p.17 #2Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
edwardkaraa wrote:
I don't think that shifted micro lenses are more difficult to design and produce. Heck if Leica and Ricoh can do it, so should Sony.
I think, for wides you need them more tilted and for teles more straight. That could be a problem.
p.17 #3Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
wfrank wrote:
You're probably right. But when I think about it I see some faint reasons for hope not easily giving up. Think about it, a somewhat retro-styled FF NEX appearing more like the RX1, perhaps even more retro (and nowhere close to the 7). And *with* the possibility to house renowned Leica and Zeiss glass as a complement to a few AF lenses by Sony/Zeiss. 2 years from now there would be 3 models to choose from, the classic original, an AA-less 2nd version and the then brand new improved in all aspects. Leica would not have been able to do anything, still fixed screen, same sensor but ok the red dot is there.
Of course I am not with Sony but if I were I could easily see myself producing a compelling 10 page powerpoint with the pro's of that approach.
EDIT, ...and some backward looking guy from the point-and-shoot dept could do the cons PPT :-)
p.17 #4Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
edwardkaraa wrote:
I don't think that shifted micro lenses are more difficult to design and produce. Heck if Leica and Ricoh can do it, so should Sony.
CMOSIS also had to change the geometry of the pixel wells and whatnot with a special CMOS design (which apparently wasn't an issue on the smaller sensor Ricoh.) Maybe Sony could use an EXMOR R sensor to achieve a similar goal, but I'm not expecting it.
p.17 #5Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
H.Lux wrote: edwardkaraa wroteI don't think that shifted micro lenses are more difficult to design and produce. Heck if Leica and Ricoh can do it, so should Sony.I think, for wides you need them more tilted and for teles more straight. That could be a problem.
I think so too, but there is no problem with the Leica M9 and lenses up to 135mm. I'm sure there will be guys wanting to use their 1200mm lenses on the FF Nex, but realistically, I think not many will use longer lenses than say 85mm.
p.17 #6Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote: wfrank wroteYou're probably right. But when I think about it I see some faint reasons for hope not easily giving up. Think about it, a somewhat retro-styled FF NEX appearing more like the RX1, perhaps even more retro (and nowhere close to the 7). And *with* the possibility to house renowned Leica and Zeiss glass as a complement to a few AF lenses by Sony/Zeiss. 2 years from now there would be 3 models to choose from, the classic original, an AA-less 2nd version and the then brand new improved in all aspects. Leica would not have been able to do anything, still fixed screen, same sensor but ok the red dot is there.
Of course I am not with Sony but if I were I could easily see myself producing a compelling 10 page powerpoint with the pro's of that approach.
EDIT, ...and some backward looking guy from the point-and-shoot dept could do the cons PPT :-)I think the main motivation to shoot digital Leica is still strong with most of its users: the rangefinder.
Right. But what would you do: 5 yr+ battle with Nikon and Canon DSLR lost. Lets challenge a top-tier segment to in the future attack them from above. Make a series of cameras and sponsor some high profile photographers to showcase and cement the qualities Sony in effect already are able to provide - skip sport and attack fashion, street and art. Nikon and Canon are fat and ugly they wont notice anything. Leica is too slow to react and wont even be interested, just make sure to enable their M-range so "we" dont have to spend billions in a full set of FF lenses on a crop mount.
The cameras will and should be expensive so they can carry their own cost - and to showcase the value proposition. Pricewise like the unsuccessful albeit capable FF DSLR range, but now Sony also enter new grounds. Leica folks are often techies, they will notice. They have accepted digital, why not further broaden some minds. If it provides some tangible benefits.
Perhaps faint hope, but it is there as I see it. Business as usual for the high end is for Canon, Nikon and in this case also Leica. But not for Sony. I hope.
p.17 #7Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
I think if the new ff sensor turned out to be not rf friendly, then only because the tech is not available/mature yet. Sony will not be afraid that legacy lens affects the their own lens sales because for vast majority of consumers AF is a must. The reasons Sony would still want to improve the sensitivity of their sensors to oblique rays are:
1. reduction of lens size.
2. improved light transmission for large aperture lenses(1.2, 1.4)
The small throat size combined with short flange distance could be a problem for longer lens with exit purple further away from the sensor. But I haven't seen any examples of mechanical vignetting using long lenses on the vg900.
p.17 #8Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote: edwardkaraa wroteI don't think that shifted micro lenses are more difficult to design and produce. Heck if Leica and Ricoh can do it, so should Sony.CMOSIS also had to change the geometry of the pixel wells and whatnot with a special CMOS design (which apparently wasn't an issue on the smaller sensor Ricoh.) Maybe Sony could use an EXMOR R sensor to achieve a similar goal, but I'm not expecting it.
