Reading mode: Light Dark

Wouldn't the Fuji X100 make more sense with M mount or F mount?

Go to last post
J

jazza

Well-known member
Messages
225
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, CA
Fuji could also release a bunch of M mount or F mount Fujinons to compete with Cosina.

If Fuji continues to stick with non-exchangeable lens, please release another version of the X100 with built-in 16mm F2.0 lens and one more with a built-in 50mm F1.4 lens. I'll buy all three of them!!!
 
jazza said:
Fuji could also release a bunch of M mount or F mount Fujinons to compete with Cosina.
Click to expand...
1) A mount will make the camera larger, you need some space for the bajonet on both the lens and the camera. A wild guess might say 2.5 mm on both lens and camera, top and bottom, ie, 1 cm higher camera.

2) The nice offset microlenses on the sensor are certainly optimised for the given lens, they would be less optimal for other lenses (particularly given how very close the last lens element is to the sensor).

3) The viewfinder size was chosen for this lens. Yes, RF cameras like the Leica M series have the same issue but a lot of people consider the M9 rangefinder only useful for lenses between 28 and 50 mm (some go higher to 75 mm). For shorter lenses you need an external viewfinder and for longer lenses, a add-on magnifier is recommended.
 
I'd say the biggest problem would be the lack of native lenses. All M-lenses would be 1.5x crops, so you'd loose all your wides. The OVF-EVF hybrid would take care of the problem of different lenses.
noirdesir said:
jazza said:
Fuji could also release a bunch of M mount or F mount Fujinons to compete with Cosina.
Click to expand...
1) A mount will make the camera larger, you need some space for the bajonet on both the lens and the camera. A wild guess might say 2.5 mm on both lens and camera, top and bottom, ie, 1 cm higher camera.

2) The nice offset microlenses on the sensor are certainly optimised for the given lens, they would be less optimal for other lenses (particularly given how very close the last lens element is to the sensor).

3) The viewfinder size was chosen for this lens. Yes, RF cameras like the Leica M series have the same issue but a lot of people consider the M9 rangefinder only useful for lenses between 28 and 50 mm (some go higher to 75 mm). For shorter lenses you need an external viewfinder and for longer lenses, a add-on magnifier is recommended.
Click to expand...
 
Jon Rty said:
I'd say the biggest problem would be the lack of native lenses. All M-lenses would be 1.5x crops, so you'd loose all your wides. The OVF-EVF hybrid would take care of the problem of different lenses.
Click to expand...
You are right, that would be my fourth reason (it is not a technical one, Fuji could develop crop-M lenses, it is just that developing a whole line of lenses might not be sustainable if you don't get enough market share for you 'new' lens mount.)
 
noirdesir said:
[...]

2) The nice offset microlenses on the sensor are certainly optimised for the given lens, they would be less optimal for other lenses (particularly given how very close the last lens element is to the sensor).
[...]
Click to expand...
Where did you find the information of Fuji X100 sensor actually using offset microlenses?

BTW: Leica M8 / M9 apparently can be used with any (interchangeable) "M" mount lens (15 to 90+ mm focal length) with no reported IQ problem.
--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/
 
rapick said:
Where did you find the information of Fuji X100 sensor actually using offset microlenses?
Click to expand...
I have not come across a confirmation for it yet but given how close the last lens element to the sensor is, it is a very reasonable guess to assume they use offset microlenses. (I am a making guesses as to why they did not offer a lens mount, I am not citing an internal PP presentation the engineers gave to upper management, thus I am anyway engaging in conjecture at best.)
rapick said:
BTW: Leica M8 / M9 apparently can be used with any (interchangeable) "M" mount lens (15 to 90+ mm focal length) with no reported IQ problem.
Click to expand...
There are two problems (particularly with wide-angle lenses):
  • colour shift
  • vignetting
They can be corrected in post completely (albeit at the cost of more noise in the corners) but getting that correction right is not easy, even for Leica's own lenses, sample variation between individual lenses (and bodies) can cause for the corrections to be slightly off. For third-party lenses getting the right correction profiles requires quite some precision work. Generally the vignetting is easier to correct as most images will look fine with some vignetting. Colour shifts are trickier as the human eye is very sensitive to them.
 
