This topic is in the 2013 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2013Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
p.9 #1Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote:
I just ran into this interview with Mark Weir again from last fall, and it has some good info about FF and future Sony cameras: Link
Yeah Douglas, I read that at the time.
Quote Mr. Weir:
... I think what those who are suggesting that a full-frame E-mount camera be developed is a full frame E-mount camera together with E-mount lenses that would operate with it and offer full frame coverage. And all one has to do is to look at the RX1 disassembled model and see the optical challenge that would represent...
I translate that as: Sure, we can make a FF NEX, but to produce FF E-mount lenses would be very difficult. So maybe a FF NEX with APS-C E-mount lenses and an LA-EAx adapter for FF A-mount lenses is what we can expect.
I just ran into this interview with Mark Weir again from last fall, and it has some good info about FF and future Sony cameras: Link
Yeah Douglas, I read that at the time.
Quote Mr. Weir:
... I think what those who are suggesting that a full-frame E-mount camera be developed is a full frame E-mount camera together with E-mount lenses that would operate with it and offer full frame coverage. And all one has to do is to look at the RX1 disassembled model and see the optical challenge that would represent...
I translate that as: Sure, we can make a FF NEX, but to produce FF E-mount lenses would be very difficult. So maybe a FF NEX with APS-C E-mount lenses and an LA-EAx adapter for FF A-mount lenses is what we can expect.
Jul 10, 2013 at 01:07 PM
p.9 #2Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
And that's the only 35mm lens for 135 that has a rear element that big, so I very much doubt that a NEX FF lens will have a rear element that big, which is why they should be R&Ding their collective butts off trying to find solutions to the corner smearing & color shift that the FF sensor would have with traditional designs, maybe Aptina has a solution Sony hasn't thought of that was in the sharing of information agreement.
Jul 10, 2013 at 01:30 PM
p.9 #3Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Mescalamba wrote:
If Im correct, Leica R converters can be converted to Nikon F. No reason why it shouldnt be possible for Sony. Just ask "worldinlens".
I had that discussion with him in the Leica-R thread- his conclusion was that it's not possible.
While I don't have a lens as demanding as the 280/4, I've been perfectly content moving from the Leica 1.4x to a Minolta 1.4x (which I dumbed down by reversibly removing the electronics and focusing mechanism and rechipping for 400/4). I think the results look just as good on the 250/4 and 180/2.8 as they do with the Leica, and, because the recessed front element on the Minolta, it works with R lenses that the Leica doesn't, like the Elmarit 135 and 100 Mac. I don't use it with those two lens, but I tested out the 100 Mac and the biggest change it made was in taming the bokeh. It also pairs up really nicely with the Nikon AI-ED 300/2.8.
The 2x is another story. Leica made a very good 2x APO at a time when 2xs in general kind of sucked (even their first attempt at a 2x kind of sucked). I don't use the 2x that often and am willing to work around the Minolta's problems, but the Leica was markedly better.
If Im correct, Leica R converters can be converted to Nikon F. No reason why it shouldnt be possible for Sony. Just ask "worldinlens".
I had that discussion with him in the Leica-R thread- his conclusion was that it's not possible.
While I don't have a lens as demanding as the 280/4, I've been perfectly content moving from the Leica 1.4x to a Minolta 1.4x (which I dumbed down by reversibly removing the electronics and focusing mechanism and rechipping for 400/4). I think the results look just as good on the 250/4 and 180/2.8 as they do with the Leica, and, because the recessed front element on the Minolta, it works with R lenses that the Leica doesn't, like the Elmarit 135 and 100 Mac. I don't use it with those two lens, but I tested out the 100 Mac and the biggest change it made was in taming the bokeh. It also pairs up really nicely with the Nikon AI-ED 300/2.8.
The 2x is another story. Leica made a very good 2x APO at a time when 2xs in general kind of sucked (even their first attempt at a 2x kind of sucked). I don't use the 2x that often and am willing to work around the Minolta's problems, but the Leica was markedly better.
Jul 10, 2013 at 01:46 PM
p.9 #4Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
LightShow wrote:
And that's the only 35mm lens for 135 that has a rear element that big, so I very much doubt that a NEX FF lens will have a rear element that big, which is why they should be R&Ding their collective butts off trying to find solutions to the corner smearing & color shift that the FF sensor would have with traditional designs, maybe Aptina has a solution Sony hasn't thought of that was in the sharing of information agreement.
