Pana is rumored to plan CFF (compact full frame) for post M43

Started Mar 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
amalric
Forum ProPosts: 10,809
Like?
Re: APS-C/dSLR is poor engineering
In reply to Mike Fewster, Mar 22, 2013

Mike Fewster wrote:

In time, manufacturers developed dx lenses that used ff mounts but were only creating an image that was APS-C size. This is also inefficient in that essentially the same lens could have been created on a smaller mount, the cameras still had to be able to take those ff mounts and lenses.

As the digital market has matured, APS-C (on dslr, not mirrorless bodies) is caught in no man's land. Those who want a traditional full sized body might as well get a ff as ff sensor prices drop.

Those who want APS-C (or similar such as mft) will choose bodies and lenses with smaller, more efficient mount sizes.

The sheer number of lenses out there for ff body mount sizes will keep aps-c full sized cameras coming for some years yet, but they will go.

I rather agree with the above, and there is an emerging consensus. As mentioned upstream in the thread when you have to deal with the limitations of short distance to flange, m4/3 seems ideally suited - TOP was one of the first to notice.

Compared to m4/3, APS mirrorless always shows problems at the edges, especially in wides, that have to do with the angle of incident light, wells being imperfectly filled.

Leica, which has the same problem for FF used microlenses and Sony did the same even on APS. This of course has an additional cost.

Further it remains to be seen if a FF mirrorless will be as universal as m4/3 in terms of lenses. Leica for instance deals with a limited focal range.

So what is sure *at the moment* is that you have two systems that will certainly survive, mirrorless cropped, with m4/3 at the center, and FF reflex systems. All the rest is wild speculation. BTW the two systems are highly complementary, so it's not even a problem like the agitators would have it.

m4/3 works on the basis of 'good enough' but S. Huff showed that in average conditions it can compete in resolution even with FF. What you earn with the latter is really easier bokeh, a dubious advantage in my book.

As mentioned before companies are always looking for ways of selling more expensive gear, so their motivation might be completely different form that of the ordinary user.

Am.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow