[HN Gopher] I wanted a camera that doesn't exist - so I built it
___________________________________________________________________
I wanted a camera that doesn't exist - so I built it
Author : cyrc
Score : 226 points
Date : 2026-01-02 17:04 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (medium.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (medium.com)
| tshanmu wrote:
| Wow! This is the kind of news that we want on hacker news in
| 2026. Amazing hacker ethos.
|
| The article could have been better with sharing some photos taken
| with the new camera.
| amelius wrote:
| > the lens should be as centered as possible. I wanted to avoid
| that horrendous look of cameras with the lens as close to the
| left edge as possible (Sony a6000, I'm looking at you here).
|
| Funny, the things some people obsess about :)
| neogodless wrote:
| When I was shopping, I was comparing the Sony Alphas with the
| Fujifilm XT line.
|
| And in reviews, complaints were made that the lens (and view
| finder) being centered in the XT means you squish your nose
| against the screen in the back.
|
| But... I just liked the look and dials of the XT-5 so much more
| than the barebones boxy look of the a6700.
|
| (Sony has meaningfully better autofocus too, I'll be sad, but I
| wanted the nice looking body...)
|
| And yes my nose squishes against that back screen.
| kiddico wrote:
| A6000 and A6600 owner checking in : I love the boxy look! The
| viewfinder on the left makes lining up long shots kinda hard
| though. I have to zoom out to 50mm find my subject (birds)
| then zoom back to 400mm+, so I have been eyeing the more
| expensive models just to have it in the center. Idk if it
| would even help lol.
| ge96 wrote:
| Also funny the opposite preference, I like the offset lenses
| looks cool
| theSuda wrote:
| Going from mostly centered lenses on dslr and m43 cameras to
| Sony with lens on mostly left side, I do prefer the offset
| lenses. Ergonomically and looks-wise both.
| blindstitch wrote:
| Practically and ergonomically I prefer a centered lens. Your
| hand has to reach less far to reach the focus ring and aperture
| control. Most slr cameras have buttons on both sides of the
| lens, so developing muscle memory is easier when those actions
| are split between each hand. Rotation of the camera is also
| much more natural. It also centers the lens' pov between your
| eyes, matching their parallax, which is really important for
| composing the photograph outside of the viewfinder.
| CarVac wrote:
| Huh? You reach towards the lens from the bottom left and thus
| a centered position puts a corner of the camera body in the
| way.
| blindstitch wrote:
| I had my directions reversed, so the extra reach doesn't
| really apply, I suppose, but I think aligned to the right
| side (when looking into the lens) is even worse. I maybe
| see what you mean about your hand hitting the body, but i
| actually want that; my grip has me resting the body along
| much of my left hand and cradled in my palm. That is really
| important to stability for me, it gives me an extra stop to
| work with.
|
| All personal preference I guess!
| wibbily wrote:
| The loveliest part of making your own gear is picking all your
| nits.
| izzydata wrote:
| My only camera is a Sony a6000 and I bought it partially
| because I thought it looked great. If it causes some issue I
| wouldn't even know it because I've never tried something else.
| petre wrote:
| It only makes sense if one wants boat a left and right handed
| camera st the same time. But then it's got the dials on the
| wrong side.
| cmxch wrote:
| The only thing really wrong about the Sony a6000 is the lack of
| weatherproofing. With even a 55-210 kit lens and maybe a good
| filter, you can still get amazing quality from far away - such
| as being able to pick apart finer architectural details of a
| monument that's about 5-6mi away.
| ayoubd wrote:
| This is awesome! Great work. The "do first, ask questions later"
| mindset is inspiring as it's so easy (for me at least) to get
| stuck forever in a preparation / ideas phase.
|
| I would also love to see some photos taken with it.
| Topgamer7 wrote:
| Not sure if any use this camera. But dude hangs out with a lot
| of ballet dancers it seems
|
| https://www.instagram.com/cristi.baluta
| Zak wrote:
| Unless something went terribly wrong, they'll look just like
| photos taken with a Panasonic G9 II. Samples from that camera
| are readily available online.
| cromulent wrote:
| A triumph. I love this.
| srean wrote:
| Any chemists or crystallographers out here?
|
| I recently got curious about whether nature solves the Bayer
| pattern problem and if so, how.
|
| Are there any 3 element crystalline compounds with the formula
| A_2BC with roughly same sized atoms for A, B and C ?
|
| If they have a 2D tiling that would nature's Bayer pattern.