Maybe they're getting some help from Oly on this. They've been producing small lenses for decades and have experience with short registration distances.
And that's the only 35mm lens for 135 that has a rear element that big, so I very much doubt that a NEX FF lens will have a rear element that big, which is why they should be R&Ding their collective butts off trying to find solutions to the corner smearing & color shift that the FF sensor would have with traditional designs, maybe Aptina has a solution Sony hasn't thought of that was in the sharing of information agreement.
Maybe they're getting some help from Oly on this. They've been producing small lenses for decades and have experience with short registration distances.
Jul 10, 2013 at 02:25 PM
p.9 #5Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
freaklikeme wrote:
Maybe they're getting some help from Oly on this. They've been producing small lenses for decades and have experience with short registration distances.
m4/3 sensors don't handle angled light rays very well at all, and old lenses designed for film don't apply here. In fact, the whole thrust of 4/3s lenses was to design them as telecentric as possible. The bottom line is that, if Sony uses the same mount for a FF NEX, and they don't significantly improve their sensor's ability with angled light rays, then native FF NEX lenses will be relatively large.
What I personally think that Sony will do is make a FF NEX with the current e-mount that auto-crops current e-mount lenses, and they'll figure out some kind of LA-EA4 adapter for a-mount lenses. They'll probably also start work on some native lenses for the system, and they'll be pretty large.
Essentially, I think the new camera will be a VG900 in a smaller camera body that is geared towards still photography. It should be great with legacy SLR lenses, and iffy with M lenses. Just a hunch.
LightShow wrote
And that's the only 35mm lens for 135 that has a rear element that big, so I very much doubt that a NEX FF lens will have a rear element that big, which is why they should be R&Ding their collective butts off trying to find solutions to the corner smearing & color shift that the FF sensor would have with traditional designs, maybe Aptina has a solution Sony hasn't thought of that was in the sharing of information agreement.m4/3 sensors don't handle angled light rays very well at all, and old lenses designed for film don't apply here. In fact, the whole thrust of 4/3s lenses was to design them as telecentric as possible. The bottom line is that, if Sony uses the same mount for a FF NEX, and they don't significantly improve their sensor's ability with angled light rays, then native FF NEX lenses will be relatively large.
What I personally think that Sony will do is make a FF NEX with the current e-mount that auto-crops current e-mount lenses, and they'll figure out some kind of LA-EA4 adapter for a-mount lenses. They'll probably also start work on some native lenses for the system, and they'll be pretty large.
Essentially, I think the new camera will be a VG900 in a smaller camera body that is geared towards still photography. It should be great with legacy SLR lenses, and iffy with M lenses. Just a hunch.
Jul 10, 2013 at 05:41 PM
p.9 #6Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote:
m4/3 sensors don't handle angled light rays very well at all, and old lenses designed for film don't apply here. In fact, the whole thrust of 4/3s lenses was to design them as telecentric as possible. The bottom line is that, if Sony uses the same mount for a FF NEX, and they don't significantly improve their sensor's ability with angled light rays, then native FF NEX lenses will be relatively large.
So I don't disagree with your statements about M4/3s, though I think in many ways, Oly and Panny set themselves up for a hard time with their choice in size of sensor. Just getting a regular 35mm field of view requires going deep into ultrawide design. However, I think you're greatly underestimating Sony's willingness to "patch" sensor performance with software corrections, a direction they're already going in with the APS-C lenses, and it's something which Sony, Panny, Oly, and Leica have all implemented somewhat successfully. I don't know about Fuji (though given the difference between the 18/2 RAW files I've seen versus the JPEGs, I'd say they do) or Samsung or the lensors on the GXR, but it would surprise me if those cameras went without any corrections possible on their native lenses. The goal no longer appears to be great performance but the appearance of great performance.