rapick said:
noirdesir said:
2) The nice offset microlenses on the sensor are certainly optimised for the given lens, they would be less optimal for other lenses (particularly given how very close the last lens element is to the sensor).
Click to expand...
Where did you find the information of Fuji X100 sensor actually using offset microlenses?
Click to expand...
He may have got it from me. ;)

I got it from Fuji, here.

http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n100920.html
rapick said:
BTW: Leica M8 / M9 apparently can be used with any (interchangeable) "M" mount lens (15 to 90+ mm focal length) with no reported IQ problem.
Click to expand...
That is true. Offset microlenses basically shift the exit pupil range of the sensor.

SLR lenses have an exit pupil range from about 52mm (closest I've ever measured) to about 400mm (for a 600mm telephoto). That's a range of...
  • 2 deg to 22 deg from perpendicular at the corner of a FF sensor
  • 1 deg to 15 deg from perpendicular at the corner of an APS sensor
I've never seen an APS camera with offset microlenses, and the FF cameras with them (Nikon D3, Canon 5D II, Canon 1Ds III) use very mild offsets, no more than 6 degrees in the corner. Just enough to cut down substantially on vignetting with wides and normals and purple fringing with fast lenses. It's a compromise, larger offsets would make those expensive tilt/shift lenses perform poorly.

Rangefinder lenses have an exit pupil ranging from 28mm (for things like a 12 or 15mm Voigtlander) to 75mm (90mm tele). That's about...
  • 16 deg to 38 deg from perpendicular at the corner of a FF sensor
  • 11 deg to 27 deg from perpendicular at the corner of an APS sensor
The only APS rangefinder, the Epson RD-1, didn't have offset microlenses. The Leica 1.3x crop M8 and FF M9 have them. The M8 was pretty conservative, Kodak had 8 degrees as the offset in the data sheet. I'm pretty sure the M9 sensor data sheet didn't list the offset, and I haven't measured it yet.

I'm betting most or all of the EVIL cameras have them. I just haven't bothered to get one in the lab to measure it...

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Also look back at some of the Fuji medium format film cameras. They had several that had fixed lenses. Allowed a more compact, optimized lens. Marketed to individual niche markets. This is not a new idea for them.
 
noirdesir said:
jazza said:
Fuji could also release a bunch of M mount or F mount Fujinons to compete with Cosina.
Click to expand...
1) A mount will make the camera larger, you need some space for the bajonet on both the lens and the camera. A wild guess might say 2.5 mm on both lens and camera, top and bottom, ie, 1 cm higher camera.
Click to expand...
I disagree. The mount is a small thing, only the diameter of the lens base. If it affects the camera size, it will only be for that protruding round area.

It won't affect the size of the lens, at all, because the lens barrel can be reduced a couple of mm to allow for the mount. It might change the appearance of some "flat" lenses, the kind that have their entire optic capsule inside the camera and just have enough protruding to allow for a focus ring.
noirdesir said:
2) The nice offset microlenses on the sensor are certainly optimised for the given lens, they would be less optimal for other lenses (particularly given how very close the last lens element is to the sensor).
Click to expand...
I'm betting that they chose a fairly generic offset, like the common 8 degree, just to improve vignetting and purple fringing a bit.
noirdesir said:
3) The viewfinder size was chosen for this lens. Yes, RF cameras like the Leica M series have the same issue but a lot of people consider the M9 rangefinder only useful for lenses between 28 and 50 mm (some go higher to 75 mm). For shorter lenses you need an external viewfinder and for longer lenses, a add-on magnifier is recommended.
Click to expand...
That's the beauty of the X100, dual more viewfinder. If you use a lens outside the focal length range of the optical, just switch to the EVF...

