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

Started Mar 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,032
Like?
Re: Final words and predictions ...
In reply to forpetessake, Mar 22, 2013

forpetessake wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

forpetessake wrote:

I wouldn't exclude

3) FF camera with a fixed lens for around $1G. Who wouldn't want an excellent image quality in a small package like this:

Well, there is a reason not to make a camera like that. It would be packing a very expensive FF sensor. This lens is an f/4.8-13. You could get exactly the same results building a camera around a Four Thirds sensor and an f/2.4-6.5 lens (provided you shifted the base ISO to 1/4 of the FF camera's base ISO). Such a camera would be smaller, much cheaper and the results would be indistinguishable. Coupling a slow zoom lens with a FF sensor in a compact camera just does not make sense.

-- hide signature --

Bob

With FF design you are trading the cost of the sensor for the cost of the lens to provide equivalent designs with the same parameters: lens has to be 2x faster, it's resolution, tolerances 2x better. Provided the cost of sensor is going down and the cost of lens manufacturing is likely going up, at some point FF design will be more cost effective even in this case: silicon eventually beats the metal.

I think in this case a 19-85/2.4-6.5 lens and an FT sensor would be a smaller, cheaper and better solution. Such a lens is not really exotic, would be quite cheap to manufacture and the sensor would be far cheaper.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Today it is not a price competitive solution, but tomorrow it will be.

I don't think so, I think it will always be more expensive. The lens is the same diameter, no less glass, a bit longer, can't see how it will be cheaper. The sensor will always be more expensive. Overall the Four Thirds solution will always be as good, cheaper and smaller. f/4.8 is just too small an aperture to be in the FF sweet spot. Had it been f/2.8, that would have been f/1.4 on the FT, and an f/1.4 zoom is getting into the area where it might be bigger and more expensive than the f/2.8 version for FF. But a f/2.4 zoom is relatively simple.

-- hide signature --

Bob

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