True but the M doesn't feature offset microlenses. Leica claimed this design is better and allows the use of very long telephoto a from the R line. In reality the M doesn't seem to be as good as the M9 with wides so maybe leica was over optimistic with the new design.
p.17 #9Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote: edwardkaraa wroteRegarding the M mount lens compatibility with the sensor: I have been looking at the narrow E mount and how the FF sensor in the VG900 has the corners covered by the mount, it is almost a certainty that rear elements of lenses have to be inside the mount to avoid vignetting, so the sensor of the Nex FF has to have good performance with oblique rays. There is no other way. So that gives some hope for M lenses.Those pics are a bit of an optical illusion, in that the sensor isn't quite as close to the mount as it looks. The mount is slightly larger than Leica M, Nikon F, etc., but it is closer to the sensor, and that's the problem that theSuede has been getting at. More tele centric lenses, like SLR lenses will be ok, but that is also going to lead to longer, more SLR+adapter sized native lenses, unless Sony does something drastic to the sensor. I think the rumor of the native 35/2.8 indicates that short lenses aren't going to be easy on the FF NEX....Show more →
I think his point wasn't that the e-mount mandates telecentric lenses but rather the sensor requires it. That poses a problem because telecentric lenses have exit pupils further away from the sensor and might require bigger throat size to avoid vignetting. In contrast, symmetric lenses would be ok because the more oblique light can reach the corners behind the lens mount easier.
p.17 #10Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
They have said it will be little larger than the NEX7 so that in my view cuts out heavy lenses. Like it or not, it is a Leica M competitor.
The time is right, with digital few people want the old coach built bodies that lasted decades, when the internals are outdated in what 2-3 generations of electronics? Say 5-6 years..they do want super quality and performance at a fair price.
Leica is already struggling to keep up, and offering a rangefinder as a point of differentiation as an offset to a better performing, more versatile, still well made but cheaper camera does not seem like a business model with a long life ahead of it.
In several years, the transition from everyone using the same 'sensor' (i.e. film) with dedicated lens 'systems' (Leica model) - to sensor driven technologies (too numerous to list soon) where the best can have a big advantage will maybe be seen as the turning point, along with mount independence for lenses. 'Any lens on any mount' puts sensor and related tech solidly in the driving seat. That is Sony territory, if it can be made to work.
wilhelm, yes, all of that. They will likely work relentlessly on EVF technology and AF, but also (I hope) on MF lens friendly design.
I expect them to just roll along on DSLR lines, they have already done the yards and paid the price (SLT, EVF), so now just add better/high Mp sensors and lose the SLT, service the (small) base. They cannot win this, back to the lens lineup issue, isn't it?
p.17 #11Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
edwardkaraa wrote: douglasf13 wroteedwardkaraa wroteI don't think that shifted micro lenses are more difficult to design and produce. Heck if Leica and Ricoh can do it, so should Sony.CMOSIS also had to change the geometry of the pixel wells and whatnot with a special CMOS design (which apparently wasn't an issue on the smaller sensor Ricoh.) Maybe Sony could use an EXMOR R sensor to achieve a similar goal, but I'm not expecting it.True but the M doesn't feature offset microlenses. Leica claimed this design is better and allows the use of very long telephoto a from the R line. In reality the M doesn't seem to be as good as the M9 with wides so maybe leica was over optimistic with the new design.
They're not offset, but they're an unusual oblong design.
p.17 #12Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Nanh wrote: douglasf13 wroteedwardkaraa wroteRegarding the M mount lens compatibility with the sensor: I have been looking at the narrow E mount and how the FF sensor in the VG900 has the corners covered by the mount, it is almost a certainty that rear elements of lenses have to be inside the mount to avoid vignetting, so the sensor of the Nex FF has to have good performance with oblique rays. There is no other way. So that gives some hope for M lenses.Those pics are a bit of an optical illusion, in that the sensor isn't quite as close to the mount as it looks. The mount is slightly larger than Leica M, Nikon F, etc., but it is closer to the sensor, and that's the problem that theSuede has been getting at. More tele centric lenses, like SLR lenses will be ok, but that is also going to lead to longer, more SLR+adapter sized native lenses, unless Sony does something drastic to the sensor. I think the rumor of the native 35/2.8 indicates that short lenses aren't going to be easy on the FF NEX.I think his point wasn't that the e-mount mandates telecentric lenses but rather the sensor requires it. That poses a problem because telecentric lenses have exit pupils further away from the sensor and might require bigger throat size to avoid vignetting. In contrast, symmetric lenses would be ok because the more oblique light can reach the corners behind the lens mount easier.
Yeah, that's what I mean. The sensor + throat size + registration distance is the issue.
p.17 #13Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
wfrank wrote: douglasf13 wrotewfrank wroteYou're probably right. But when I think about it I see some faint reasons for hope not easily giving up. Think about it, a somewhat retro-styled FF NEX appearing more like the RX1, perhaps even more retro (and nowhere close to the 7). And *with* the possibility to house renowned Leica and Zeiss glass as a complement to a few AF lenses by Sony/Zeiss. 2 years from now there would be 3 models to choose from, the classic original, an AA-less 2nd version and the then brand new improved in all aspects. Leica would not have been able to do anything, still fixed screen, same sensor but ok the red dot is there.
Of course I am not with Sony but if I were I could easily see myself producing a compelling 10 page powerpoint with the pro's of that approach.
