Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 145 posts

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#121

Post by jeswin »

yabones wrote: post #31
Zak wrote: post #15

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.

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...

I have a GM1, it's truly a standout camera. GM5 makes it even better. It's quite funny nobody wants to attempt similar sizes, even when the market has voted for pocketable cameras.

Especially OM - with all their troubles, if it were me I'd have pivoted the company to sizes that do justice to the mount's inherent size advantage. They have a rich legacy of amazing small cameras (Trip, Pen, XA series, and the overrated mju ii) - yet it's fuji selling an order of magnitude more x-halfs than anything OM is producing.

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#122

Post by actionfromafar »

Hamuko wrote: post #46
actionfromafar wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

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".

except

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#123

Post by Zak »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #110
yabones wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

If they just remade it with modern AF software , I'd probably carry mine around most every I went. Not to mention what they could do by updating hardware.

I'm not sure there's a lot of improvement possible purely in software with a contrast detect system and an old processor.

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#125

Post by hypercube33 »

james_in_the_uk wrote: post #44
tormeh wrote: post #41

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 e…

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.

I'm super happy with my OM10 mark3 and z9. the first is super fun to use and gives a really satisfying shitter kachunk when you shoot and the z9 though a chonker makes adjusting stuff easy having a billion buttons

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#126

Post by hypercube33 »

ngcc_hk wrote: post #107
tormeh wrote: post #41

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 e…

Olympus is one of the few camera (I literally have hundreds as this is my side hobby) I love to use. Until every time I want to change anything. As a guy who can do 8x10, gfx, 907x, z9 etc I still find the menu system totally confusing. It is not the hardware, it is the software …

I had to think about this a while since my Olympus is my go to camera just because I love using it but I agree some of the menus are mildly confusing....though leaps ahead of sony

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#127

Post by hypercube33 »

alistairSH wrote: post #33
_0xdd wrote: post #20

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.

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 a…

They are no Pentax Q which is ridiculously small and maybe not the best design lens / shutter wise as a lot of the in-lens shutters seem to fail...

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#128

Post by alexpotato »

This post, where someone from one field decides to do something they love but in another field, reminds me of the below:

At my kids' elementary school there is a yearly "Dad's Night" show where the dads get up and do skits, dance, sing and/or make funny videos.

You get to see dads who sell insurance or are lawyers do dance numbers that look professionally choreographed or make music videos that look like they could have been on MTV.

It's a reminder that "The Sort" pulls people very strongly into certain fields but there is always that question, from the movie Up In The Air and asked by George Clooney, "How much did they pay you to give up your dream?" [0]

Part of me is VERY excited to see AI/LLMs help facilitate this for the people who always thought "I have always wanted to write a piece of software but didn't know how and now I can!"

0 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkX-TPaodoM

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#129

Post by alexpotato »

m4rtink wrote: post #98
buildbot wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/

BTW, if you want to design some models for 3D printing but the only thing you know to do is to code, you can use OpenSCAD & program the obejcrs into existence: https://openscad.org/ Also recommend using the BOSL2 library with OpenSCAD - it turnes an already very powerful tool into something insane: https://github.com/BelfrySCAD/BOSL2

Just got a 3D printer and was curious what the best practice was for generating objects in code and then outputting to a printer.

Thanks for sharing!

Re: I wanted a camera that doesn't exist, so I built it

#130

Post by Zababa »

tormeh wrote: post #41

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 e…

>On the other hand there's no other class of camera that really works on vacation/travel and is meaningfully better than a smartphone.

My a6500 is serving me well, though I guess it depends what you mean by "meaningfully better than a smartphone". I do end up with a lot more photos that I like when I go on vacation with a camera than with just a smartphone

Edit: also applies to commuting, but I'm always a bit uneasy about having my camera with me when comutting.

Post reply on HN