The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Thoughts on mirrorless FF camera with interchangeable lenses in 2013?

Shashin

Well-known member
A couple thoughts on the thread subject and the responses so far:

- Would Fuji alienate their current X users by developing a FF system? Surely their XR lenses can't all perform as well on a larger sensor.
Why would it? It would seem both systems can exist side-by-side. That gives folks a choice on how much they are willing to spend.

- Zeiss has a winning model for an FF system - the film Ikon. Letting Sony help design a digital version would definitely shift the risk.
That is not Zeiss, but Cosina. Cosina did not like the Epson product and said it really does not want to work on digital rangefinders. And just because you have a film rangefinder, it is not that easy to convert it to a digital one. There would be a great risk for both companies, although I imagine Cosina might make a camera for Sony, just like sony makes cameras for Hasselblad and so the risk would be for Sony.

But I don't think Sony would want to be bothered with a coupled rangefinder. They are a pain to manufacture and a pain to service. They are also expensive. I would imagine they would be using an EVF just like in all their other cameras.

maybe most importantly...

- Given all of the amazing advances in sensor technology, how important is it to have a full frame digital camera, for most people? I think RX1 sales will probably answer this question, but the market has to be big enough for a FF system to make sense to both mass produce and not cost a small fortune. There is a lot of space between the RX1 and a Leica M + lenses. I think Sony/Zeiss could produce a nice system, but it will end up in a Bermuda triangle in the price spectrum.
And there is the rub. How much is a FF system worth to people. There are certainly advantages to smaller format beyond prices as well--you get more DoF which can be a plus for many folks. And the image quality is great.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I post this here in the Sony forum because the RX1 is for me a sign what to come.

Ok the Leica M fits the bill but is also out of reach for some of us. What are your thoughts about FF mirrorless cameras in 2013? I think Sony will likely make one. Canon or Nikon anyone?
So here's my hypothesis...

The question has little to do with the sensor. Sony obviously has the sensor technology well in hand, albeit at a price. There is certainly a market for cameras with 35mm format sensors, no matter how good or bad APS-C and FourThirds are, and Sony seemingly can build them into arbitrarily small bodies. Prices will come down somewhat with volume, as usual for electronics manufacture, so for them to produce bodies at an affordable price point (say $2000) is really a matter of putting in the investment, and then having a product that is acceptable for sale.

So the real issue of whether and how to make a mirrorless FF camera has to do with lenses, and the match between sensors and lenses. What we've seen so far is that, even with APS-C format, existing RF lens designs are often a troublesome match to the sensor. Only those cameras with sensors customized for short register mounts do well with a large enough range of the existing lenses. Customizing sensors for these lenses implies additional costs, and is not always perfect either. The required geometry for SLR lens designs, because of the moving mirror, makes a much easier adaptation to digital sensors. But SLR lenses are bulky, again because of the required geometry, which defeats much of the purpose for the mirrorless system.

So what's the solution? Well, we've seen three smaller-than-FF format solutions so far: Micro-FourThirds, NEX, and Fuji X (skipping the NX simply because it's not been a big seller, but it's a fourth). The best quality images from these three formats have all been made with lenses optimized for the format and sensor characteristics. mFT has been around long enough now for a fairly extensive lens line to be developed, and there are quite a few good lenses for it. NEX has been around a couple of years less, and the lens system is growing slowly. The Fuji is just out of the traps and the lens system is still quite immature but good quality.

For Sony to take on producing a mirrorless FF system that encompasses the desire for compact size and high quality will require, I believe, nothing less than a full bore lens development program with lenses optimized for the sensor and mount. There's certainly value in that, and there's a ready market for it if many of the comments made on the varlous new M threads are to be believed. BUT it's a very price conscious audience already: they know all about the Leica M, the value and quality of Leica (and Zeiss, and Voigtlander) lenses. They also know the price of these things, and many don't want to pay the ticket. And developing lenses is both very expensive and takes a lot of time.

The question comes down to how adroitly Sony (or any other manufacturer) can pilot their way between the development of bodies and lenses that can be sold profitably, at affordable prices, and yet fulfill the very high expectations of the buying community. The RX1 may be a test program ... Will people buy into a dedicated full frame camera with a super quality lens at this price level? The next question after that is, will they buy into a $2000 body and $1000 lens combination for an interchangeable lens system at enough volume to be profitable?