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| Natured solved it in our eyes by doing non-uniform placements
| of rods and cones (rather than uniform fixed pattern) and then
| fixing it in "software".
| srean wrote:
| Agreed.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| Yes! As an optical engineer, I heard endless complaints about
| how the camera doesn't "see" like our eyes do.
|
| Even the 1990s cameras were far superior to a "static
| picture" from our eyes: color everywhere, instead of mostly
| in the fovea, no blind spot, etc.
|
| What they lacked was: higher resolution wherever you chose to
| concentrate within the scene at one moment, jagged lines if
| they weren't perfectly aligned (your eyes correct near-lines
| to be LINES), and (in the 1990s) lower peak resolution.
|
| (Weirdly, people used to argue that "digital would NEVER have
| better resolution than film, even though it was clearly
| trending upwards to and past that static goal...).
| dsego wrote:
| What about the x-trans pattern?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujifilm_X-Trans_sensor
| solarkraft wrote:
| Oh, that effort.
|
| I've been thinking about putting an MFT mount on my RX100 to use
| it with more interesting lenses (I have it for the high frame
| rate capability) but concluded it to be way too much effort and
| risk.
|
| And then along comes a person with enough determination to build
| an entire custom case! Truly impressive.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I saw footage someone captured when they modified their Canon
| 1D to use a PL mount. They then mounted a 17mm, iirc, that in a
| slow shutter could capture as many photons as my shitty 20mm EF
| mount could do in a 5s long exposure in bulb mode. The front
| piece of glass on that 17mm was ginormous. I really wish I
| could remember the guy's name to find a link. He mounted that
| camera to the front of a fishing boat down the canyon river
| pushed by the current navigating in the dark with night vision
| goggles. The resulting timelapse was glorious.
|
| There was something specific to the body of the 1D that allowed
| for the proper flange depth of PL lenses that the other Canon
| bodies did not work for this mod.
| SilentM68 wrote:
| Wow, that's cool.
|
| If there is anything that can be patented, I'd make sure to
| patent it.
| Zak wrote:
| Something is terribly wrong with the patent system if anything
| about sticking the innards of a commercially-produced camera
| into a different-shaped metal case is patentable.
| _aavaa_ wrote:
| If Nintendo can patent game mechanics despite prior art,
| anything's possible.
| Zak wrote:
| I'm sure a number of things are terribly wrong with the
| patent system. Amazon's one-click patent is another that
| comes to mind. Patents are for _how_ , and the how there is
| "store the default payment and shipping info in a
| database".
| BizarroLand wrote:
| I'm sure that some of these patents happen by slipping
| the examiner a few bands in the application paperwork.
| Afterwards it's on other people to defend themselves to
| the tune of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, and
| if they lose you can get an entire company and all of its
| IP, property, and money.
|
| $5k under the table is a small price to pay for such
| potential payoff, not to mention the value of the
| chilling effect on competition.
|
| It's unethical, seedy, shitty, banal, and pestilent, the
| kind of thing that only the most hellbound and soulless
| of sleazebags would ever even think of to do, but it's
| profitable.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| How many patents do you have? Or are you just making
| assumptions and defaming people who could very well do an
| honest day's work? I assume the people at the US Patent
| Office go through thousands of patents, I would imagine
| it can get pretty exhausting reading each and every
| patent, especially after you ran through hundreds of
| unpatentable documents. You literally have to look up
| prior patents, and make sure its not already a thing, and
| figure out, is this really the same or not?
|
| Funnily enough, one of my former bosses has one or two
| patents on something really simple that he came up with.
| It's a really clever piece of tech that the military
| uses, stupid simple to implement too.
| metabagel wrote:
| I rather think that issuing patents was incentivized in
| various ways, leading to more bad patents being issued.
| IAmBroom wrote:
| There's prior art (centuries old!) on Mickey Mouse's head.
| zipy124 wrote:
| There are design patents specifically for looks[1], in other
| countries such as the UK where I am from this is known as
| registering a design rather than using the word 'patent'[2].