EDIT, ...and some backward looking guy from the point-and-shoot dept could do the cons PPT :-)I think the main motivation to shoot digital Leica is still strong with most of its users: the rangefinder.Right. But what would you do: 5 yr+ battle with Nikon and Canon DSLR lost. Lets challenge a top-tier segment to in the future attack them from above. Make a series of cameras and sponsor some high profile photographers to showcase and cement the qualities Sony in effect already are able to provide - skip sport and attack fashion, street and art. Nikon and Canon are fat and ugly they wont notice anything. Leica is too slow to react and wont even be interested, just make sure to enable their M-range so "we" dont have to spend billions in a full set of FF lenses on a crop mount.
The cameras will and should be expensive so they can carry their own cost - and to showcase the value proposition. Pricewise like the unsuccessful albeit capable FF DSLR range, but now Sony also enter new grounds. Leica folks are often techies, they will notice. They have accepted digital, why not further broaden some minds. If it provides some tangible benefits.
Perhaps faint hope, but it is there as I see it. Business as usual for the high end is for Canon, Nikon and in this case also Leica. But not for Sony. I hope.
I hear you, but I think Sony would want to sell Leica users the Sony/Zeiss lenses, too, for better or worse, so I'm not sure that they're going out of their way to cater to M wides, especially when all of the other SLR lenses in the world will work fine.
p.17 #14Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
I finally had to break down and buy a new Sony emount.
The sigma eight – 16, is pretty darn good, though I'd like it to be sharper, and it is a real pig. You don't want to hike with it, and you don't want to ride with it. Works good for real estate though, :-)
So I bit the bullet, and bought the new 10 – 18. So far, I'm happy, and it is very light. Wish it was full frame :-(
Anyway, I don't know where everyone gets the idea that lenses are where the money is. Now, lenses are where the money "stays", I'll give you that :-)
And that's exactly the point, you don't need to go around upgrading your lenses all that often. Once you have a good set, that is. Bodies, on the other hand, are not going to last.
Douglas is probably right, but its too bad sony doesn't notice that small third-party Wides are the cats meow. Well, I'm sure they do notice…
CV is a Japanese company now,?
Seriously, what is the point of a nice light body with a heavy SLR lens on it? It either has to be better, or cheaper, and I'm still going to curse it every time I pick it up.
I agree that the nexseven build does not feel good. Very plasticy, unlike the 5n. But they do seem fairly tough. Which brings me to my last whine why the heck do we need optical stabilization? I prefer some more weatherproofing :-)
If your subjects aren't moving and it's really dark, okay I guess so.
p.17 #15Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
uhoh7 wrote:
... my last whine why the heck do we need optical stabilization? I prefer some more weatherproofing :-)
Optical stabilization made sense when it was impractical to move film around but now that sensor-based stabilization is common, the intentional decentering, limited stabilization axes and optical compromises of OIS ought to be things of the past.
p.17 #16Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote:
I hear you, but I think Sony would want to sell Leica users the Sony/Zeiss lenses, too, for better or worse, so I'm not sure that they're going out of their way to cater to M wides, especially when all of the other SLR lenses in the world will work fine.
Ok but my point is that M-lenses counts for 98% of the interesting universe given size and quality.
The average-Joe Canon-FD/Minolta or whatever isnt the focus here and will never be even for the majority of us here in the alt group.
p.17 #17Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
wfrank wrote: douglasf13 wroteI hear you, but I think Sony would want to sell Leica users the Sony/Zeiss lenses, too, for better or worse, so I'm not sure that they're going out of their way to cater to M wides, especially when all of the other SLR lenses in the world will work fine.Ok but my point is that M-lenses counts for 98% of the interesting universe given size and quality.
The average-Joe Canon-FD/Minolta or whatever isnt the focus here and will never be even for the majority of us here in the alt group.
It's still a small sample, likely. FWIW, this forum used to be primarily Leica R, Zuiko, Contax C/Y, Takumar, FD, MD/MC, etc, users.
p.17 #18Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
You rarely see those lenses on Leicas which is a crucial part of the point I fail to get through.
FWIW I have yet to put a CY (though I have a cream set) on my NEX, I use Contax G and CVs solely because of size. I know others do (sometimes) but then thats because we are at this forum.
p.17 #19Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
wfrank wrote:
You rarely see those lenses on Leicas which is a crucial part of the point I fail to get through.
FWIW I have yet to put a CY (though I have a cream set) on my NEX, I use Contax G and CVs solely because of size. I know others do (sometimes) but then thats because we are at this forum.
Yeah, maybe I misunderstood your point. I'm just saying that, overall, M lens users are a relatively small subset of manual lens users, and manual lens users are a relatively small subset of DSLR/Mirrorless users, so I'm not sure Sony will have the motivation to improve the sensor enough for M lenses, at least in this first generation.
p.17 #20Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote:
I'm just saying that, overall, M lens users are a relatively small subset of manual lens users, and manual lens users are a relatively small subset of DSLR/Mirrorless users, so I'm not sure Sony will have the motivation to improve the sensor enough for M lenses, at least in this first generation.
My point exactly. Plus, Sony expect to make money on lenses for its new camera. An earnings stream which is already at risk from Sigma in anothe rmarket segment.