I honestly wish they would take a long hard look at old lenses designed for film cameras, particularly the relatively small ones like OM. If they kept the rear element recessed and used the additional length for the helicoid and light baffles to control stray light, there wouldn't be the need for heavy software correction. They wouldn't be RF-tiny, but they don't have to be ZA 24 + adapter huge either. I'm not saying you could just dust off the OM lens designs and transplant them (although I'd love to see them do just that with the 40/2), but for an enthusiast, they'd likely be more than good enough. Zeiss will handle the high end, and those lenses will be huge.
douglasf13 wrote:
What I personally think that Sony will do is make a FF NEX with the current e-mount that auto-crops current e-mount lenses, and they'll figure out some kind of LA-EA4 adapter for a-mount lenses. They'll probably also start work on some native lenses for the system, and they'll be pretty large.
Essentially, I think the new camera will be a VG900 in a smaller camera body that is geared towards still photography. It should be great with legacy SLR lenses, and iffy with M lenses. Just a hunch.
Agreed. I'd be thrilled if we got the VG900 performance in a larger NEX-7 like package. My pre-ASPH Summilux 35 and Summarit 75 looked great on the VG in our local Sony Store, and those are the only two that are important to me. But I think we're going to see a lot of "Look at how crappy the CV 15/ZM 18/Elmar 24/Biogon-C 35 is on this thing" posts next year.
m4/3 sensors don't handle angled light rays very well at all, and old lenses designed for film don't apply here. In fact, the whole thrust of 4/3s lenses was to design them as telecentric as possible. The bottom line is that, if Sony uses the same mount for a FF NEX, and they don't significantly improve their sensor's ability with angled light rays, then native FF NEX lenses will be relatively large.
So I don't disagree with your statements about M4/3s, though I think in many ways, Oly and Panny set themselves up for a hard time with their choice in size of sensor. Just getting a regular 35mm field of view requires going deep into ultrawide design. However, I think you're greatly underestimating Sony's willingness to "patch" sensor performance with software corrections, a direction they're already going in with the APS-C lenses, and it's something which Sony, Panny, Oly, and Leica have all implemented somewhat successfully. I don't know about Fuji (though given the difference between the 18/2 RAW files I've seen versus the JPEGs, I'd say they do) or Samsung or the lensors on the GXR, but it would surprise me if those cameras went without any corrections possible on their native lenses. The goal no longer appears to be great performance but the appearance of great performance.
I honestly wish they would take a long hard look at old lenses designed for film cameras, particularly the relatively small ones like OM. If they kept the rear element recessed and used the additional length for the helicoid and light baffles to control stray light, there wouldn't be the need for heavy software correction. They wouldn't be RF-tiny, but they don't have to be ZA 24 + adapter huge either. I'm not saying you could just dust off the OM lens designs and transplant them (although I'd love to see them do just that with the 40/2), but for an enthusiast, they'd likely be more than good enough. Zeiss will handle the high end, and those lenses will be huge.
douglasf13 wrote:
What I personally think that Sony will do is make a FF NEX with the current e-mount that auto-crops current e-mount lenses, and they'll figure out some kind of LA-EA4 adapter for a-mount lenses. They'll probably also start work on some native lenses for the system, and they'll be pretty large.
Essentially, I think the new camera will be a VG900 in a smaller camera body that is geared towards still photography. It should be great with legacy SLR lenses, and iffy with M lenses. Just a hunch.
Agreed. I'd be thrilled if we got the VG900 performance in a larger NEX-7 like package. My pre-ASPH Summilux 35 and Summarit 75 looked great on the VG in our local Sony Store, and those are the only two that are important to me. But I think we're going to see a lot of "Look at how crappy the CV 15/ZM 18/Elmar 24/Biogon-C 35 is on this thing" posts next year.
Jul 11, 2013 at 12:16 AM
p.9 #7Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote:
What I personally think that Sony will do is make a FF NEX with the current e-mount that auto-crops current e-mount lenses, and they'll figure out some kind of LA-EA4 adapter for a-mount lenses. They'll probably also start work on some native lenses for the system, and they'll be pretty large.
Essentially, I think the new camera will be a VG900 in a smaller camera body that is geared towards still photography. It should be great with legacy SLR lenses, and iffy with M lenses. Just a hunch.
That would be my bet too
What I personally think that Sony will do is make a FF NEX with the current e-mount that auto-crops current e-mount lenses, and they'll figure out some kind of LA-EA4 adapter for a-mount lenses. They'll probably also start work on some native lenses for the system, and they'll be pretty large.