|
| [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_patent [2]:
| https://www.gov.uk/register-a-design
| ionelaipatioaei wrote:
| Why would you even give a shit about patents for a hobby?
| s1mon wrote:
| As someone who's been doing mechanical product engineering for
| 30+ years, doing this as a first project is way more than jumping
| off the deep end. Impressive.
| buildbot wrote:
| I'm just a hobbyist 3D user but I feel like I have good
| experience, been using Autodesk Inventor then Fusion since
| early high school...
|
| I saw the level of detail in the model and am shocked. If this
| is truly their first experience with CAD/CAM they are a
| natural.
|
| For example - here's my home built camera. It's massively more
| simplistic: https://blog.maxg.io/phase-one-swc/
| properbrew wrote:
| It may be simplistic, but that's a cracking photo you've
| taken on it.
| aaronbrethorst wrote:
| Wow super cool. I've always wanted a Hasselblad SWC, but now
| I think I want what you built even more ;)
| Zak wrote:
| The Panasonic GX series of cameras was very similar to what we
| see here, and prices for them remain elevated years past their
| discontinuation. I'm a little surprised they haven't introduced a
| new model in that lineup.
|
| The Fuji X-E5 also seems similar to this, though obviously with a
| different lens mount.
| yabones wrote:
| GM-5 is probably the greatest pocket-size mirrorless, and maybe
| the last. The GX-85 is also great, but it does have a larger
| grip and more of a shoulder at the top.
|
| The G-100D is also quite small, but the faux pentaprism at the
| top makes it just a bit too big to justify being MFT.
|
| https://petapixel.com/2025/06/28/the-panasonic-lumix-gm-5-is...
| criddell wrote:
| In December I bought a GX-85. I love it even though it's 9
| years old and still uses micro-USB. I got a great deal on it -
| $300.
|
| It doesn't seem like it would take a lot to keep this line
| going. Bump the sensor, change the USB cable, add GPS, etc...
| but keep the form factor.
|
| I guess the market just isn't big enough.
| _0xdd wrote:
| This is amazing. It's such a shame that Olympus and Panasonic
| have largely abandoned the small camera market within the M43
| system. I really wish another manufacturer would step up and
| build something similar to the GX85, which is still one of my
| favorite walkaround cameras.
| zokier wrote:
| Fujis X-E5 seems on paper very comparable to GX85?
| https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?produ...
| criddell wrote:
| That looks amazing. I wish I could justify it (I'm a terrible
| photographer).
| alistairSH wrote:
| FWIW, Olympus spun-off/sold their consumer camera division.
| It's now operating as OM System (1) and has released a few new
| cameras over the past few years. As the article mentioned, the
| latest is the OM-3, which is sort of similar form factor, but
| not exactly compact. They also have the smaller Pen EP-7, but
| it's not available in the US (though they're readily available
| on Ebay or via KEH etc). I bought an EP-7 for an earlier Xmas
| gift to myself, but haven't had much change to use it
| (previously had an EP-5 and E-M5ii).
|
| 1 - https://explore.omsystem.com/us/en/
| abetusk wrote:
| A weird contradiction for the licensing [0]:
|
| > This project is open-source under the MIT License. Feel free to
| modify and use -- but no commercial use without permission.
|
| [0] https://github.com/cristibaluta/Leica-G9ii?tab=readme-ov-
| fil...
| jagged-chisel wrote:
| I wouldn't call it weird. But it's unenforceable.
|
| This kind of thing works better with GPL. General use falls
| under GPL. If that doesn't suit your commercial use, contact
| the copyright holder for another license.
|
| As it stands, I can use the MIT licensed project anyway I like,
| including handing it to a commercial entity for their use.
| actionfromafar wrote:
| It's no more unenforceable than GPL is unenforceable.
|
| But MIT + weird condition is radioactive to anyone who takes
| licensing seriously.
|
| Might just as well write "for hobbyist use only".
| Hamuko wrote:
| It is more unenforceable since the LICENSE file in the
| repository clearly states that I can "deal in the Software
| without restriction", and that includes the right to "sell
| copies of the Software".
| nancyminusone wrote:
| Pretty neat that you can do this nowadays and it only costs
| $3,000 instead of $30,000
| buildbot wrote:
| This is an amazing project and level of effort, and I empathize
| deeply with this photographers desire for a clean, simple,
| beautiful camera.
