | (#32923144)

You don't need to be skeptical. This will produce crappy results. You're still pushing the light through a tiny dirty lens and a tiny aperture

No kidding - I was looking forward to learning how he removed the iPhone's crappy lens and then got an slr lens exactly the right distance from the film plane to be useful. This was followed by a realization that he'd be wasting about 95% of the glass, since the sensor's size is a tiny fraction of a crop or 35mm sensor.

If he does stick with the iPhone lens, he's sticking the wrong optics in front. Canon and many other manufacturers make telephoto and wide angle lenses designed to fit over existing optics. This would get rid of the blue fringing, blurriness etc... in his sample pics. He could have saved a lot of time and effort by getting a Canon TC-DC58N [amazon.com] lens on eBay and modded a LADC58B [amazon.com] lens mount (or similar) to get the spacing right.

Re:uh, samples? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921308)

Not only that, this could be done with any phone, android-based ones included. Phones have had cameras for more than a decade, why is this suddenly news because it's an iphone?

Oh that's right, Apple fanboys are being hired by Steve Jobs to rewrite history so we all believe iPhones were the first phones with a camera

Paid slashvertisement, indirectly, much?

Re:uh, samples? (3, Insightful)

falzer (224563) | about 4 years ago | (#32921362)

It could be done with any phone, but it wasn't, because it's so incredibly useless and indulgent.

Re:uh, samples? (3, Insightful)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | about 4 years ago | (#32921538)

I don't care about the goods.

Anyone who goes out of their way to say iPhone 5 times in 3 sentences is a douche.

Re:uh, samples? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921728)

Oooh. You said "iPhone 5". At least that's what I saw at first.

ummm (0)

commodoresloat (172735) | about 4 years ago | (#32921818)

It's not going to take any better pictures than any other camera using that lens. The advantage here is being able to view and edit the photos on the fly using the iphone screen and editing tools. Which is pretty cool, I guess -- personally I'd rather have an actual DSLR (which this is technically not) connected to an iPad so I can see the photos on a big screen and edit at will. But still a cool hack nonetheless.

Shenanigans (1)

hkz (1266066) | about 4 years ago | (#32922096)

This thing cannot work, unless they remove the iPhone's original lens, of which the article makes no mention. You simply cannot stack lenses like that. Compare it to what you see when you look (with your eye, which is a lens) through the rear of a lens. You see a round patch of light, not a whole view of the world. The iPhone would see the same thing. Also, if you _did_ remove the original lens, you'd end up with an enormous crop factor, turning every SLR lens into a very long tele. Try holding that steady with a mount like this. In short, I call shenanigans, get the brooms!

Re:Shenanigans (1)

Zerth (26112) | about 4 years ago | (#32922606)

Really? Oh wait, there's these photos... He does seem to be getting some chromatic aberration, though.

I've done a similar thing with the large front lens from a set of binoculars on my camera as a $15 macro lens.

Works decent enough, but since I picked cheap binocs, the lens was attached to the front tube instead of being separate, so the edge shows a bit if I'm zoomed all the way out. I could saw it down but the eyepiece cap fits perfectly over the open end.

Re:uh, samples? (0, Troll)

candyer (1843350) | about 4 years ago | (#32922724)

Iphone's antenna and srceen are my question. Even so, I still love my iphone. We are confident that we can solve the problems that have arisen. We have been expecting the newer version have a good job! iPhone OS 4.0: Top 9 New Features to Expect (http://www.aneesoft.com/tutorials/iphone/iphone-os-4-new-features.html)

Re:uh, samples? (5, Informative)

StarDrifter (144026) | about 4 years ago | (#32922974)

There is another post with the result: http://iphonedslr.com/blog/archives/62fb [iphonedslr.com]
It is somewhat disappointing, to say the least. I do give some credit for posting it though. Even though things didn't work out as planned it is nice to see what happened.

Re:uh, samples? (1)

tibit (1762298) | about 4 years ago | (#32923286)

That blog format of his is abysmal: it's very hard to explore, you feel like peeling data out of the blog's cold dead hands. Why do people set up their blogs such that even if there is maybe a dozen articles, you have to keep clicking and scrolling forever to see them all? It almost feels like those online news formats where a single page article is split across 15 pages, each with ads covering 80% of screen real estate... </offtopic_rant>

LOL (1)

p51d007 (656414) | about 4 years ago | (#32923218)

Anyone that owns an SLR or DSLR will tell you that you can put the biggest piece of fast glass on a crappy tiny sensor and you will get a big photo of what happens when you put a big piece of fast glass on a crappy tiny sensor.

iPhone rules! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921256)

Android users take a cock in the ass.

Slashdotted in under 5 minutes.... (1)

phoenixwade (997892) | about 4 years ago | (#32921262)

who'd have thought

DegroundingJackiPhoneOldPhoneSpoon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921268)

What did you do, vote on which icon to use?

You have a camera in your ear (5, Funny)

countertrolling (1585477) | about 4 years ago | (#32921274)

What? I can't hear you!

I said, you have a camera in your ear!

I can't hear you. I gotta a camera in my ear...

Re:You have a camera in your ear (1)

phoenixwade (997892) | about 4 years ago | (#32921294)

well, I do Admit I can't play Farmville on my D3h.....

Re:You have a camera in your ear (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921418)

Debunking ahead:

Odds are, overwhelmingly, that you don't possess a D3h, considering that such a model does not exist (yet), the last such iteration being the D2h. Which you probably don't possess either, because you wouldn't confuse the name of a 5000$ tool bought years ago (and probably used just about every week since then) with a non-entity.

Aside of this, nice joke. But... did I hit bullseye?

Trying too hard. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921290)

The three pictures of the device (pics A thru C) look like blurry garbage. I hope this is by accident and not design.

Re:Trying too hard. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921792)

The three blurry garbage pictures were taken with the iPhone DSLR Prototype 2.0 - you should have seen the crap from the 1.0 version!

CNet has copied some of the pictures (2, Informative)

DWMorse (1816016) | about 4 years ago | (#32921380)

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10409153-1.html [cnet.com]

I'm kinda seconding the general thought everyone else is voicing. Disappointment over the lack of improvement. But I think with some more work, it could be made to do better.

Let's face the facts though - it's taped onto the phone.

Re:CNet has copied some of the pictures (1)

falzer (224563) | about 4 years ago | (#32921404)

Well, the person in this article made an aluminum mount.

Re:CNet has copied some of the pictures (1)

DWMorse (1816016) | about 4 years ago | (#32921430)

Oohh, I figured it was the same thing. Move along, move along...

Re:CNet has copied some of the pictures (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921584)

Well, they bought one. Well, the bought one that has a detachable lens on it. And then bought an adapter for Canon lenses.

Some kind of mega fucking super genius here, man.

NOT DSLR!! (5, Informative)

LoudMusic (199347) | about 4 years ago | (#32921402)

DSLR does not mean "detachable lens". It means "Digital Single Lens Reflex", or "digital camera that uses a mechanical mirror system and pentaprism to direct light from the lens to an optical viewfinder on the back of the camera".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dslr [wikipedia.org]

In fact, it has nothing to do with detachable lenses. That is a completely different technology, which just happens to be commonly (but not universally) paired with (D)SLR hardware. Nor is the mechanical mirror or pentaprism contained in the lens. The SLR mechanism(s) are in the camera body, which clearly do not exist in the iPhone nor the mount that the phone and lens(es) are attached to.

What this device provides is simply detachable lenses for the iPhone camera system. Detachable lens camera systems have been available for non-SLR cameras for quite some time.

This horribly wrong use of technical terms really should not be showing up on the site that proclaims itself as "news for nerds, stuff that matters".

Re:NOT DSLR!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921658)

It's a timothy posting, what can you expect.

Re:NOT DSLR!! (1)

bkgood (986474) | about 4 years ago | (#32921676)

This horribly wrong use of technical terms really should not be showing up on the site that proclaims itself as "news for nerds, stuff that matters".

Have you been living under a rock? Fodder like this has been the vast majority of slashdot for years, it feels. Being about an Apple product just means it got to the front page even quicker.

Re:NOT DSLR!! (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 4 years ago | (#32921692)

Mod parent up. This pretty much summed up my confusion about the article, i.e. "where's the DSLR?".

Re:NOT DSLR!! (0)

VTI9600 (1143169) | about 4 years ago | (#32922702)

Good point but the terminology is kind of debatable. After all, the camera is digital and does technically use a single lens rather than separate lenses for the viewfinder and image sensor. So the best term would be "DSL Camera" (dropping the 'R').

All hair-splitting aside, your post is much appreciated, and your mod points well-deserved. The reason I (and I'm sure others) read discussions is to filter out the truth from the BS, so thanks.

Re:NOT DSLR!! (5, Insightful)

Mr. Freeman (933986) | about 4 years ago | (#32923346)

"Good point but the terminology is kind of debatable"
No, it's not.

Yes, this camera uses a single lens and yes, it's digital. So does that $20 piece of junk point-and-shoot digital camera that you can buy at walmart. By your logic every single modern day camera is actually a DSLR because they use one lens and are digital.

"A digital single-lens reflex camera (digital SLR or DSLR) is a digital camera that uses a mechanical mirror system and pentaprism to direct light from the lens to an optical viewfinder on the back of the camera."
The iphone does not use a mechanical mirror system and pentaprism and therefore is not a DSLR, period. There's no debate here. It's simply not a DSLR camera.

From the TFA:
"Now by no means would I consider myself a professional photographer. Heck&#8230; I am by would I even consider myself an amateur photographer. The truth is I really know nothing about photography. " Link: http://iphonedslr.com/blog/archives/42fb

By his own admission, he doesn't really know what he's doing or why this is simply a bad idea.

Re:NOT DSLR!! (1)

Splab (574204) | about 4 years ago | (#32923136)

Also, using the iPhone will cost more than most entry level DSLR, the iPhone wont have auto focus enabled on the lenses - so basically he ends up with something way inferior more expensive, and by the looks of it, way less user friendly.

Also, with my DSLR it's the lenses and flash that weigh me down, both economically and mass, using the iPhone just give me an inferior product, with no benefits.

Re:NOT DSLR!! (1)

S-100 (1295224) | about 4 years ago | (#32923184)

Absolutely right. I just purchased a Sony NEX-5 which to me is the tipping point of SLR digital camera technology. Sure, a pure DSLR will always have some advantages, but I think these are now superseded by all of the benefits gotten by the new mirror-less APS-C and Micro Four Thirds cameras.

Back to the original post, that looks like very nice industrial design, but doesn't the lens mask or occlude the flash LED? It's also nothing but a joke putting a big lens with a wide objective size in front of the tiny iPhone lens. Probably 90% of the glass is doing nothing. Plus it's attached to automatic-everything firmware. And although that could be upgraded, it doesn't involve the lens at all, except that the big lens is on perpetual manual focus mode, and there's no aperture control at all.

Re:NOT DSLR!! (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 4 years ago | (#32923254)

Many large manufacturers of DSLR's, such as Canon and Sony, have started removing the mirrors from their prosumer-level camera's in exchange for sensors that can work in different modes.

It seems to improve autofocus and add (HD)-video features at the cost of the optical viewfinder (and as such, manual focus quality) without affecting photo quality.

From what I understand, taking away the "R" from DSLR is becoming more and more common. At some point a digital viewfinder could have enough resolution as to make no significant difference and the "R" bit will have become redundant.

(I still shoot with the "R" though; need manual focus).

YOU FAIL! IT'?! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921406)

FRREBSD'S the point more

This is an EVIL camera (5, Informative)

Bryansix (761547) | about 4 years ago | (#32921412)

The lens may be borrowed from a DSLR but what it makes is an EVIL camera. EVIL = Electronic Viewfinder, Interchangable Lens.

Re:This is an EVIL camera (1)

Dzonatas (984964) | about 4 years ago | (#32921518)

Only if it doesn't have Android.

Re:This is an EVIL camera (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921554)

It certainly does seem unholy.

Why? (5, Insightful)

OverlordQ (264228) | about 4 years ago | (#32921416)

'Why pair an iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, or iPhone 4 with a DSLR lens?' Why not!"

Because it wouldn't take very good pictures.

not a dslr (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921470)

apparently this guy doesn't know what dslr means.

Tag Cloud (5, Informative)

lemur3 (997863) | about 4 years ago | (#32921478)

Seeing the tag cloud reminded me of those sites from the 90s that would put the whole dictionary into the bottom of their page black text on a black background to garner the most hits.

See for yerself:

This entry was posted in iPhone DSLR Prototypes and tagged Canon EF mount, Digital DSLR, DSLR, iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3G aluminum housing, iPhone 3G camera, iPhone 3G camera lens, iPhone 3G with DSLR lens, iPhone 3G with SLR lens, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 3GS aluminum housing, iPhone 3GS camera, iPhone 3GS camera lens, iPhone 3GS with DSLR lens, iPhone 4, iPhone 4 aluminum housing, iPhone 4 Camera, iPhone 4 camera lens, iPhone 4 with DSLR lens, iPhone aluminum housing, iPhone camera, iPhone camera lens, iPhone Digital DSLR, iPhone DSLR, iPhone DSLR housing, iPhone DSLR Prototype, iPhone Prototype, iPhone with DSLR lens, iPhone with SLR lens.

Desperate for hits much?

The phone killed the GPS (1)

bugs2squash (1132591) | about 4 years ago | (#32921490)

now it will kill the digital camera too

Re:The phone killed the GPS (1)

CMonk (20789) | about 4 years ago | (#32921752)

It killed the consumer GPS market and it will kill the consumer digicam market too. It hasn't and won't touch pro-sumer let alone pro GPS/camera markets. "Phones" are becoming the jack of all trades, master of none.

Re:The phone killed the GPS (1)

tagno25 (1518033) | about 4 years ago | (#32921826)

"Phones" are becoming the jack of all trades, master of none.

Except being phones. And possibly UUMPC.

Re:The phone killed the GPS (1)

Nadaka (224565) | about 4 years ago | (#32921894)

I hate to brake this to you, but the iPhone is pretty bad at being a UMPC, and it is even worse at being an phone.

Re:The phone killed the GPS (1)

tagno25 (1518033) | about 4 years ago | (#32922126)

I was talking smart phones in general.

Re:The phone killed the GPS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32922722)

"Phones" are becoming the jack of all trades, master of none.

Except being phones. And possibly UUMPC.

I disagree. I jumped up and down, a lot, on my Motorola phone because it was so crappy at being a phone - the radio stack kept crashing with no indication until you went to make a call or send an SMS and so was missing all incoming calls and SMSs. I went back to my trusty old and reliable Palm Trëo.

Re:The phone killed the GPS (1)

trapnest (1608791) | about 4 years ago | (#32923010)

That's Tr-e-with-macron-o. Posting the word with no accent is more correct than posting with the wrong one.

Pentaprism? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921494)

Where's the pentaprism (you know, the part that actually makes it an SLR)?

Re:Pentaprism? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921730)

Actually many recent DSLRs use a penta-mirror system because it's cheaper. But your point is valid.

Good for gps tagging (1)

Trieuvan (789695) | about 4 years ago | (#32921522)

Cheap solution if it works . The canon one is over $700.

Re:Good for gps tagging (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921950)

Yes. The canon one costs over $700 because it has a big-lens. Forget the high sensitivity CMOS sensors and variety of settings and options and modes.

The CMOS sensor is actually one of the most important components of cameras - the better the sensor, the better (less noisy, better color resolutions etc.) you get. And it costs a lot. I have a pretty good pro-sumer camera, and when I use that vs. my friend's DSLR in a controlled setting. The DSLR blew mine away.

Re:Good for gps tagging (4, Insightful)

jd2112 (1535857) | about 4 years ago | (#32922538)

Cheap solution if it works . The canon one is over $700.

The Canon one doesn't require a 2 year AT&T contract + expensive data plan.

Re:Good for gps tagging (1)

sjwt (161428) | about 4 years ago | (#32923150)

The Canon one also has a 35mm sensor, the bigger the sensor in physical size, the better image quality.
The Canon one has very good processing power behind the sensor.
The Canon one has over 12mp
The Canon one has been designed to focus the image from the lens.
The Canon one has much better ISO range and smarter Automatic settings.
The Canon one can manipulate the aperture and focus of the lens

I would not be surprised to find out that you can get a better result with a magnifying glass taped to the phone.

Cheap version with actual results (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921536)

here:

http://cow.mooh.org/2009/12/phone-o-scope-attaching-slr-lenses-to.html

No mirror, no pentaprism=NOT AN SLR! (2, Insightful)

Ellis D. Tripp (755736) | about 4 years ago | (#32921544)

This is just a bigger lens kludged onto an iPhone. Epic fail....

Why does anyone care? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921558)

This isn't even an SLR. You can't look directly through the lenses... it's still a point and shoot.

Also, you're still stuck with the shitty image sensor.... it's not like anyone is going to through an APS-C or even 4/3 image sensor in a cell phone any time soon.

Pictures (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921568)

Not sure if this is the same guy, but I found this article: http://hypebeast.com/2010/07/iphone-4-dslr-lens/

More is better, shoot for the moon (1)

NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) | about 4 years ago | (#32921570)

If you are going to do something like that, then do it all the way -- http://www.nikonusa.com/Assets/Camera-Lenses/2173_AF-S-NIKKOR-600mm-f-4G-ED-VR/Views/2173_AF-S-NIKKOR-600mm-f-4G-ED-VR_FRONT.png [nikonusa.com] .

Re:More is better, shoot for the moon (1)

Zakabog (603757) | about 4 years ago | (#32923276)

600mm is not all the way, it's just half-way there! [bhphotovideo.com]

Worthless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921806)

What a worthless post. As others have said, not only is this NOT a "DSLR" in any way shape or form, it's going to produce shit results. Just easier to take a snapshot with a iPhone and then add gaussian blur or such to get shallow DOF effect. Still, using iphone for anything other than just "I was here" snapshots is a major waste of effort.

Crop_factor++; (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32921864)

People using DSLRs with crop sensors are already shitting their pants due to focal length multiplication. Seeing how small the iPhone sensor is, what will it turn a 35mm lens into? A tele?!

Timothy, you're an idiot. (5, Informative)

BitZtream (692029) | about 4 years ago | (#32921886)

Moron, SLR requires that it has a few mirrors and some moving parts.

Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_single-lens_reflex_camera [wikipedia.org]

And read it, not just look at the pictures. Nothing external to the camera that you can see has anything to do with SLR, its all internal mechanics and not the fact that you can screw on a different lens.

This isn't slashdot: News for idiots by idiots

Its Slashdot: news for nerds.

Timothy, you have never been a nerd for a split second of your life.

Re:Timothy, you're an idiot. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32922402)

Timothy, you have never been a nerd for a split second of your life.

Timothy dreams of being a nerd. Maybe we can get him to sniff some spores and become a geek like that one episode of TOS where Spock did the same thing and started mackin' on that bitch like shit was getting real.

Yeah, I went there.

Where's the pics? (2, Insightful)

teslatug (543527) | about 4 years ago | (#32921966)

I think sharks with frickin' lasers attached to their heads have a better chance of functioning than this thing.

