3D printed MEDIUM FORMAT CAMERA for MAMIYA PRESS lenses 

Thank you so much! I honestly appreciate it.

Thanks!! :D

Thanks mate!

Huuuuge thanks. Really happy you liked it :)

@@mcb187 Hi! Yes, a system for the metering of the film advance is going to be implemented. I'll go for the red window, since the configuration you propose was already thought, but wouldn't work properly. First of all, it can't be a 64mm diameter roller because it's too big for the size of the camera (also, wouldn't be 64mm in diameter but in perimeter). Adding a roller of half the size, or of a third of the size, would be better. But anyway, the friction of the whole system may possibly cause the film not to advance. If using rubber bands, the surface on the other side of the film should be slippery and perfectly flat to avoid any scratches. Even if it advanced, the empty spool where the exposed film is collected would need to have a "tensioning" mechanism to help that empty spool to turn. So the idea itself is great, but the implementation is not that simple.

Thanks buddy!

Thanks!!

Thanks!!

Thanks!! :)

You definitely should!! It's so nice taking pictures with a camera you made :)

@@javier_fernandez no doubt, I'm quitte new to film photography but have been making my tools for a few years now and I reelly enjoy it.

Thanks!! ;)

Thanks for the tip ;)

@@bullpaintbullpaint8439 gracias!!

Thanks for the comment and the ideas! The four screws just hold the front plate in place, and the light proofing is achieved (or I think is achieved) due to the front plate's geometry entering the housing. Anyway, as other comments mentioned and you did, little light is coming in. I'll give it a thought about what could be done. A sealing foam or similar would be really nice. Thanks again for the feedback!! It's truly helpful.

Regarding light leaks; saw a vid in last 2 days of a commercial low volume manufacturer who sent a demo model to a 250k subscriber channel. Light leak caused by a change in printing material. It wasn’t truly optically opaque…. Yoiks.

I'm a total noob with everything regarding electronics. But while ago someone sent me a post that talked about conversions from film cameras to digital ones, and didn't feel very complicated. The idea is really great, but I feel I won't make it in the near future. Again, thanks for the ideas!!

I'm thinking about doing that. I think it would be viable, but it will be a bulkier camera than I'd like for Instax/Polaroid film. Anyway, I'll give it a try!

The other route is ground glass lots of 3D printed backs dark slides. Load Polaroid put Darkside backing into bag with Polaroid camera drop another back on.

Hi!! I'm glad you liked it. 0. I used Autodesk Fusion360, which works really good and it's easy to use. But lately I'm leaning towards using CATIA, way more profesional but more difficult to use as well. Anyway, any CAD software you use is great! 1. Version 3 is coming out this summer. It seems to be more compact and will add a few upgrades that will improve the design significantly, I hope. Build time would be approximately the same; cost may depend on if I implement some upgrades that are not decided yet. 2. As mentioned, V3 will be more compact (probably a little bit wider and taller, but shorter). Also, working to see how to add a (removable) handle, which will make the camera bulkier. Weight will be similar. 3. Don't understand the question. Could you rephrase? Thanks! 4. Allowing frames is something I'm not sure about, since it makes the design more complex. I'll try to add them, but can't ensure it. Thanks fot the questions and happy 3D printing ;)

@@javier_fernandez hello, thanks for your replies. 0. I’ll check out CATIA. I’m reading up to learn what decent free softwares exist. 3. It’s hard to explain with words. I’d love to see a demonstration of you focusing V3 and watch exactly how you adjust focus on the lens. 4. Okay, that’s understandable. One thought I had is that it would be nice to have the option for a “ground glass” back for times when you want critical focus or composition. However, it wouldn’t be worth it if that made the camera too bulky.

@@CertainExposures I thought about adding a ground glass, but found it hard to implement. V3 won't have a ground glass, but your thoughts and the ones of the people commenting makes me take things like these into account for future updgrades. Thanks again for your feedback!

@@javier_fernandez okay, that's understandable. Good luck - I'll keep an eye out for V3.

Thanks! I use the lines on top and on the side. Everything in the angle between lines will appear in the image. Obviously not the fastest method to frame an image.

That's right, the film doesn't advance consistently but it was the simplest way to design it. Version 3 of this camera is on the way and a window to see the frame where you are will be implemented. Regarding the frame scratching: I didn't find any mark in my film, but relying on friction isn't the finest solution. I'll give it a thought! Huge thanks for the feedback :)

@@javier_fernandez I wanted to thank you for posting your design because it inspired a design feature for a 6x17 panoramic camera I'm designing. I have designed a 3D printed ratchet gear with dual pawls for my film advance after seeing your design. I started with a recessed area just like in your camera and it worked fine, but then I got to thinking I really wanted a lever action film advance like the toyo 4x5 roil film backs use. That feature just required a slight redesign, door handle return spring from amazon and a 20mm long M3 hex coupling nut from amazon. I've remixed the lid of your design adding my film advance lever system and will post it to printables soon.

