A mount comes to an end

[Annna T]

Hi there - well, that's certainly true . . . but it makes them bigger - I just wonder whether Sony rushed into the FF concept with the E mount without reflecting whether it would actually have been better to have re-designed a wider mount.

I have the same feeling. I think that Sony should keep two FF lines : the A7 series small bodies like the first version, with small but somewhat slower lenses (aka the digital RF equivalent) and then create mirrorless bodies for the A mount; then the ones needing faster but bigger lenses could get a better balanced body, one that may even be a little smaller than traditional pro DSLRs, but offering all the advantages of modern technology (aka mirrorless, with fast hybrid AF).

 

[Vivek]

Hi there - well, that's certainly true . . . but it makes them bigger - I just wonder whether Sony rushed into the FF concept with the E mount without reflecting whether it would actually have been better to have re-designed a wider mount.

One could say the same thing about the
Leica M mount.

They should have discarded the film era mount for a much wider mount for digital. Having a RF coupling in the optical path, shiny metal parts in lenses and all that is hardly helpful to get good IQ. Despite all the real fundamental problems, it is a real miracle that it is still surviving.

 

[iiiNelson]

I have the same feeling. I think that Sony should keep two FF lines : the A7 series small bodies like the first version, with small but somewhat slower lenses (aka the digital RF equivalent) and then create mirrorless bodies for the A mount; then the ones needing faster but bigger lenses could get a better balanced body, one that may even be a little smaller than traditional pro DSLRs, but offering all the advantages of modern technology (aka mirrorless, with fast hybrid AF).

That would be an option if it maintained short flange distance (which it couldn't if it was built for the A-mount) so that people had the ability to bolt any lens on the camera - otherwise there's less flexibility in the system than the FE...

Probably just makes a lot more sense to just build a more robust Professional FE body (A9 line) while maintaining the smaller A7 line than to try to build out another 35mm based system. Could you imagine listening to A/FE owners angry (appropriately so) about Sony shafting them for the newest system?

I'm pretty sure (or at least it appears to be) the plan is to build out lenses of different prices, sizes, and speeds in all the popular focal lengths so that people can choose what's best for them (sort of like Leica does it.) Maybe f/1.8 or f/2 will be the start for primes from here on out and f/4 seems to be the balance for zooms. After that you can build the faster f/1.4 or way too small for my hands to manually focus f/4 pancakes.

Truth is DSLR/DSLT is more of a technology test bed for Sony. The higher end cameras they make are as good as the competition when they were released but it's crazy how some say Sony releases bodies too fast regarding E/FE-mount and others are saying they aren't releasing them fast enough although they're pretty close to the standard3 year pro cycle regarding A-mount. I guess you're damned if you do or don't. Either case they really aren't going to cut in past the 5-10% market share on their best days in the DSLR market.

It would be nice (read: a dream) if Sony made an "affordable" mirrorless MF body/system that could shoot anything else with appropriate adapters, FE lenses, or A mount lenses natively with adapters in a crop mode. I'd be all over that but it's probably more of a pipe dream than anything.

 

[iiiNelson]

One could say the same thing about the
Leica M mount.

They should have discarded the film era mount for a much wider mount for digital. Having a RF coupling in the optical path, shiny metal parts in lenses and all that is hardly helpful to get good IQ. Despite all the real fundamental problems, it is a real miracle that it is still surviving.

I tend to agree except you can get damn good IQ with the Leica M - like most camera these days. Could you imagine Sony alienating those invested in E mount like Leica dropped the R mount altogether until a "solution" came about? Truth be told the FE line is a far better and more ergonomic solution than the M is or will be. No external EVF needed and the profiles are built into Lightroom already - but you don't get metadata.

What's best or what's the best fit for an individual is ultimately in the eye of the beholder though.

 

[uhoh7]

Truth be told the FE line is a far better and more ergonomic solution than the M is or will be.

There are three lenses in the FE mount near Summarit optical quality, and one good zoom.

Maybe we will have a 90 at that level also.

Ergonomic? Seems video is driving those designs, and even simple infinity stops are few and far between, no?

Overall, to my eyes, contest is not remotely close between M and E. Unless one needs an AF lens or wants a zoom, from 18 to 135, the M mount offers the most and best lenses of any mount, and that will not change for a good long time.

The mount width seems moot moving forward in EVIL configuration, with no more RF couples needed with a Sony body, and the new sensor stack options. Eventually new sensors will also deal better with high ray angles.

If resale is any indicator, the small ultra high quality Leica lenses have more future than E mount primes, the best of which are tuned to the thick, problematic stack of this particular generation of sony sensors.

The M lens quiver is there now. No need to wait to see what Sony decides is important next. And new lenses appear. What is the most exciting new lens at the moment, for me? In terms of images, it's the ZM35/1.4 shooting from the 240 platform (all I have seen yet). Close second is the CV15 v3 which is smoking hot on the 240.

More M lenses.

 

[iiiNelson]

There are three lenses in the FE mount near Summarit optical quality, and one good zoom.

Maybe we will have a 90 at that level also.

Ergonomic? Seems video is driving those designs, and even simple infinity stops are few and far between, no?

Overall, to my eyes, contest is not remotely close between M and E. Unless one needs an AF lens or wants a zoom, from 18 to 135, the M mount offers the most and best lenses of any mount, and that will not change for a good long time.

The mount width seems moot moving forward in EVIL configuration, with no more RF couples needed with a Sony body, and the new sensor stack options. Eventually new sensors will also deal better with high ray angles.

If resale is any indicator, the small ultra high quality Leica lenses have more future than E mount primes, the best of which are tuned to the thick, problematic stack of this particular generation of sony sensors.

The M lens quiver is there now. No need to wait to see what Sony decides is important next. And new lenses appear. What is the most exciting new lens at the moment, for me? In terms of images, it's the ZM35/1.4 shooting from the 240 platform (all I have seen yet). Close second is the CV15 v3 which is smoking hot on the 240.

More M lenses.

Sooo... You seem to miss the point that I was referring to the FE bodies compared to an M as an R solution. I also do not like the original Summarits at all so not a good comparison for me. I haven't touched the new ones since I no longer own an M body.

As for the M system great lenses and good to great cameras cameras but limited in flexibility. As for the best selection of lenses from any camera - no but what they offer ranks amongst the best compared to offerings from other companies. Marketing aside there are plenty of great offerings from a variety of manufacturers at more reasonable prices. Maybe the firmware updates have improved it but I passed on the M240 twice (and still have no desire to own one) in the past when compared to my M9-P that I sold about a year ago. It just wasn't for me and it wasn't as nice of a sensor as the FE bodies have.

I believe Leica may be one of the few companies in the world that can get away with charging more for receiving less.

 

[Vivek]

I tend to agree except you can get damn good IQ with the Leica M - like most camera these days.

If moire, unexpected flares (from the shiny metal bits), etc are not part of that IQ then, yes.

 

[iiiNelson]

If moire, unexpected flares (from the shiny metal bits), etc are not part of that IQ then, yes.

It's character and the rangefinder way... Well actually no moire is just annoying to borderline impossible to try and fix quickly. Don't make them send the ghost of HCB and other Magnum Masters after you!!!

 

[Vivek]

It's character and the rangefinder way... Well actually no moire is just annoying to borderline impossible to try and fix quickly. Don't make them send the ghost of HCB and other Magnum Masters after you!!!

Thanks for the reminder! I am going to have chills and that recurring nightmare again tonight! :facesmack: