>>3272559>remove and deactivate the device when shooting is finished...And if you forget to do that, say goodbye to the already abysmal battery life. That sure sounds convenient.
>build a correcting element directly in front of the sensorWhere? In film cameras with focal plane shutters, film is squeezed between the pressure plate and the shutter assembly. There's maybe half a millimeter between film and shutter blades. You can try to remove the pressure plate, but that is an irreversible process in many cameras, and by moving the sensor back you're throwing the image plane out of alignment with the viewinder (in SLRs) or rangefinder (in RFs)
>>3272543>It would allow someone who already has a film camera to get at least some of the convenience of digital.The thing is, you're likely paying the same kind of price as a comparable digital camera costs, if not more (because miniaturization isn't free, and low-volume production makes it even more expensive), while getting only a small part of the convenience.
>No need to go out and buy a bunch of new glassThat was never an issue, digital cameras can use older glass just fine.
>Sure it does have disadvantages compared to a full on digital cameraIt doesn't have instant review and easily variable ISO, the most important advantages of digital cameras. That alone would limit it to Leica M-D levels of adoption, and it's hard to justify serious R&D costs for something that niche.
>>3272583>you can use a single readout-line for triggering purposeUnreliable. What if that part of the picture is black? What if I'm shooting long exposures with a ND filter or at night?
>and you can ofc build the device thin enoughYou can make the sensor itself really thin, yes, but you also need an optical IR filter (that has a physical limit on how thin it can be) and likely an optical lowpass filter. That can't fit in the thickness of film.