Hi! Yes, that is what is happening. That's due to the knob turning clockwise. If the knob would have been located in the left-hand side and the unexposed film in the right-hand one, it wouldn't happen, but I preferred having the knob where it is. For version 3, I'll try to "fix" it.

I'm glad you liked the camera! I thought about adding a red window but I was worried about light leakages, plus it would be difficult for other people who want to print the camera to find this part. But a frame counter of any kind is a necessary upgrade.

@@javier_fernandez what I'm seeing in your camera project, you can add a red window like those old Hasselblad backs with something to cover in the end. The hole will be very deep, doesn't look to have any light leaks.

@@javier_fernandez ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zSTy6k_8beE.html Something like this, and looks like you don't need a red window

@@filmlovephotography first time I see a hole like this. Simple and seems that light won't cause any problem. Now I feel the urge of designing another version :) Thank you very much for the knowledge!!

@@javier_fernandez the camera looks great, I couldn't resist to talk about the window. I believe will be very easy now to change frames. Good luck and hope to see the mark III in the future 👍

Appreciate you liked the project!! You are totally right. A cold shoe or any other viewfinder mod would be nice. Possible future versions might add those things. And thanks for the feedback! It's so great to get people's opinion.

@@javier_fernandez can I ask what 3d printer you used for that project? and what material?

@@fanaticAlien I used a Creality Ender 3 (one of the first versions). And PLA was the way to go for me since it prints very nicely.

​@@javier_fernandez Have you checked if 3D print does not transmit light? I think that photos are bit "bland". From my experience when I try to print bulk film loader, it turned out, that my 3D prints are not lightproof (of course using black PLA).

Hi @@piszczyk ! I also noticed what you are saying. I'll have to check whether it is due to the filament not being opaque (despite I painted black the whole exterior of the camera), due to the internal walls reflecting light (which for me seems to be the main reason) or due to ligth leaks (maybe the "step" used for light-proofing isn't tall enough). But in addition to that, maybe the problem occurs when loading the film or when developing it. I develop it myself and I'm definitely not an expert. Anyway, I'll try to improve all aspects above in possible future versions. Thanks a lot for the feedback :))

That's a really interesting question. The design of the camera wouldn't change much, plus it should be easier since you just need a piece that connects the lens and digital back. I think it would be a project that would work perfectly. If you have any design doubts, don't hesitate to contact me (I hope I can help)

Yessss totally. I must fix this aspect of the camera (by firstly ensuring that there are no mayor light leaks). Both painting and giving some "sawtooth" texture to the inner walls would help. There is a special black paint that reflects very very little light, but it would be nice to check if standard black paint works great. I really appreciate the feedback, it helps a ton for future versions of the camera :)

@@javier_fernandez I know what paint you're talking about. It's called Vantablack, it supposedly absorbs 99.95% of visible light. The problem is that it's quite toxic to work with, cracks and flakes easily and most importantly, costs quite a bit of money. Your best bet would be just using matte black paint or covering the inside with black fabric.

@@Stuntman175 That's obvsly the paint I was talking about. So already knowing that, I'll just go for matte paint (I think it would be easier than using fabric). Again, thanks a lot for the knowledge. Whenever I make another version of the camera, I'll make a video about it for sure.

@@javier_fernandez would you ever consider making an Instax Mini version of your camera? Plenty of cheap Instax cameras around to cannibalize parts for your build. You'd lose 1mm in width and height with a 645 lens due to the film size being 61mm x 46mm, but with careful alignment of the film plane, the difference could probably be split both ways. Maybe I'm just crazy, but I think it could work, film prices have gone through the roof, but Instax has remained more or less the same price... Edit: Instax Mini. Size matters, after all haha.

@@Stuntman175 I like how you think ;). I've thought about it quite a lot, but haven't developed that idea yet. As you said, it's a similar design, and the main obstacles I could find are already faced. Also, being able to have an instant print would be soooo helpful to make fast design decisions.

The shutter is inside the lens. The camera is a light-proof box that holds the film at the correct distance.