Canon and Nikon have an advantage selling their new lower-end FF SLR bodies: they already have a lens line that works with them. Even though that is still an ongoing work in progress as they continue to revise and optimize for the digital sensor, it's huge leg up on the introduction of a new, compact, TTL electronic system of similar specification.

I think it will happen, and it's quite possible Sony will have to be the one to do it. Leica's agenda is higher end than the mass market product that the mirrorless call wants, and they don't have the resources (or motivation). Nikon and Canon are concentrating on their traditional SLR base for the present. Ricoh/Pentax are probably better off continuing with their Pentax SLR and GXR system efforts, given that they are both relatively niche market brands at this point in time. Olympus and Panasonic are wedded to the FourThirds format for the present, and are already doing well there. There really isn't anyone else out there with the resources to tackle this kind of thing.

The future will tell the story.
 

douglasf13

New member
A fullframe, e-mount still camera poses a few issues that make it a little more difficult than it sounds, if you want the lenses to remain small.

As mentioned above, getting the rear element close, like the RX1, would require a leaf shutter, which adds to the cost of the lens. Also, the large rear element of the RX1's lens wouldn't even fit through the e-mount when attached to an interchangeable lens, so there'd still be compromise.

You can wedge a fullframe sensor into a pretty small mount, like e-mount, and you can make the registration distance of a fullframe mirrorless shallow, like e-mount... but, if you have BOTH a small mount AND a short registration distance, the flange starts becoming an issue of physically being in the way. There is a reason that the mounts of m4/3, NEX, Fuji, Nikon 1, etc., are oversized compared to their sensor.

See link: http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/449848-post66.html

So you're stuck with either designing lenses that are nearly as large as their DSLR counterparts, including adapters, or you go the Leica route and design special sensors to accommodate, highly advanced lenses, and software correction, most of which would be very expensive, and you'd still have to add in auto aperture and auto focus mechanisms.

My guess is that Sony will eventually make a FF NEX still camera, but they won't develop a separate lens line, but, rather, give us the option of using a-mount lenses for quality and e-mount lenses for size. However, I think we're a ways away from that, because they aren't ready to give up on their SLT cameras. The RX1 seems like their solution for FF and compact.


p.s. Of course, there is the VG-900, but that was built to accept fullframe cine and SLR lenses with much longer registration distances. Small lenses need not apply.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
The RX1 lens is small. It is about 43mm extended from the front of the body and about 60mm in diameter. The Leica 35mm f/2 Cron with no AF or leaf shutter is 36mm x 51mm and it has a larger flange distance.
 

kit laughlin

Subscriber Member
The only problem with leaf shutters is the maximum speed; I think the current Schneider Kreuznach (sp.?) lenses for the Phase 645D bodies are limited to a top speed of 1/1600"; the advantage, as everyone knows, is flash sync at all speeds. Incredibly quiet, too. For me, a leaf shutter would be perfect, and a dial-in ND filter (or two) would take care of the top speed problem.

Good point about the 35/2 'Cron, too.

Interesting times for photographers, it seems: a return to an OM-sized camera, but a digital version, just might happen—and The OMs had beautiful optical finders too. Ah: strike that!
 

Shashin

Well-known member
The Sony RX1 has 1/2000th top shutter speed which is really good.

BTW, Fuji just made an announcement today that their X series lenses will NOT cover FF.
 
Last edited:

douglasf13

New member
The only problem with leaf shutters is the maximum speed; I think the current Schneider Kreuznach (sp.?) lenses for the Phase 645D bodies are limited to a top speed of 1/1600"; the advantage, as everyone knows, is flash sync at all speeds. Incredibly quiet, too. For me, a leaf shutter would be perfect, and a dial-in ND filter (or two) would take care of the top speed problem.

Good point about the 35/2 'Cron, too.