|
| I so deeply want a modern EVF camera, doesn't even have to be a
| rangefinder, with a mechanically wound shutter so the film
| advance lever has a reason to exist.
|
| I'm aware of the Epson R1 but 6MP is too low.
| alistairSH wrote:
| The Fuji X-Half has a wind lever.
|
| https://shopusa.fujifilm-x.com/x-half-x-half/
| buildbot wrote:
| Yes it does - I have one - it's simply a button basically.
| Not the same feel as something like a Leica
| the_arun wrote:
| This is an incredible project! Thanks for sharing. Love to see
| some photos taken in this camera!
| poppafuze wrote:
| Gives a sense of how infuriating the G9ii update was to G9 users.
| The guts are ergonomically better off in a rangefinder body than
| what Panny shipped.
| tormeh wrote:
| I have to say I'm a bit unimpressed with the efforts of the MFT
| consumer system camera manufacturers. Panasonic creates excellent
| cameras, they're so big it lessens the appeal of the smaller
| mount. OM makes cameras of the right size, but it's releasing new
| models really really slowly, with mediocre sensors. The OM-5 mark
| II is a lame rehash. Only the OM-3 is somewhat exciting, but it
| sacrifices too much in terms of ergonomics to achieve an
| aesthetic I don't care about.
|
| On the other hand there's no other class of camera that really
| works on vacation/travel and is meaningfully better than a
| smartphone. Oh, well.
| james_in_the_uk wrote:
| The OM-3 is fine ergonomically, for me at least. The thumb pad
| on the back is very comfortable and balances the body very
| well. I held off buying one for a while because of ergonomic
| concerns but in practice it's been great.
| Retr0id wrote:
| I'm very happy with my thoroughly behind-the-curve E-M10, and
| I'm secretly glad the newer ones aren't all that great because
| I don't have to spend money on upgrading.
| relaxing wrote:
| Title is misleading -- if you read to the end, he did not end up
| with a usable camera.
| tristor wrote:
| The camera they want is also the camera I want. I say this as
| someone who still regularly shoots with an Olympus Pen-F and also
| has a Fuji X100VI, and primarily shoots a Nikon Z8 but wishes
| there was a more compact entry into FF. I actually really like
| the m4/3/MFT format, especially for travel photography, but it's
| a struggle because the best lenses are Pana/Leica and the best
| bodies are OM/Oly, and neither has done much to really develop
| the technology in the last 10 years. MFT feels dead, but even as
| a dead format, nothing compares to the size/weight flexibility it
| gives you.
| erghjunk wrote:
| incredible project but unless I'm misunderstanding what he is
| comparing it to, this is only a few hundred dollars/euros less
| than a used leica m digital body per a quick ebay search.
| ebbi wrote:
| Amazing work, and so inspiring! The size difference compared to
| the G9ii made it all worth it!
|
| Lately I've been converting a few old 5k iMac's to work as
| external displays, and I had a thought about making my own
| housing for the display instead of using the iMac chassis. This
| gives me some motivation to look into it further!
| flakiness wrote:
| No picture from the camera. Stoic.
| Kon5ole wrote:
| The hobby of caring about cameras sometimes overtakes the hobby
| of taking pictures.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| This is batshit insane, and I fully _fully_ endorse this person
| 's madness to do such things. This is what the internet is _for_
|
| Going straight into making a camera is very much a bold move.
|
| my next comment isn't for the author, as they have strong enough
| opinions on cameras to do this. But for everyone else, I have
| greatly enjoyed fujifilms line of cameras.
|
| I borrowed a gfx100s from work, and my word is a wonderful
| machine. (it should be for the price) for more normal budgets,
| the x series is great. Unlike a canon what you see is what you
| get, and the autofocus works on objects rather than the closest
| fucking thing it sees.
| twic wrote:
| > the Lumix lenses are crippled on Olympus bodies
|
| Are they?
| rdlw wrote:
| As mentioned in the next clause of that sentence, the aperture
| ring does not work on Olympus bodies.
| XCSme wrote:
| Off topic: why do people keep posting on medium?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-01-06 23:05 UTC)