Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5      
6
       end
  

Archive 2013 · Re-thinking MFT
  
 
mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #1 · p.6 #1 · Re-thinking MFT


ISO1600 wrote:
FF NEX will be stupid if people are planning/expecting to use DSLR-style large lenses on it. I think the real key for FF NEX will be smaller RF type (think M mount) lenses.


Until somebody comes out with a FM2n-sized FF DSLR there's still a great argument for using DSLR lenses on a FF Mirrorless. Plenty of good glass in FF isn't massive, especially for mid-speed primes in the 20-135mm range.

A FF NEX-9 with a set of Nikkor AI-S or Contax primes sounds very much like an ideal setup to me, and definitely not a large kit. Think 28/2.8 AI-S, 50/1.2 AI-S, 105/2.5 AI-S or 28/2.8D, 50/1.4P, 100/3.5S




Apr 26, 2013 at 12:16 PM
ISO1600
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #2 · p.6 #2 · Re-thinking MFT


That would be an awesome kit.


Apr 26, 2013 at 02:55 PM
Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #3 · p.6 #3 · Re-thinking MFT


Yes, but no AF.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



Apr 27, 2013 at 10:03 AM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #4 · p.6 #4 · Re-thinking MFT


I dont need AF.

And I wouldnt say "no" to option of having huge OVF with ability to MF with high precision (and including true DOF preview). Camera without AF can have bigger (and most important is, brighter) OVF.

Maybe Im not only one who would like such camera?



Apr 27, 2013 at 04:38 PM
Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #5 · p.6 #5 · Re-thinking MFT


I'm re-evaluating M4/3 was well.

I may bail on it and instead buy a RX100 or G1X (or future replacement).

I keep going back to my G10 for convenience, even though it has a much smaller sensor than M4/3. By comparison, both these formats are minuscule compared to DSLR (FF is my favorite). M4/3 is much bulkier than a large sensor P&S. It just doesn't make sense for cost and size to carry both M4/3 and DSLR, whereas the P&S type just slips in a small space.

I do like AF for a P&S, and if I'm going to be methodical or use MF, it may as well be with a larger sensor.

No prejudice against others choosing M4/3 or other formats. I've seen some very good work in all formats including tiny P&S.

Anyway, that's what's going through my head regarding M4/3 or other interchangeable lens system outside of EOS.



Apr 27, 2013 at 04:59 PM
Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #6 · p.6 #6 · Re-thinking MFT


Mescalamba wrote:
I dont need AF.

And I wouldnt say "no" to option of having huge OVF with ability to MF with high precision (and including true DOF preview). Camera without AF can have bigger (and most important is, brighter) OVF.

Maybe Im not only one who would like such camera?


I want both.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



Apr 27, 2013 at 05:17 PM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #7 · p.6 #7 · Re-thinking MFT


Yakim Peled wrote:
I want both.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.


Hm, not possible I think. You would need AF sensors somewhere in pentaprism area. Or you need bigger sensor (and as consequence, bigger OVF). Something like Leica S.



Apr 27, 2013 at 09:22 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #8 · p.6 #8 · Re-thinking MFT


Why?

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



Apr 28, 2013 at 10:45 PM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #9 · p.6 #9 · Re-thinking MFT


Many have walked that path and failed, I am sure, Yakim.

Mawz, stop making sense ;-) That's my go too. C'mon Sony we know you can do it..actually the new Sony chief has sacrificed a couple of Alpha models in pursuit of more 'innovation'. That's a better road for them to travel.



Apr 28, 2013 at 10:49 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #10 · p.6 #10 · Re-thinking MFT


Yakim Peled wrote:
Why?

Happy shooting,
Yakim.


AF is currently typically implemented by having a small, secondary mirror behind the primary mirror, and a semi-transparent (not translucent, Sony!) area which lets some light through to hit the smaller mirror, and then the AF sensors on the floor of the mirrorbox. There may be other ways to do this. Anyway, thus some of the light is not used to make a bright image in the OVF, but to focus.



Apr 30, 2013 at 08:35 AM
Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #11 · p.6 #11 · Re-thinking MFT


Well, up to now I thought OVF in DSLR are bright enough...

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



Apr 30, 2013 at 10:20 AM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.6 #12 · p.6 #12 · Re-thinking MFT


People are always going to moan about VFs of any kind short of a HUD from an F-15. If I used a OVF today I would want the Mamiya 7's polarised one. I bet a lot of photos got shot just because the VF made the scene look so good. Any APS-C OVF looks a bit tunnel-like. They all work though. People are spoilt and want the camera to 'come to them', not the other way around.


Apr 30, 2013 at 10:48 AM
Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #13 · p.6 #13 · Re-thinking MFT


I'll tell you after I use the Mamiya 7... In the meantime, Canon's FF OVF's (and 7D) are my standards.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.



Apr 30, 2013 at 11:03 AM
1       2       3              5      
6
       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5      
6
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password