awilder
Alan Wilder
Anyone know if someone plans to expand on the digital SLR concept with a larger sensor to reduce crop size much the same as FX fomat is to DX? The continued use of a mirrorless system allowing M lens use via adapters intriques me especially if the crop size could be reduced to 1x or even 1.3x like the M8. Even if the price goes way up, I doubt it will approach that of an M8.2.
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
Yes, Samsung is planning to introduce the NX camera later this year or in 2010. If this camera fulfills my requirements it will foster my older Canon FD lenses. It is reported to have an APS-C sized CMOS sensor.
awilder
Alan Wilder
Can I assume it will take a Leica M lens adapter or an adapter for Nikon SLR lenses?
Chris101
summicronia
I'm looking for the price to go way down. There is no Leica name or mystique to maintain, so why shouldn't this type of camera approach the price point of, say the Nikon D40 or even less, as it has fewer moving parts, and fewer optical elements.
I guess I just want to be able to afford one without loosing what I already have.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Chris101
summicronia
You are no doubt correct. My option then is to wait for competitors to appear, and force the price down due to market pressures. Oh well, as they say, "Waiting is."
250swb
Well-known
I don't know, half the world is applauding a camera that has gone down in size, and as soon as it is announced people want cameras to go up in size again! There is no significant difference between a 4/3rds sensor compared to an APS-C sensor in terms of performance. But the important thing is I really can't see Samsung approaching the quality of dedicated lenses from Olympus and Panasonic (who have Leica behind the designs) in a new APS-C based format. For me that would be the deal breaker, and would overide the advantage of a more conventional crop factor.
Steve
Steve
ampguy
Veteran
I believe there is a difference
I believe there is a difference
The Nikon APS-C is 50% larger in sensor area than a 4/3 size sensor, a Canon APS-H is double the size.
I believe there is a difference
The Nikon APS-C is 50% larger in sensor area than a 4/3 size sensor, a Canon APS-H is double the size.
250swb
Well-known
And the Panasonic G1 sensor gives more resolution with Sigma control lens (and indeed the kit lens) than a Nikon D3 or D700 with FF control lens. So where does that leave your '50% larger' as a selling point for APS-C if m4/3 can out resolve the D3 with one arm tide behind its back using a non telecentric lens? Tests carried out by Amateur Photographer magazine 11th April 2009. Are you sure you haven't mis heard something somewhere? These are a quick guide to respective sensor areas for comparison
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm
Steve
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
I read the article, but I can tell you from experience that images from a FF sensor look far different (i.e., better) than images from an APS-C or 4/3 size sensor. There is a mythology being created here. To what end I can't quite understand.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
There is no magic in a 4/3 sensor that defies physics.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
What's so special about the M8.2... sensor-wise that is? In my mind its just another digital camera with a sensor made by some Japanese company. If Olympus, Samsung, or Panasonic came out with a 1.3x sensor camera that accepted Leica glass, would the image quality be any different than an M8.2? Doesn't seem like there would be much difference.
mawz
Established
Note that 'some japanese company' is Kodak. But the magic is all in the lack of an AA filter.
A current technology 1.3x crop sensor from a Japanese company with no AA filter would likely be much better all-round than the M8.2's sensor. Such a sensor exists (in the Canon 1DmIII), but is not available to other manufacturers and it has an AA filter unlike the M8's Kodak sensor.
axiom
Non-Registered User
I didn't know Kodak is Japanese
mawz
Established
Different is probably a better description. The difference in DoF effects is the only really visible difference between 12MP FF and 12MP 4/3rds in most situations. It's only in low light or high DR scenes where the technical advantages of FF exist. But the difference in DoF effects can be very easily seen and provides a more 'Medium Format' look to the FF shots.
4/3rds does have some distinct advantages with regards to IQ. Particularly the extended DoF on longer lenses and also extra DoF at wide apertures which can be a win in some lower-light situations.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
If you want to dig MUCH deeper into this subject, get yourself a cold longneck and sit down this article:
http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/
http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Yes... it is short for Kodakisan, famous Japanese sensor maker. 
Al Patterson
Ferroequinologist
Or, you can buy model N-1. When everyone was upgraing to 10 and 12 megapixel DSLRs, I bought a 6 megapixel camera and kit lens for $350 on closeout.
So, when the E-P1 drops to $499 for the body and lens, it will be on my radar if I have enough cash at the time. I also want to see the Samsung NX and Panasonic m4/3 before I make my final decision.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Hmmm... I recently picked up a 2nd hand Canon 5D (mk I) and I've been looking for the magical full-frame pixie-dust without much success, at least for prints up to 19"x13". Aside from DoF effects, I'm not seeing anything much different from photos taken with APS-C sensors. I've found lens choice and technique tend to have a far larger impact on the final output, at least to the largest size I can print.
That's not to say I'm disappointed with the 5D - rather the opposite. But pixie-dust doesn't seem to be part of the package (perhaps the original owner held out on me).
...Mike
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Oh, I agree. I think we've just reached the point where cameras are irrelevant. Just pick up any camera that's laying around and take photos with it. The thing that fuels GAS and keeps camera makers in business is the search for the Pixie Dust.