Interesting times for photographers, it seems: a return to an OM-sized camera, but a digital version, just might happen—and The OMs had beautiful optical finders too. Ah: strike that!
Agreed, Kit. Of course, the other disadvantage of leaf shutters in lenses is cost. A set of lenses that all have leaf shutters tend to be more expensive.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Now if we could only realize the dream of the aperture blade doubling as the shutter blades, we could have cheap leaf shutters in every camera. Leaf shutters are fast today because they only have to end the exposure.
 

dhsimmonds

New member
There is some discussion on this topic over at the Fuji X forum. There are a number of members there with considerable expertise in oriental Asian verbal discussion that possibly recognise cultural differences in interpretation by Amateur Photographer staff of what is meant by Mr. Hiroshi Kawahara of Fuji, rather than what was actually said by him.

We would all like it to be true, but it may not actually be what was meant.

As always with rumours, time will tell!
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Actually, while the RX1 is a very promising camera concept and outlines a number of possibilities for a Sony FF ILC, my decision is simple.

Having my M lens arsenal in my closet and having seen the introductions about the new Leica M, I think my search for mirror less high quality is over. I am so convinced, that I put me on the list for the new M today, which should probably get me one mid 2013.

Great to be home again :D
 
V

Vivek

Guest
After the initial buzz with some of the testers and few sales in the US, Sony will realize it is better to come up with a ILC (in the EU it is simply expensive).

That should be here mid 2013, about the same time the M will be available.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Now if we could only realize the dream of the aperture blade doubling as the shutter blades, we could have cheap leaf shutters in every camera. Leaf shutters are fast today because they only have to end the exposure.
I was under the impression that there are several cameras that already have combined aperture/leaf shutter mechanisms in them.

I don't know what you mean by "leaf shutter are fast today because they only have to end the exposure." Leaf shutter minimum exposure time is the result of being able to close quickly enough, which becomes easier as the maximum aperture of the lens becomes smaller. As focal length decreases, it's possible to make a faster leaf shutter ... the blades do not have to be as big or move as far, which reduces accelerative loads so they can stand to be cycled more swiftly.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Actually, while the RX1 is a very promising camera concept and outlines a number of possibilities for a Sony FF ILC, my decision is simple.

Having my M lens arsenal in my closet and having seen the introductions about the new Leica M, I think my search for mirror less high quality is over. I am so convinced, that I put me on the list for the new M today, which should probably get me one mid 2013.

Great to be home again :D
I'll be right behind you, Peter.

It makes no sense to me to spend half the price of a new M body for the RX1 when I already have the X2. And the new M will allow me to finally reduce the amount of gear in my closet ... I'll no longer keep an SLR around for long lens and macro work, and I'll standardize on 35mm format for all my interchangeable lenses.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
After the initial buzz with some of the testers and few sales in the US, Sony will realize it is better to come up with a ILC (in the EU it is simply expensive).

That should be here mid 2013, about the same time the M will be available.
But it will never have a true rangefinder focusing system, or Leica M lens mount. And the raw files will not be DNG format. That's why I'll stick with the Leica. :)
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The news that the M will only be available mid 2013 is a bit of a surprise. More time to save up the cash, I suppose.

I am really taken with the MM image quality, despite it not having live view like the M.

May be I will look into getting the Nik pluggins and Silver Effex. ;)
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I was under the impression that there are several cameras that already have combined aperture/leaf shutter mechanisms in them.
As far as I know the aperture and shutter blades are still a separate set. But maybe someone has done it.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
The news that the M will only be available mid 2013 is a bit of a surprise. More time to save up the cash, I suppose.

I am really taken with the MM image quality, despite it not having live view like the M.

May be I will look into getting the Nik pluggins and Silver Effex. ;)
According to the Leica Shop Vienna, they assume to receive the first M's around April 2013. As I am not under the first one's having pre ordered - belief it or not - I am for the moment scheduled for mid 2013. At least what I was told.

Plus it helps me saving for funding the M of course ;)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I'll be right behind you, Peter.

It makes no sense to me to spend half the price of a new M body for the RX1 when I already have the X2. And the new M will allow me to finally reduce the amount of gear in my closet ... I'll no longer keep an SLR around for long lens and macro work, and I'll standardize on 35mm format for all my interchangeable lenses.
Fully agree.

Only I will keep my D800E for the occasions when I want to use a DSLR, especially when I shoot wildlife with focal length from 100-500 and above.

Other I plan to use the M or hopefully also the X2 when I can get one.
 
Top