Essentially, I think the new camera will be a VG900 in a smaller camera body that is geared towards still photography. It should be great with legacy SLR lenses, and iffy with M lenses. Just a hunch.
That would be my bet too
Jul 11, 2013 at 12:57 AM
p.9 #8Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
freaklikeme wrote:
Agreed. I'd be thrilled if we got the VG900 performance in a larger NEX-7 like package. My pre-ASPH Summilux 35 and Summarit 75 looked great on the VG in our local Sony Store, and those are the only two that are important to me. But I think we're going to see a lot of "Look at how crappy the CV 15/ZM 18/Elmar 24/Biogon-C 35 is on this thing" posts next year.
+1
if my 40 cron works decently that'll be enough to make happy. i don't really care if ultrawides have terrible smearing and color casts. i just want a compact FF camera for my normalish lenses.
Agreed. I'd be thrilled if we got the VG900 performance in a larger NEX-7 like package. My pre-ASPH Summilux 35 and Summarit 75 looked great on the VG in our local Sony Store, and those are the only two that are important to me. But I think we're going to see a lot of "Look at how crappy the CV 15/ZM 18/Elmar 24/Biogon-C 35 is on this thing" posts next year.
+1
if my 40 cron works decently that'll be enough to make happy. i don't really care if ultrawides have terrible smearing and color casts. i just want a compact FF camera for my normalish lenses.
Jul 11, 2013 at 01:32 AM
p.9 #9Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
sebboh wrote:
+1
if my 40 cron works decently that'll be enough to make happy. i don't really care if ultrawides have terrible smearing and color casts. i just want a compact FF camera for my normalish lenses.
Exactly!
If my CV 35/1.2, Contax-g 45/2, 90/2.8 work well and they release a nice 18-21 somewhere slow, but decent wide, I'm set for life.
Or rather "SET 4 LYF!" as the kids say these days.
freaklikeme wrote
Agreed. I'd be thrilled if we got the VG900 performance in a larger NEX-7 like package. My pre-ASPH Summilux 35 and Summarit 75 looked great on the VG in our local Sony Store, and those are the only two that are important to me. But I think we're going to see a lot of "Look at how crappy the CV 15/ZM 18/Elmar 24/Biogon-C 35 is on this thing" posts next year.if my 40 cron works decently that'll be enough to make happy. i don't really care if ultrawides have terrible smearing and color casts. i just want a compact FF camera for my normalish lenses.
Exactly!
If my CV 35/1.2, Contax-g 45/2, 90/2.8 work well and they release a nice 18-21 somewhere slow, but decent wide, I'm set for life.
Or rather "SET 4 LYF!" as the kids say these days.
Jul 11, 2013 at 02:06 AM
p.9 #10Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
freaklikeme wrote:
So I don't disagree with your statements about M4/3s, though I think in many ways, Oly and Panny set themselves up for a hard time with their choice in size of sensor. Just getting a regular 35mm field of view requires going deep into ultrawide design. However, I think you're greatly underestimating Sony's willingness to "patch" sensor performance with software corrections, a direction they're already going in with the APS-C lenses, and it's something which Sony, Panny, Oly, and Leica have all implemented somewhat successfully. I don't know about Fuji (though given the difference between the 18/2 RAW files I've...Show more →
Essentially, I think the new camera will be a VG900 in a smaller camera body that is geared towards still photography. It should be great with legacy SLR lenses, and iffy with M lenses. Just a hunch.
The things that can be corrected in software, like distortion, CA and color shift, are not what I'd be worried about. It's the resolution falloff that I'd be concerned about, and that isn't correctable in software. I think what we'll see is, once people start doing comparisons between the FF Nex and a Leica digital, is that the resolution will not be nearly as even across the frame. Some of the tests I've seen of M lenses on the VG900 practically look like SLR Magic images, and even the Nex-7 has resolution issues when you go towards the edge of the frame.
douglasf13 wrote
m4/3 sensors don't handle angled light rays very well at all, and old lenses designed for film don't apply here. In fact, the whole thrust of 4/3s lenses was to design them as telecentric as possible. The bottom line is that, if Sony uses the same mount for a FF NEX, and they don't significantly improve their sensor's ability with angled light rays, then native FF NEX lenses will be relatively large.douglasf13 wrote
What I personally think that Sony will do is make a FF NEX with the current e-mount that auto-crops current e-mount lenses, and they'll figure out some kind of LA-EA4 adapter for a-mount lenses. They'll probably also start work on some native lenses for the system, and they'll be pretty large.Essentially, I think the new camera will be a VG900 in a smaller camera body that is geared towards still photography. It should be great with legacy SLR lenses, and iffy with M lenses. Just a hunch.
