In the old days I had a large Bronica setup. I still have a Russian Hasselblad. The Salut-C

Film is NOT obsolete, in fact it is trendy. Kodak even restarted production of Ektachrome.

I've got the GX7. have not tried a pinhole on it but it has had a lot of very strange lenses attached.

@@IMSAIGuy I’ve worked with doctors who have used it with medical devices that go where the sun doesn’t shine!

I love my LX100. I have an LX5 as well. Everything else is Sony!

no

@@IMSAIGuy why

Yes Barry you are right, Compur was the name of the central shutters from the Deckel company and at the time this lens is from they started to design central shutters to stay behind the lens for interchangeability of the lens. As you can imagine the central shutters has to open and shut very fast and therefore the size was restricted. So they ended up with a certain width of the last element and that defined the minimum apperture of the lens. To make it all work they developed the bajonett along with it as the shutter was more a part of the bajonett than the camerabody and the lenscase part of the whole design of shutter and bajonett. That opened up some options for automatic exposure as the apperture was driven from the cameraside (hense the adapter shown has an apperture control ring). On the other hand there were no telelenses with low apperture possible, the opening was to tiny. For some time these were anyway selling good on viewfinders and consumer slrs but the thurst for lowlight photography pushed the planeshutter ahead, working direct in front of the filmpane offering wider bajonetts (like minolta desgned). Nevertheless one other aspect should be mentioned that centralshutters are in sync with flashes at any speed while the planeshutters in the sixties usually ended up with 1/30 or 1/60 being in sync. So you can shoot with flash at higher speeds and reduce influence of natural light. But on the other hand powerfull electronic flashes were bulky and expensive. In the end the compur shutter behind the lens was an interesting development of the time and on the long run was one of the reasons why the german cameraindustry didn't catch up with the japanese. Nevertheless the lenses are nice, if you have a camera and film these are charming and I'm very much looking forward to use some in the next future.

@@alyro-ls1dv Thanks. I knew about leaf shutters vs FP ones. Incidentally, the Pentax 110 SLR has a combined shutter/diaphragm. Take your two first fingers on both hands nail-to-nail and slide them together. The aperture gets smaller as you slide your hand together, and the speed in which you slide is effectively the shutter speed. Quire clever, although of course complicated. But cheap to make. I have all the generations of Minolta DSLRs as the mirror technology evolved. First it moved like a film camera, then it did not as it was semi-silvered and sent some of the light to the viewfinder and most to the sensor, then all electronic with no mirror at all. Then Sony changed the lens mount from A, which was Minolta compatible to E which was new and reduced the focal plane to lens distance and allowed a smaller camera, and I think allowed other advantages. One is that it is easy to now adapt many other lenses, M39's, Canon, etc. But I must use an adapter for my 25 Minolta lenses. And there are four different adapters! Anything to make you spend more.

the schematic I show is correct

@@IMSAIGuy Yes I believe the schematic that you drew is correct. The schematic that is OEM has everything grounded can that work like that. And if it does can you explain how those grounds don't matter or do matter

and of course, they do.

I don't think anyone mass-produced a digital back for any camera. 35mm anyway. They would all rather sell you a new camera, after all.