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
jazza said:
Fuji could also release a bunch of M mount or F mount Fujinons to compete with Cosina.
Click to expand...
This is true. And they've got a pretty good start...
jazza said:
If Fuji continues to stick with non-exchangeable lens, please release another version of the X100 with built-in 16mm F2.0 lens and one more with a built-in 50mm F1.4 lens. I'll buy all three of them!!!
Click to expand...
I take it you mean a 50mm equivalent, like a 30mm?

But since you asked "wouldn't it make more sense"...
  • The M mount isn't autofocus, and the X100 doesn't have a coupled rangefinder. So, the only way to focus M mount lenses is manually, in EVF mode.
  • The F mount can autofocus, but only in a very slow and awkward contrast detection AF mode.
  • That pretty viewfinder looks awful close to the lens. M lenses tend to be small, and have neat things like "vented" lens hoods, to avoid blocking the viewfinder window, but F mount lenses are honkers, and the viewfinder wouldn't see around them.
For interchangeable lenses, Fuji's concept really does need a new mount, like what Panasonic did to four thirds to get it focusing faster.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
  • The M mount isn't autofocus, and the X100 doesn't have a coupled rangefinder. So, the only way to focus M mount lenses is manually, in EVF mode.
  • The F mount can autofocus, but only in a very slow and awkward contrast detection AF mode.
  • That pretty viewfinder looks awful close to the lens. M lenses tend to be small, and have neat things like "vented" lens hoods, to avoid blocking the viewfinder window, but F mount lenses are honkers, and the viewfinder wouldn't see around them.
Click to expand...
I guess we answered different questions, mine was why did the Fuji does not have interchangeable lenses to which your answers do not apply so while my reasons might be pretty weak, I have not seen any other, stronger ones (beside my 'fourth' commercial argument). Thus weak reason are still be better than no reasons at all.
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
rapick said:
noirdesir said:
2) The nice offset microlenses on the sensor are certainly optimised for the given lens, they would be less optimal for other lenses (particularly given how very close the last lens element is to the sensor).
Click to expand...
Where did you find the information of Fuji X100 sensor actually using offset microlenses?
Click to expand...
He may have got it from me. ;)

I got it from Fuji, here.

http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n100920.html
Click to expand...
Now I see it. Thanks!
Strange... DPR News didn't spend a word about that.
I thought Leica M8 / M9 were the only digicams to use this trick...
Nikon and Canon FF: are you sure?
Ciao.
--
Rapick
Jalbum supporter
http://www.pbase.com/rapick
http://rapick.jalbum.net/
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
jazza said:
Fuji could also release a bunch of M mount or F mount Fujinons to compete with Cosina.
Click to expand...
This is true. And they've got a pretty good start...
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
If Fuji continues to stick with non-exchangeable lens, please release another version of the X100 with built-in 16mm F2.0 lens and one more with a built-in 50mm F1.4 lens. I'll buy all three of them!!!
Click to expand...
I take it you mean a 50mm equivalent, like a 30mm?

But since you asked "wouldn't it make more sense"...
  • The M mount isn't autofocus, and the X100 doesn't have a coupled rangefinder. So, the only way to focus M mount lenses is manually, in EVF mode.
  • The F mount can autofocus, but only in a very slow and awkward contrast detection AF mode.
  • That pretty viewfinder looks awful close to the lens. M lenses tend to be small, and have neat things like "vented" lens hoods, to avoid blocking the viewfinder window, but F mount lenses are honkers, and the viewfinder wouldn't see around them.
For interchangeable lenses, Fuji's concept really does need a new mount, like what Panasonic did to four thirds to get it focusing faster.
Click to expand...
I forgot one very important reason.
  • The X100 is a leaf shutter camera. It should be extremely quiet, very low on vibration. And, on a small camera like X100, a leaf shutter should hit 1/1000 sec flash sync speeds. Even on honking big Hasselblads and Leica S2, the leaf shutters hit 1/500 sec flash sync.
I'm betting the large part of the leaf shutter is inside the X100 body, not in the external lens barrel. Interchangeable lenses mean the leaf shutters have to come out with the lens. On longer lenses, they'd be outside the camera, big bulgy things (every wonder why slow, slow f2.8 Blad lenses have huge 70mm barrels?)

