Shashin
Well-known member
You can design a smaller lens to have more contrast, but then the trade off is resolution. You cannot optimize a lens for both, but have to balance between them.
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?
- Thread starter ustein
- Start date
douglasf13
New member
Do we know which elements are FLD in the DP2M? It could very likely be the two last elements, which allow the setup to be smaller by placing the rear element right up against the sensor.
Either way, the lenses in the DP2M and Sigma 30/2.8 are very similar, and certainly share on overall design ethos, with the rear of the lens differing in design to accommodate the different sensor to lens distances. The DP2M may even be at a disadvantage, since it has more elements in the design, thus the FLD elements.
DP2M
Sigma 30
FWIW, the DP1M and Sigma 19 are quite a bit different, which makes sense, because getting a wide angle up against the sensor like that is more difficult.
V
Vivek
Guest
They (30mm) are, in fact, different.
Take a look: Dedicated DP Lenses | SIGMA DP2 Merrill : Special Contents
3 ED elements in DP2-M's lens.
Take a look: Dedicated DP Lenses | SIGMA DP2 Merrill : Special Contents
3 ED elements in DP2-M's lens.
douglasf13
New member
Yes, "To maximize image quality while minimizing lens barrel length." The Sigma 30 also has two asph elements to the DP2M's one.
The two lenses obviously can't be identical, because the DP2M's sensor is right up against the lens in order to maintain smaller size. My point is simply that these two lenses are very similar. The MTF of the DP2M's lens is a little better at f2.8. I'd be curious to see the MTFs at f5.6.
The two lenses obviously can't be identical, because the DP2M's sensor is right up against the lens in order to maintain smaller size. My point is simply that these two lenses are very similar. The MTF of the DP2M's lens is a little better at f2.8. I'd be curious to see the MTFs at f5.6.
Shashin
Well-known member
I think Sony may have the best chance of going to a mirrorless FF IC system, but it will not be based on the RX1, but the a99. The a99 sensor has the AF sensor built into the chip. It also has a lines line. Sony had put out a patents for a duel mount. Build a body with a duel mount where it has the possibility of a lens line with a shorter flange distance. Their Alpha lens customers can use the camera as well as an opening for a future system.
V
Vivek
Guest
douglasf13
New member
I could see that as a possibility someday, although on-sensor PDAF isn't where it needs to be for a-mount lenses, yet. I guess that adapter for a-mount lenses could just have an SLT mirror, like the LA-EA2, but I think we're a ways out from such a thing.
V
Vivek
Guest
..and without any duels.* 
* I am assuming that you refer to the live view M and not the RF crippled (scratch that) er coupled ones when you say it will take pretty much any lens.
* I am assuming that you refer to the live view M and not the RF crippled (scratch that) er coupled ones when you say it will take pretty much any lens.
Godfrey
Well-known member
Well, the RF coupled ones take any lens too. Then, without RF coupled lenses, you just have scale focus. ];-)..and without any duels.*
* I am assuming that you refer to the live view M and not the RF crippled (scratch that) er coupled ones when you say it will take pretty much any lens.
I was shooting the M9 fitted with a Skink Zone Plate f/47 today. No focus necessary.
jonoslack
Active member
yes indeed, no duels (although they can be fun, especially with super soakers)...and without any duels.*
* I am assuming that you refer to the live view M and not the RF crippled (scratch that) er coupled ones when you say it will take pretty much any lens.
Of course, I like the crippled RF (but I'm not willing to fight a duel over it . . . actually Vivek - how about super-soakers at dawn in Antwerp next Thursday morning?)
But yes, I was referring to the live view M, which seems to be the FF mirrorless camera of choice (assuming that CMOSIS sensor is okay).
V
Vivek
Guest
Well, I had this thought about putting together a description of (old Leica) doodahs (no super-soakers/pinholes included) one can use on the new M (with liveview) that can not be done on the RF Ms. Not sure if that would be of any use to the general public though.
Godfrey
Well-known member
For me, I don't know about the old Leica doodahs.
What I will find useful is to be able to use my Micro-Nikkor 55/3.5, 105/2.8 and 200/4 as well as the lovely Nikkor-H 85/1.8. These are some of my favorite SLR lenses. I don't use them as much as I once might have, partly because they are best on a full 35mm format camera. But I'll never use them enough to warrant spending the bux for a D3/D700/D800/D600 body.
All of my other lenses are RF coupled, and of them the LiveView/EVF will be most useful for the 90 and 135mm focal lengths.
jonoslack
Active member
I'd have thought it'd be very useful . . . sounds like a lot of work though. I'm considering an e-book on walks in the southern White Mountains in Crete . . . sounds like a lot of work though!
douglasf13
New member
Of course, but $6995 for a camera body limits the audience quite a bit. $2-3K for a camera body is still very expensive by most accounts.
Either way, although I'm not ruling out buying an M next year, the truth is that, at my usual print sizes, I already have a very difficult time distinguishing between prints made from my FF and aps-c cameras, and I think we all fall a bit in to the trap of buying a 500hp car to drive to the grocery, so I'm not in a huge hurry to move back to FF.
dhsimmonds
New member
The very latest modern digital cameras are a far cry away from the necessity to use FF to obtain excellent useable images, so I agree totally with your thoughts here Douglas.Of course, but $6995 for a camera body limits the audience quite a bit. $2-3K for a camera body is still very expensive by most accounts.
Either way, although I'm not ruling out buying an M next year, the truth is that, at my usual print sizes, I already have a very difficult time distinguishing between prints made from my FF and aps-c cameras, and I think we all fall a bit in to the trap of buying a 500hp car to drive to the grocery, so I'm not in a huge hurry to move back to FF.
I have spent some time recently with both APSc and m4/3 (Olympus OM-D) and I am amazed at the detailed, clean images they produce even at high ISO's. Who would have thought that even three years ago that a little micro 4/3rds camera could produce high DR and clean images capable of printing quite comfortably to A3 size (18"x12") and all in a small light package with excellent lenses.
I think the best answer can be found in the NEX system lens line-up. NEX has been very well accepted by consumers. Yet after years of offering the line, Sony has yet to produce a lens line worthy of the capabilities of the bodies. CZ is helping them out, after years, availability still difficult. While the Sigma's offer great value, I can't see many purchasing one for a relatively expensive FF.
Throw in the reality that Sony is now in cost cutting mode, implemented well after the development of the RX-1 was near complete. I would not hold my breath for what people would like to see from Sony or believe is technically possible. The RX-1 is a very admirable product but it's not a system.
douglasf13
New member
The NEX lineup is pretty filled out now, I'd say, with the 10-18 and 35/1.8 coming soon. The 10-18, 24, 35 and 50 make for a good lineup. Digital cameras is one of the few places Sony has been doing well, so, if anything, I'd imagine that's where they'll direct resources.
Granted, I don't think FF NEX is coming anytime soon, either.