btgc
Veteran
As you have noted, FF is mostly needed by those willing to use legacy glass. Now ask yourself if manufacturers are willing to part with income coming from selling native lenses. Several lenses cost more than body so it's quite risky to leap into FF mirrorless realm knowing lenses will not be required as much as bodies. That is, going this route body isn't expected to be priced low, it has to cover also not gained income.
jarski
Veteran
dont think question is not wether FF-mirrorless is doable at cheaper price (Leica made M9 already 3 years ago), nor humongous engineering costs (Japanese makers for sure know how to cut these). its lack of interest, because large sensor requires larger lenses. + zooms are needed as well, that have bigger size than primes. whole package might be in risk of growing bigger than entry level dSLR's.
so providing mount that allows adapting legacy lenses, but use them with small sensor is the compromise that have been chosen.
so providing mount that allows adapting legacy lenses, but use them with small sensor is the compromise that have been chosen.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I couldn't see Leica being too happy about any cheap full frame compatible with M mount hitting the market. Sure they make plenty of lenses but this would have to cut into M9 sales.
Jamie123
Veteran
haha if it cost $2k to make it would certainly be insanely expensive. I doubt that the M9 even costs $2k to make.
btgc
Veteran
Speaking of costs vs price, I've heard manufacturing costs of electronics are about 1/3 of retail price. That's rough figure.
eleskin
Well-known
X Pro 1 size is perfect, but with NEX technology
X Pro 1 size is perfect, but with NEX technology
For me, the X Pro 1 size and form factor are perfect. I had to add an ownuser grip to my NEX 5n to hold the damn thing right especially with my Noctilux attached! I think small cameras have a cute gadget character, but for many they are too small for the hands. My fingers are large enough that I have problems flossing my teeth!
As to the sensor size, A full frame is marketable in that it would be the worlds first universal digital camera. You could program tge camera to take lenses for smaller formats by having the camera electronically crop the sensor.
Imagine telling an artist that they can only have a small canvas and a limited set of brushes and colors to paint with. This is what happens when you crop sensors and limit the capability of what many lenses can do. Cropping a Noctilux is insane. I really love focus peaking with the NEX 5n but hate the crop.
If there were a camera that looked like the X Pro 1 but had the NEX EVF and peaking with full frame I would buy without hesitation!
X Pro 1 size is perfect, but with NEX technology
For me, the X Pro 1 size and form factor are perfect. I had to add an ownuser grip to my NEX 5n to hold the damn thing right especially with my Noctilux attached! I think small cameras have a cute gadget character, but for many they are too small for the hands. My fingers are large enough that I have problems flossing my teeth!
As to the sensor size, A full frame is marketable in that it would be the worlds first universal digital camera. You could program tge camera to take lenses for smaller formats by having the camera electronically crop the sensor.
Imagine telling an artist that they can only have a small canvas and a limited set of brushes and colors to paint with. This is what happens when you crop sensors and limit the capability of what many lenses can do. Cropping a Noctilux is insane. I really love focus peaking with the NEX 5n but hate the crop.
If there were a camera that looked like the X Pro 1 but had the NEX EVF and peaking with full frame I would buy without hesitation!
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I don't know what "foreshortened" means, but if you mean that there is a difference in perspective, relative size and location of fore- and background etc. between a normal lens on a 24x36 sensor and the equivalent normal lens on a crop sensor, you're wrong.
This has been shown over and over again here and on other sites. You can try it yourself. Put a 50 on your full frame camera and take a picture, then put a 35 on the same full frame camera and take a picture, and then crop the 35 shot to the field of view of the 50 shot. Just do it.
And this is not why "medium format still thrives". Medium and large format thrives because of the detail and colour and/or grayscale rendition that you get from a large negative. This is also beginning to be true for full frame.
The only actual difference is depth of field behaviour, which is somewhat different, but not much. You can compensate for that by building faster lenses, which can be smaller due to the smaller image circle. The emergence of things like 25/f0.95 and 17/f0.95 lenses is evidence enough that full frame is being displaced.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
I'm not so sure if I'd be interested specifically in a full-frame NEX, but I *would* be interested in a full frame M mount body with an NEX-7 style built in EVF and tilting LCD, price dependent. (That last qualifier knocks future Leicas out of the running for me.)
My NEX-7 is showing me that the EVF concept is valid. Now port the basic form factor over to a simpler body with a full frame sensor, M mount, a real shutter speed dial, no AF support and similar MF focus aids (peaking, magnification on demand) and you'll get my attention.
I for one feel no need to stick with a mechanical rangefinder in this day and age. Yes, they are magnificent - but so were fountain pens. (And I still use a fountain pen every day!)