The things that can be corrected in software, like distortion, CA and color shift, are not what I'd be worried about. It's the resolution falloff that I'd be concerned about, and that isn't correctable in software. I think what we'll see is, once people start doing comparisons between the FF Nex and a Leica digital, is that the resolution will not be nearly as even across the frame. Some of the tests I've seen of M lenses on the VG900 practically look like SLR Magic images, and even the Nex-7 has resolution issues when you go towards the edge of the frame.
Jul 11, 2013 at 07:25 AM
p.9 #11Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote:
The things that can be corrected in software, like distortion, CA and color shift, are not what I'd be worried about. It's the resolution falloff that I'd be concerned about, and that isn't correctable in software. I think what we'll see is, once people start doing comparisons between the FF Nex and a Leica digital, is that the resolution will not be nearly as even across the frame. Some of the tests I've seen of M lenses on the VG900 practically look like SLR Magic images, and even the Nex-7 has resolution issues when you go towards the edge of...Show more →
So what you're saying is the camera designed for RF lenses will remain the best option for using RF lenses? Imagine that.
The things that can be corrected in software, like distortion, CA and color shift, are not what I'd be worried about. It's the resolution falloff that I'd be concerned about, and that isn't correctable in software. I think what we'll see is, once people start doing comparisons between the FF Nex and a Leica digital, is that the resolution will not be nearly as even across the frame. Some of the tests I've seen of M lenses on the VG900 practically look like SLR Magic images, and even the Nex-7 has resolution issues when you go towards the edge of...Show more →
So what you're saying is the camera designed for RF lenses will remain the best option for using RF lenses? Imagine that.
Jul 11, 2013 at 09:09 AM
p.9 #12Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
I sold all my RF wides when I got the Speed Booster. Now, owning only SLR glass, a FF NEX with VG900 performance would suit me fine, That is, if Sony doesn't goes too greedy regarding price, like they did with the RX1 ( specially in Europe ).
Anyway, like other people here, I think that if they want to get it right from the start, their FF mirrorless needs a new mount with a wider throat. Keeping the E mount is a severe restriction for designing native FF lenses. Sony might pay that mistake in the future if/when other manufacturers start releasing mirrorless with new mounts designed for FF.
That said, my heart will be always for a M-mount FF Ricoh GXR-II ( but I'm not holding my breath for that to happen )
Anyway, like other people here, I think that if they want to get it right from the start, their FF mirrorless needs a new mount with a wider throat. Keeping the E mount is a severe restriction for designing native FF lenses. Sony might pay that mistake in the future if/when other manufacturers start releasing mirrorless with new mounts designed for FF.
That said, my heart will be always for a M-mount FF Ricoh GXR-II ( but I'm not holding my breath for that to happen )
Jul 11, 2013 at 09:19 AM
p.9 #13Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
freaklikeme wrote:
So what you're saying is the camera designed for RF lenses will remain the best option for using RF lenses? Imagine that.
Of course that seems obvious, but it seems like there is quite a bit of hope for such a thing. Your 35 Lux pre-asph isn't exactly the best example for those interested in 35mm lens performance, because it already doesn't have a flat field, and it is the least likely 35mm M lens to color shift, outside of maybe the CV 35/1.2. If you don't mind the across the field sharpness drop, you'll likely be in good shape, I'd imagine.
Like sebboh says, though, as long as there's a good native wide, and the M lenses around 50mm and up work ok, then I think many will be happy.
