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!
A fixed lens MF rangefinder with an expensive sensor behind one lens or few lenses is a non starter.If anything made sense that would be it, but I don't think it does...for various reasons...
Actually I am very interested in MF, but larger medium format and with medium format/large format functionality I am used to. Tilt shift, various viewfinders, rotating backs and film support (or film body option).There are those still very interested in MF even if you aren't Fred.
-Marc
I could see Fuji making a mirrorless system with interchangeable tilt shift lenses.But it most likely won't be resurrecting the GX680. I see them more likely to make a MFD mirrorless or rangefinder.
It's the most important part of this thread I think together with the "Its all about the lens" topic. I have made this bokeh test with the Phase DF and RZ lenses. I'm using the RZ most of the time, that image is what I'm looking for as a photographer. Why do we need 80mpx when the lens has only 5 blades and ugly bokeh?The absolute best thing about this thread is that we have not mentioned pixel, peep, mtf curve, or lines per blah blah once. Not once.
I think this is part of the issue is no one is going to build anything for stuff you can buy on e-bay. Just no money in it for them. First and foremost these MF companies are running a business not a charity case we need to realize that out of the gate. They build any bodies it will be for the most profitable avenue they can take and that will usually mean for there latest and greatest backs and lenses. Im sorry to say folks but I see no love for anything legacy these OEMs are going to build. You won't see a new RZ or a new Fuji in jumbo size with a 6x6 sensor either. They will continue to build bodies that actually may get smaller and more competitive. Don't we really all bitch about the size of these things, sure we love you Fuji and RZ guys but you really are a minority to the OEMS. I think we will still see the 645 format and you will not see mirrors anymore and you won't see shutters at all in these new and upcoming bodies. They will be able to shrink the sizes taking those out, they are dated to film which we no longer need a shutter and certainly mirrors could be history as well ( for all intensive purposes film is dead no one is even going to support it come these new bodies). What you may see is CMOS and live view like a A77 cam for instance. For tech cams you just open the shutter than close for capture (maybe).The absolute best thing about this thread is that we have not mentioned pixel, peep, mtf curve, or lines per blah blah once. Not once.
This is a debate about cameras and what photographers need as their tool of choice. I compromise every day with my 645df, but I love it, even if it plays up sometimes. I just want to help the MF players make a better product. They really can't do it without us shouting advice.
Surely a new camera body that allowed legacy backs and existing lenses to still work in some way would be a good idea. I know there are loads of backs on eBay and loads of people who would prefer to use MF if they could afford to.
I partly agree, but sensors are getting larger, aren't they, although slowly? There was nothing the size of an IQ180 ten years ago was it? Add 13.5mm to the shortest side, and we're practically there, at least with regards to a square sensor. The most important reason why it probably won't happen is that nobody makes a modern camera body for square sensors. There's the H-series and the RZ more or less still in production, but I doubt that anybody would have the guts to take the development costs for a sensor made for camera designs that are decades old.I think this is part of the issue is no one is going to build anything for stuff you can buy on e-bay. Just no money in it for them. First and foremost these MF companies are running a business not a charity case we need to realize that out of the gate. They build any bodies it will be for the most profitable avenue they can take and that will usually mean for there latest and greatest backs and lenses. Im sorry to say folks but I see no love for anything legacy these OEMs are going to build. You won't see a new RZ or a new Fuji in jumbo size with a 6x6 sensor either. They will continue to build bodies that actually may get smaller and more competitive. Don't we really all bitch about the size of these things, sure we love you Fuji and RZ guys but you really are a minority to the OEMS. I think we will still see the 645 format and you will not see mirrors anymore and you won't see shutters at all in these new and upcoming bodies. They will be able to shrink the sizes taking those out, they are dated to film which we no longer need a shutter and certainly mirrors could be history as well ( for all intensive purposes film is dead no one is even going to support it come these new bodies). What you may see is CMOS and live view like a A77 cam for instance. For tech cams you just open the shutter than close for capture (maybe).
Im sorry I just don't see bigger sensors being made as the costs would be higher than what they are producing today. At least thats my take on whats going to happen. Find out probably at Photokinia.
I'm going to put on my geek hat for a minute, but before I do let me point out that there are far more qualified people to answer that question. Without going into too much detail, putting more photosites on a small chip is a relatively minor R&D and production expense. By and large, it scales with Moore's Law providing that things like test and measurement are able to keep up. Going to a physically larger sensor requires larger dies, larger wafers, new machines, new technologies and possibly new factories.I partly agree, but sensors are getting larger, aren't they, although slowly? There was nothing the size of an IQ180 ten years ago was it?
I was thinking sensor size, not the number of pixels. The number of pixels are going up, which is fine with me, but I still use 7 and 12 MP cameras and film, so the 200 MP forecast (which I'm sure is realistic) doesn't really bring out the big excitement. Larger sensors on the other handI'm going to put on my geek hat for a minute, but before I do let me point out that there are far more qualified people to answer that question. Without going into too much detail, putting more photosites on a small chip is a relatively minor R&D and production expense. By and large, it scales with Moore's Law providing that things like test and measurement are able to keep up. Going to a physically larger sensor requires larger dies, larger wafers, new machines, new technologies and possibly new factories.
What this means in plain language is you will probably see a 200 mp DSLR before you see an 80 mp 6x7, though the latter is fun to think about. As Guy pointed out, large sensors really aren't in the cards until there is a major shift in manufacturing technology away from silicon wafers.
Makes me want to break out my RZ/Valeo 22 again. I forgot what I was missingI think the idea of a second phase body that is RZ-like is brilliant... one that also takes their current 645 lenses so that you have the choice of a "box" camera or an "SLR" form factor (current body), but can re-purpose the 645 lenses on either according to your shooting style or job requirements. I'd look very hard at getting back into MF with a body like an RZ that didn't feel as cumbersome when teamed with digital.
More to the point... the MF companies should really make themselves as different from 35mm as possible at this point. Full frame sensors only, better bodies (and multiple type bodies with same back/lens mount). With the used market so flooded, why not make fewer back choices but with more compelling body choices?
Did I say that I thought an RZ styled 645 body that takes Phase lenses/backs was a brilliant idea?
Seems like a great time for them to differentiate. I bet even a 22mp back with the latest electronics/screens/interface would sell if at a good price. When I come back to an MF body in the future, I won't need 80mp... I just want the look/draw of the lenses and those beautiful colors and details I got from my previous aptus @ 28mp (or 40).
Frankly Guy is right (I didn't quote the whole statement it's worth reading). I am playing with the A77 and already tried (and sold) the Nex7. The A77 has an electronically simulated 'front shutter'. That means there is no phyiscal shutter opening. The shutter only closes to end the exposure. That means zero, absolutely zero movement in the system, none, nada, niente. So Sony have three things I want in my MF Camera. Focus peaking, Superior live view with instant focus area magnification when I grab the focus ring and simulated front curtain. If you've not actually picked up an Nex7, there's a button you press it and grab the focus ring. The camera zooms to the focus spot AND gives focus peaking, you release the shutter and done.... bodies that actually may get smaller and more competitive. Don't we really all bitch about the size of these things...you will not see mirrors anymore and you won't see shutters at all in these new and upcoming bodies ... CMOS and live view like a A77 cam for instance....