My NEX-7 is showing me that the EVF concept is valid. Now port the basic form factor over to a simpler body with a full frame sensor, M mount, a real shutter speed dial, no AF support and similar MF focus aids (peaking, magnification on demand) and you'll get my attention.
I for one feel no need to stick with a mechanical rangefinder in this day and age. Yes, they are magnificent - but so were fountain pens. (And I still use a fountain pen every day!)
Smiert Spionam
Member
A full frame body that was somehow close in size to the NEX-7 would be lovely, but that's magical thinking for now, and for the foreseeable future. The NEX has a registration distance of 18mm, vs. 27.8mm for Leica M. It's clear by now that getting adequate performance from a typical (symmetrical, more or less) rangefinder lens on a crop frame is a challenge. Only the NEX-5n really accomplished that, and there are probably multiple interlocking issues that make it a challenge. Though it was initially criticized as a failure for rangefinder users, the much larger issues with the Fuji X-Pro1 make the NEX-7 look like an engineering miracle.
Now imagine scaling up to a full frame -- how would even the best current Sony sensor look with compact lenses designed for a 27.8mm registration distance, if it were doubled to cover the full 35mm frame? Ugly. Leica so far has the only 24x36mm sensor for short flange lenses, and it requires sometimes extensive corrections that are dialed in for each specific lens. Hardly a universal, interchangeable system.
What does this mean?
To me, it means that at minimum, any Sony full frame mirrorless will have a flange focal length of at least that of the M system, in order to even have a ghost of a chance of decent edge performance -- and that's only with lenses specifically designed for the camera, and probably carefully profiled and corrected in software. That means a body that's at least 10mm deeper than the current NEX bodies. It also means that Leica users will lose that precious 10mm that allows room for a non-optical mount adapter. Honestly, if Sony were to develop a full frame mirrorless, I wouldn't be surprised if they pushed the registration distance even farther, to avoid the kinds of problems that seem inherent with the M system. Sony might conclude that something more like a 30-35mm mount would allow them to design compact wides that don't require software correction. And why should they try to accommodate Leica shooters, anyway? Sony, just like every other major camera manufacturer, is interested in selling lenses, and not just bodies. Why accommodate users who want to use your body to support another company's lenses, when you could steer them toward some excellent lenses of your own, that perform better on a dedicated platform?
For Leica shooters looking for an alternate full-frame platform, it seems the only likelihood in the medium-to-short term is a third-party native M-mount camera. The only possibility I see is Cosina, though I'm not terribly optimistic there, either. The Cosina/Voigtlander/Epson body was just a repurposed Cosina, and far from an engineering marvel. They did the much nicer Zeiss Ikon, so maybe that could be a base platform for a full-frame digital -- but once again, they're still faced with solving the lens problems that Leica hasn't exactly put to bed.
(edited to add, in response to Ken's post: a native M-mount body with an EVF and handling like that of the NEX-7 would indeed be appealing. I don't see Sony doing it, though, since they'd want to steer users toward their own lenses. Cosina could, of course, but they're pretty conservative with design issues, essentially just building very conventional rangefinder cameras. They don't have the digital engineering resources of Sony or Fuji, so they'd have to license something or fairly aggressively recalibrate their camera development operation. It's hard to see that as likely, but stranger things have happened.)
Eventually, there will likely be another sensor design breakthrough -- but I doubt that such a revolution will happen very soon, and it won't likely be the weird camel (ie, a horse designed by a committee) that would be the result of trying to transform a current NEX into a multi-purpose full frame hybrid.
Now imagine scaling up to a full frame -- how would even the best current Sony sensor look with compact lenses designed for a 27.8mm registration distance, if it were doubled to cover the full 35mm frame? Ugly. Leica so far has the only 24x36mm sensor for short flange lenses, and it requires sometimes extensive corrections that are dialed in for each specific lens. Hardly a universal, interchangeable system.
What does this mean?
To me, it means that at minimum, any Sony full frame mirrorless will have a flange focal length of at least that of the M system, in order to even have a ghost of a chance of decent edge performance -- and that's only with lenses specifically designed for the camera, and probably carefully profiled and corrected in software. That means a body that's at least 10mm deeper than the current NEX bodies. It also means that Leica users will lose that precious 10mm that allows room for a non-optical mount adapter. Honestly, if Sony were to develop a full frame mirrorless, I wouldn't be surprised if they pushed the registration distance even farther, to avoid the kinds of problems that seem inherent with the M system. Sony might conclude that something more like a 30-35mm mount would allow them to design compact wides that don't require software correction. And why should they try to accommodate Leica shooters, anyway? Sony, just like every other major camera manufacturer, is interested in selling lenses, and not just bodies. Why accommodate users who want to use your body to support another company's lenses, when you could steer them toward some excellent lenses of your own, that perform better on a dedicated platform?