You are all a bunch of jerks (1, Troll)

grandmasterlee (1055426) | about 4 years ago | (#32922116)

For the most part. His article clearly states even in the /. snippet "PAIRING an iphone with a DSLR lens." It doesn't say it turns the iphone into a SLR camera, and iphonedslr.com is a lot easier than iphonewithadslrlensbutnoprismpleasedontcrucifyme.com. That said, I would think the addition of good optical zoom would be a boon for the iphone camera, as it would be for any non-SLR camera. It doesn't need to do your laundry while filing your taxes and walk the dog, it just needs to add something. The poster seems good natured and doesn't deserve such vitriol. And I don't know who the hell he is or even own an iphone as a disclaimer.

Re:You are all a bunch of jerks (1)

The Living Fractal (162153) | about 4 years ago | (#32922232)

"iPhone DSLR Prototype 1.0"
"iPhone DSLR"

Sounds to me like he's calling it a DSLR in the summary. Since most Slashdotters these days don't RTFA, I'd say that's your real problem here (they don't RTFA). And yeah, the summary is weak.

Re:You are all a bunch of jerks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32922330)

in the sentence IMMEDIATELY prior to that he says "This is my first attempt at putting together an iPhone DSLR."

so I submit that YOU are the jerk, you jerk, and HE is an idiot.

Newegg OWLE (1)

Loconut1389 (455297) | about 4 years ago | (#32922132)

Re:Newegg OWLE (1)

Vegeta99 (219501) | about 4 years ago | (#32922380)

LOL I'd like to mod you down, but this is DNRTFA syndrome real bad here, go click the damn link, dude, and take one look at the pictures. You dont even have to RTFA!

Big lens != SLR (3, Insightful)

TyFighter (189732) | about 4 years ago | (#32922220)

I highly doubt an iPhone has the capacity to hold a Single-lens Reflex mechanical action, nor has anyone every designed one. Do people even know what SLR means?

new producut (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32922310)

when will the idea put into market. chi flat iron [superflatiron.com] , chi hair strighteners
chi hair straighteners [superflatiron.com] , chi flat iron
chi nano ceramic flat iron [superflatiron.com] , chi nano ceramic flat iron
[url=http://www.superflatiron.com]chi hair straighteners[/url] chi hair straighteners [url=http://www.superflatiron.com]chi flat iron[/url] chi flat iron

Pictures, or it didn't happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32922346)

Put that together with a DSLR lens, and you’ve got a device that can shoot amazing images/video with SLR lenses

Seriously - after claiming you get amazing images or videos, why don't you show us some of them? I suspect they were bad (assuming the pictures are authentic). And no, 5 megapixels doesn't mean you get fantastic pictures. A lot more goes into amazing photographs than just megapixels.

What part did he actually make? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32922398)

So this guy takes an iPhone and an OWLE [wantowle.com] and, what?

He mentions adapters for lenses, but that's not even needed for the Canon lens he's using.

The only thing he's actually created is an utterly incorrect definition of DSLR.

I'm very skeptical...... (1)

CapeDoryBob (204240) | about 4 years ago | (#32922486)

Where are the pictures taken with this monstrosity?

Maybe there are none.

DSLR's are superior because, among other things, their sensors are larger, Over 1 sq cm. The lenses are built to provide images that cover that area. How does this adapter funnel that light into the little iPhone lens? Some fancy optics?

Unobtainium has interesting optical properties!

Re:I'm very skeptical...... (1)

epp_b (944299) | about 4 years ago | (#32922570)

DSLR's are superior because, among other things, their sensors are larger, Over 1 sq cm. The lenses are built to provide images that cover that area. How does this adapter funnel that light into the little iPhone lens? Some fancy optics?

No "funnel" or "fancy optics" are necessary, assuming that the lens mount is fitted in such a way that it focuses correctly to the image plane through the iPhone's lens. You can use a regular SLR lens with a smaller sensor, but it's going to be an extremely long focal length (ie.: 50mm will become something like 250mm or so).

Re:I'm very skeptical...... (1)

epp_b (944299) | about 4 years ago | (#32922586)

(ie.: 50mm will become something like 250mm or so).

"become equivalent to" is what I meant to say.

This is basically pointless (and wrong) (1)

epp_b (944299) | about 4 years ago | (#32922558)

"SLR" is the abbreviation of "Single Lens Reflex"; it's defined by a camera having a reflex mirror (go figure, huh?); the ability to change lenses has nothing to do with this definition.

With that out of the way, I feel compelled to point out that this adds a very small amount of functionality for the bulk. As any photographer knows, no phone will be able to work with depth of field [wikipedia.org] because the sensor is too small. All you're getting is the ability to change focal lengths instead of walking 10 feet.

Re:This is basically pointless (and wrong) (1)

harley78 (746436) | about 4 years ago | (#32922790)

acronym, it's an acronym.

Is a SLR, yes it is. (-1)

AnAdventurer (1548515) | about 4 years ago | (#32922664)

It's very cool, quite neat and probably a huge time sink. I would almost like one. BUT it IS a Single Lens Reflex camera. The image you see comes from/through the lens.

Re:Is a SLR, yes it is. (1)

harley78 (746436) | about 4 years ago | (#32922806)

No, it's not a SLR. It might be single lens(well now, dual); but no reflexes.

Re:Is a SLR, yes it is. (4, Insightful)

sjwt (161428) | about 4 years ago | (#32923186)

Wrong, wrong, wrong, and very wrong.

That is what is called an 'Lens'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photographic_lens [wikipedia.org]

And he has attached the 'Lens' to a 'camera phone'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_phone [wikipedia.org]

an SLR is a camera that has various mechanical moving parts, that allow you to split the same light that will be hitting the film or sensor, so that you can see this with your own eye, and then the millisecond you hit the shutter button, the Reflex mirror, jumps out of the way, and the shot is taken with almost the exact same light you where seeing that was sent to your eyes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-lens_reflex_camera [wikipedia.org]

This is just a phone that might as well be taped to a large magnifying glass, there are no SLR parts in the lens of a SLR camera.

NOT an SLR (1)

M0b1u5 (569472) | about 4 years ago | (#32922674)

IAMANOTA camera buff, but even *I* know that is *NOT* an SLR.

SLR refers to the mechanism which allows yo to view the actual image which will be taken by the camera without any paralax effects.

Plus this is a shitty thing to do in the first place. Why would anyone want to spend a lot of money to take crappy photos with a crappy phone attached to a humungous lens?

SLR??? (1)

Hamsterdan (815291) | about 4 years ago | (#32922886)

As in *S*ingle *L*ens *R*eflex?

This is not a SLR.

This is no better than crappy point-and-shoot cameras with removable lenses. Even a low-end DSLR (such as the Canon Rebel) has a much bigger (and better) sensor, not counting the Reflex parts ...

I did something similar (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32923086)

I did something similar once:

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/digital-discussion-q/171412-getting-most-my-camera.html

It's just an expensive close-up lens (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32923196)

Put a prime lens in front of another prime lens, and you lose the ability to focus to infinity. Great if you want a close-up of a ladybug, useless if you want a picture of someone standing twenty feet away.

-j

Duh (1)

davmoo (63521) | about 4 years ago | (#32923300)

I'll skip leaving a "this is not a DSLR" comment because that has already been covered.

While its interesting from the "can this be done?" standpoint, I see absolutely no practical reason for doing this. He's basically taking a point and shoot cellphone camera and putting another lens on it, and it gains nothing useful by doing so. The device is no longer pocketable, and the pictures certainly won't be as good as the DSLR the lens came from could produce. If you're going to lug something around that you can't stick in a pocket anyway, why not just lug around a good DSLR.

This is definitely something only a iPhone fanboy could get excited about.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...