Like artur5 says, the best thing for Sony to do is make an all new, larger mount, so that native lenses won't have to be so long, but I'm not sure that Sony will do that.
douglasf13 wrote
The things that can be corrected in software, like distortion, CA and color shift, are not what I'd be worried about. It's the resolution falloff that I'd be concerned about, and that isn't correctable in software. I think what we'll see is, once people start doing comparisons between the FF Nex and a Leica digital, is that the resolution will not be nearly as even across the frame. Some of the tests I've seen of M lenses on the VG900 practically look like SLR Magic images, and even the Nex-7 has resolution issues when you go towards the edge of the frame.Of course that seems obvious, but it seems like there is quite a bit of hope for such a thing. Your 35 Lux pre-asph isn't exactly the best example for those interested in 35mm lens performance, because it already doesn't have a flat field, and it is the least likely 35mm M lens to color shift, outside of maybe the CV 35/1.2. If you don't mind the across the field sharpness drop, you'll likely be in good shape, I'd imagine.
Like sebboh says, though, as long as there's a good native wide, and the M lenses around 50mm and up work ok, then I think many will be happy.
Like artur5 says, the best thing for Sony to do is make an all new, larger mount, so that native lenses won't have to be so long, but I'm not sure that Sony will do that.
Jul 11, 2013 at 10:57 AM
p.9 #14Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote:
Of course that seems obvious, but it seems like there is quite a bit of hope for such a thing. Your 35 Lux pre-asph isn't exactly the best example for those interested in 35mm lens performance, because it already doesn't have a flat field, and it is the least likely 35mm M lens to color shift, outside of maybe the CV 35/1.2. If you don't mind the across the field sharpness drop, you'll likely be in good shape, I'd imagine.
I can't take responsibility for everyone's expectations, but I do try to keep mine in check. I don't understand how the lack of color shift makes the pre-A Lux a bad example. I wasn't holding it up as an example, just a personal preference, but I assume I must be missing the point since a positive attribute is being used in a negative context. And, from what I saw on the VG, I think you're making too much of the resolution drop, but we'll pick that up post-release.
Of course that seems obvious, but it seems like there is quite a bit of hope for such a thing. Your 35 Lux pre-asph isn't exactly the best example for those interested in 35mm lens performance, because it already doesn't have a flat field, and it is the least likely 35mm M lens to color shift, outside of maybe the CV 35/1.2. If you don't mind the across the field sharpness drop, you'll likely be in good shape, I'd imagine.
I can't take responsibility for everyone's expectations, but I do try to keep mine in check. I don't understand how the lack of color shift makes the pre-A Lux a bad example. I wasn't holding it up as an example, just a personal preference, but I assume I must be missing the point since a positive attribute is being used in a negative context. And, from what I saw on the VG, I think you're making too much of the resolution drop, but we'll pick that up post-release.
Jul 11, 2013 at 02:56 PM
p.9 #15Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
freaklikeme wrote:
I can't take responsibility for everyone's expectations, but I do try to keep mine in check. I don't understand how the lack of color shift makes the pre-A Lux a bad example. I wasn't holding it up as an example, just a personal preference, but I assume I must be missing the point since a positive attribute is being used in a negative context. And, from what I saw on the VG, I think you're making too much of the resolution drop, but we'll pick that up post-release.
Oh, the 35 Lux pre is definitely a good example, in terms of color shift. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. It's just that color shift isn't really much to worry about, since it is so easy to fix in software. Even the digital Leica's have lots of color shift issues.
I meant that it isn't a good example in terms of looking at resolution at how resolution may drop across the frame, because it is already not particularly sharp across the frame, compared to other 35mm M lenses out there, so the drop in resolution may be harder to spot. Either way, if it's your lens and you're ok with the performance, that is certainly all that matters.
douglasf13 wrote
Of course that seems obvious, but it seems like there is quite a bit of hope for such a thing. Your 35 Lux pre-asph isn't exactly the best example for those interested in 35mm lens performance, because it already doesn't have a flat field, and it is the least likely 35mm M lens to color shift, outside of maybe the CV 35/1.2. If you don't mind the across the field sharpness drop, you'll likely be in good shape, I'd imagine.Oh, the 35 Lux pre is definitely a good example, in terms of color shift. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. It's just that color shift isn't really much to worry about, since it is so easy to fix in software. Even the digital Leica's have lots of color shift issues.
I meant that it isn't a good example in terms of looking at resolution at how resolution may drop across the frame, because it is already not particularly sharp across the frame, compared to other 35mm M lenses out there, so the drop in resolution may be harder to spot. Either way, if it's your lens and you're ok with the performance, that is certainly all that matters.
Jul 11, 2013 at 03:19 PM
p.9 #16Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
The one thing that gives me hope is that there are not many different Sony sensors that can use RF glass, and of those the ones in the NEX 3, 5, 7 are the only ones that have issues, not a huge sampling for us to get a clear picture of how easy or hard it is to design sensors with good low angle performance, did Sony even consider that in the 7's sensor?
Jul 11, 2013 at 03:29 PM
p.9 #17Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
LightShow wrote:
The one thing that gives me hope is that there are not many different Sony sensors that can use RF glass, and of those the ones in the NEX 3, 5, 7 are the only ones that have issues, not a huge sampling for us to get a clear picture of how easy or hard it is to design sensors with good low angle performance, did Sony even consider that in the 7's sensor?
Keep in mind that even the 5N and others still have issues with M rangefinder wides. They just aren't as pronounced as the NEX-5, 7, etc. I think most of it has been a happy accident, and a FF sensor will certainly require a lot more. The GXR M mount is still quite a bit better than the 5N with M lenses.
The one thing that gives me hope is that there are not many different Sony sensors that can use RF glass, and of those the ones in the NEX 3, 5, 7 are the only ones that have issues, not a huge sampling for us to get a clear picture of how easy or hard it is to design sensors with good low angle performance, did Sony even consider that in the 7's sensor?
Keep in mind that even the 5N and others still have issues with M rangefinder wides. They just aren't as pronounced as the NEX-5, 7, etc. I think most of it has been a happy accident, and a FF sensor will certainly require a lot more. The GXR M mount is still quite a bit better than the 5N with M lenses.
Jul 11, 2013 at 03:41 PM
p.9 #18Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
I wouldn't be surprised at all if that rumor is pure hoax. Even a rumor stating that the A99 is going to be replaced by a "no-mirror" A999 would be more believable.
An E-mount FF camera would necessitate either a permanent-mount adapter, OR another new lens series from Sony. I doubt they could pull that past the auditors. They can hardly justify their A-series financial losses as it is.
A full-size (body) mirrorless on the other hand is seemingly inevitable at some point in the future.
An E-mount FF camera would necessitate either a permanent-mount adapter, OR another new lens series from Sony. I doubt they could pull that past the auditors. They can hardly justify their A-series financial losses as it is.
A full-size (body) mirrorless on the other hand is seemingly inevitable at some point in the future.
Jul 11, 2013 at 06:38 PM
p.9 #19Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
That is the current rumour for the A mount line, that the translucent mirror will be removed and AF will will use on sensor detectors.
Doug, I realize the 5N is not 100% perfect, but it is still very usable and hardly noticeable.
The point of my post was that we won't know how it performs based on past performance because there is so little data, and I don't think anyone but Sony really know what the main cause of the problems in the 7's sensor is, most Internet opinion is just that, opinion.
Though I do put more weight behind posts from posters like the Suede.
Doug, I realize the 5N is not 100% perfect, but it is still very usable and hardly noticeable.
The point of my post was that we won't know how it performs based on past performance because there is so little data, and I don't think anyone but Sony really know what the main cause of the problems in the 7's sensor is, most Internet opinion is just that, opinion.
Though I do put more weight behind posts from posters like the Suede.
Jul 11, 2013 at 06:56 PM
p.9 #20Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
LightShow wrote:
That is the current rumour for the A mount line, that the translucent mirror will be removed and AF will will use on sensor detectors.
Doug, I realize the 5N is not 100% perfect, but it is still very usable and hardly noticeable.
.
My 5N had color shift with quite a few lenses, and the across the field sharpness isn't near the GXR M. Either way, scaling that up to FF size is an entirely different story, so those smaller issues will be amplified. I'm sure theSuede could tell us just what it would take for Sony to make a FF sensor that works well with M lenses, and whether it's a possibility.
That is the current rumour for the A mount line, that the translucent mirror will be removed and AF will will use on sensor detectors.
Doug, I realize the 5N is not 100% perfect, but it is still very usable and hardly noticeable.
.
My 5N had color shift with quite a few lenses, and the across the field sharpness isn't near the GXR M. Either way, scaling that up to FF size is an entirely different story, so those smaller issues will be amplified. I'm sure theSuede could tell us just what it would take for Sony to make a FF sensor that works well with M lenses, and whether it's a possibility.
Jul 11, 2013 at 07:29 PM