For Leica shooters looking for an alternate full-frame platform, it seems the only likelihood in the medium-to-short term is a third-party native M-mount camera. The only possibility I see is Cosina, though I'm not terribly optimistic there, either. The Cosina/Voigtlander/Epson body was just a repurposed Cosina, and far from an engineering marvel. They did the much nicer Zeiss Ikon, so maybe that could be a base platform for a full-frame digital -- but once again, they're still faced with solving the lens problems that Leica hasn't exactly put to bed.
(edited to add, in response to Ken's post: a native M-mount body with an EVF and handling like that of the NEX-7 would indeed be appealing. I don't see Sony doing it, though, since they'd want to steer users toward their own lenses. Cosina could, of course, but they're pretty conservative with design issues, essentially just building very conventional rangefinder cameras. They don't have the digital engineering resources of Sony or Fuji, so they'd have to license something or fairly aggressively recalibrate their camera development operation. It's hard to see that as likely, but stranger things have happened.)
Eventually, there will likely be another sensor design breakthrough -- but I doubt that such a revolution will happen very soon, and it won't likely be the weird camel (ie, a horse designed by a committee) that would be the result of trying to transform a current NEX into a multi-purpose full frame hybrid.
douglasf13
Well-known
Most great artists work within constraints. As Orson Welles famously said, "The enemy of art is the absence of limitation."
Either way, I'm not sure it's applicable, and you get just buy lenses designed for aps-c to take advantage of their "full" capability.
I've resigned myself to aps-c NEX cameras and aps-c NEX lenses, and I sold off all of my M glass, because, if a 35mm mirrorless camera comes, it'll likely be bigger than I'd like, and it won't likely play well with M lenses.
I don't have a feeling that anyone will look at my prints and wonder why I didn't use a 35mm sensor. In fact, I have A900 and NEX prints hanging right next to each other all over my house, and you'd probably never tell the difference at my 13x19 or less print size. No one I know has ever mentioned it, and even I sometimes forget which is which.
EdwardKaraa
Well-known
I think it would pay off to be a little patient, until May 10 that is. Leica will not only announce the M10, but also their own mirrorless system that is at least a 1.5x crop or larger according to Leica's own sources. For those who want to use M mount lenses, no manufacturer has more interest than Leica in providing one. In the meanwhile, the Ricoh GXR M mount is very nice, no AA filter, no corner blur, no color shift on many lenses.
Emacs
Newbie
Of course I will buy one, since FF is significantly larger and thus helps to maintain more details and higher local contrast.
Matus
Well-known
I would not be surprised if a full frame NEX (or GXR or whatever) could be had/produced for under $3000, but probably only if number of units that would sell would compare to NEX7 or there about. The problem is - most of today's mirror-less buyers do not really want to pay double simply because the performance of APS-C sensors is already very good - it would only mean more expense and (even) bigger lenses - even the m4/3 offers performance nobody wold have thought of few years back. The small group of possible buyers (who have mostly manual focus M-mount lenses in mind) would simply not be large enough for such a FX camera to sell for the price expected. Would I buy one for under $3000 - maybe, but it wold be a tough decision.
Well - just my non-educated guess.
Well - just my non-educated guess.
Emacs
Newbie
I'm quite surprised with these endless allegations about limited demand on FF NEX (and FF in general).
Take a look at D800, the demand is very high so Nikon can't even satisfy it. Take a look at NEX-7, which is quite a bad camera (IQ-wise), but still highly needed.
So I would not insist on limited interest (I'm sure it's the opposite though).
douglasf13
Well-known
Bad camera IQ-wise? Compared to what? The Nex-7 is at the top of the heap of aps-c sensors, and it's better in some aspects, like low ISO DR and color, than some fullframe cameras. How big do you print??
I sold my 35mm digital because it was larger than I thought necessary. If a 35mm NEX comes, I'd likely only be interested if the camera and lenses were only marginally larger than the current Nex systems (I don't expect it'll play well with M lenses.)
porktaco
Well-known
maybe. they'd have to simplify the menu structure a lot. i sent my nex back and i'm having some sender's remorse.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
What?!?!? Bad compared to what?
celluloidprop
Well-known
Despite demand, the D800 will still sell far fewer units than Nikon's smaller/cheaper cameras this year.
) once you decided to look at edges and corners. It doesn't prevent from taking great photos, but this camera has too much flaws and looks more like a reject than a reliable tool.