Yesss exactly

Hi!! So I had trouble finding the flange distance on the internet, so I measured it myself. But another problem I found was where to measure that distance from (I mean from what part of the lens). Anyway, the distances in the Fusion file worked well for me and for other people that printed the camera.

@@javier_fernandez it is very difficult to find the technical data for such old cameras, even when information can be found on the internet it is frequently wrong, and lacks citations for people to check the original source. As you say even if we have a figure given for film plane to flange distance of 53mm we are often left uncertain as to what mamiya calls the flange. Is that the base of the helicoid, or the underside of the bayonette tabs, or the very back of the lens barrel? Without a precise definition we often guess and make do with the results, but it would be preferable to optimize the optical design. I am going to use my view camera to making a test rig so I can mount a lens and focus at infinity, then use a depth micrometer to measure the distance to the back of the lens mounting plate to determine my required body depth.

Yesss it is.

Hi! The shutter is inside the lens (like most medium format lenses). Both f number and shutter speed are set in the lens.

@@javier_fernandez Hm interesting. I did some research to try to figure how this works (I had a feeling the shutter was in the lens but I couldn't quite tell) but there isn't much online. Do you know where I can find the details of this mechanism? Thanks!

@@kierancarter3693 Hi! In this case, the shutter is inside the lens. There is a ring in the lens dedicated to selecting the shutter speed.

Thanks Dmitry!! I thought of making a window like that but I was worried about light leakage. Those cameras have a reddish glass to improve light-proofing, but getting this glass might be difficult. But a frame counter is the next important upgrade to be done. Thanks again for the feedback, your comments really help :)

@@javier_fernandez Sort of on that topic, you said it takes 1.5 turns to advance the film 1 frame. If you did that test at the beginning of the roll, then that works. As the film collects on the collector roll, the circumference of the roll grows and pulls more film per turn. Thus it will require less than 1.5 turns to advance 1 frame. My sister's twin lens reflex had a broken advance mechanism. When I disassembled it I found the advance mechanism allowed for less and less of a turn before locking into place. Then when the camera was opened to remove the film, the advance mechanism reset to the beginning. As I recall (from 50 years ago) it was a fairly simple system which should lend itself to 3d printing. And also as I recall, the shutter release was on the body not the lens, so more of your design would have to change. But still, if you could find a 1950s or 60s camera, before they went electronic, there was nothing fancy about any of it.

@@dchall8 he means holder for cable-release like on MUP cams.

Hi!! Sorry for the late reply. You are right: the more the film is advanced, the less you have to turn the knob. I thought about some mechanisms to solve this problem, but none of them where simple enough to be printed (and simplicity is a main goal for me). I'll have to check a mechanism like the one you are talking about. It would be such a great improvement. Anyway, despite not perfect, always turning the knob 1.5 times makes the job (the film has length enough to absorb that inaccuracy). Thank you so much for the response and knowledge!! I helps a lot.

@@javier_fernandez Can't wait to see your updated version!!

You focus using the lens. You use the scale drawn in it.

For the shutter speed you rotate a ring on the lens (which contains the shutter inside). The ISO is set by the film you use.

@@javier_fernandez thanks, but next time please explain details on the video.

I think so! In fact, it is something I've been thinking for a while. But it seems it would be more difficult than what it may look at first sight. If I ever do it (or something related to Polaroid film) I'll probably uploaded here.

Black PLA. This one: tienda.bq.com/products/pla-bobina1kg

:)

Muchas gracias Héctor!! Te mando un link de eBay, que es donde más oferta suele haber: www.ebay.es/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m570.l1313&_nkw=mamiya+sekor+100mm+f%2F3.5&_sacat=0

@@javier_fernandez Genial! muchas gracias!

Ooh so close. I'm from Spain :)

PLA. And thankss :)

Glad you liked the content anyway!

A future version should include all you mentioned. A standardized magazine mount and a groundglass, while perhaps difficult to implement, are must-have to be able to finely tune the focus. Thanks for the feedback and ideas: it helps a lot.

@@javier_fernandez aAron Smith could allow using his g-adPter Design.

@@javier_fernandez get brightscreen Split gg.fresnel integrated.not cheap but perfect.split essential so fresnel in low light.

@@javier_fernandez rightangle mup viewfinder fabulous fresnel inside for essyficussing without loupe.

@@michaelprzewrocki4195 I think I'll go with a DIY version of the focusing screen to keep the project as cheap and easy as possible (a sanded methacrylate sheet). In that way, the camera built is accesible to more people. (I'll also have to simplify the advance mechanism obvs).

learn to appreciate the groove, man😤😤

search for good subjects at good light. and let it be developped.