Or they'd have to go to a focal plane shutter: louder, more vibration, and limiting the sync speed.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
That's why I had this idea when I read about the new viewfinder. Not sure I should tell it without patenting it first, but I like to boast.

If I'm not mistaken the camera can overlay LCD information on the OVF, as well as replace the image completely. Thus, I'd imagine that it should be possible to overlay a magnified viewfinder patch on top of the OVF, which would work as a RF-patch of sorts. I'd imagine that parallax correction shouldn't be that hard, as I assume that the bright-lines already move. Of course, the same principle would work in live-view mode as well.

I understand that some camera-models already use this in live-view, and I can't understand why all of them don't. Maybe it's already been patented.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
jazza said:
Fuji could also release a bunch of M mount or F mount Fujinons to compete with Cosina.
Click to expand...
This is true. And they've got a pretty good start...
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
If Fuji continues to stick with non-exchangeable lens, please release another version of the X100 with built-in 16mm F2.0 lens and one more with a built-in 50mm F1.4 lens. I'll buy all three of them!!!
Click to expand...
I take it you mean a 50mm equivalent, like a 30mm?

But since you asked "wouldn't it make more sense"...
  • The M mount isn't autofocus, and the X100 doesn't have a coupled rangefinder. So, the only way to focus M mount lenses is manually, in EVF mode.
  • The F mount can autofocus, but only in a very slow and awkward contrast detection AF mode.
  • That pretty viewfinder looks awful close to the lens. M lenses tend to be small, and have neat things like "vented" lens hoods, to avoid blocking the viewfinder window, but F mount lenses are honkers, and the viewfinder wouldn't see around them.
For interchangeable lenses, Fuji's concept really does need a new mount, like what Panasonic did to four thirds to get it focusing faster.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
Click to expand...
 
Of course, they still could bring out a inter-changeable lens body. But the 'smart' money always favoured the m4/3rds mount as they are already signed up to the standard (albiet the old one) and there is a pre-excisting lens range available. But what's everyone think of that?

A fixed-lens camera could simply be buying them time until they see which way the 'big sensor compact' market pans out.

I myself see only beauty and logic in a Fuji m4/3rds camera :)
 
noirdesir said:
jazza said:
Fuji could also release a bunch of M mount or F mount Fujinons to compete with Cosina.
Click to expand...
1) A mount will make the camera larger, you need some space for the bajonet on both the lens and the camera. A wild guess might say 2.5 mm on both lens and camera, top and bottom, ie, 1 cm higher camera.
Click to expand...
should Fujifilm release an interchangeable lens camera with this hybrid VF, it would require some changes in the body for sure
M mounts should work with minor modifications of this body

F mounts are designed for SLRs so they might not without more radical body modifications
noirdesir said:
2) The nice offset microlenses on the sensor are certainly optimised for the given lens, they would be less optimal for other lenses (particularly given how very close the last lens element is to the sensor).
Click to expand...
the Leica Ms work just fine with in camera correction for the microlenses

the solution they developed with Kodak & Jenoptik works perfectly well for lenses as wide as 16 mm
noirdesir said:
3) The viewfinder size was chosen for this lens. Yes, RF cameras like the Leica M series have the same issue but a lot of people consider the M9 rangefinder only useful for lenses between 28 and 50 mm (some go higher to 75 mm). For shorter lenses you need an external viewfinder and for longer lenses, a add-on magnifier is recommended.
Click to expand...
the VF of the M8 & M9 frame 21 and 24 mm lenses near perfectly, but an external VF allows for seeing beyond the capture frame which is a big RF advantage

I often shoot my 75 & 90 mm lenses without a magnifier, though for critical focus a magnifier helps
--
--
pbase & dpreview supporter
DPR forum member since 5/2001
http://www.pbase.com/artichoke
 
Joe0Bloggs said:
Not like it would cost them much more than this camera would be going for anyway...
Click to expand...
I'm still guessing it's to give the camera an essentially silent and vibration free leaf shutter.

I swear, some of the EVIL cameras have the strangest sounding focal plane shutters I've ever heard. Chiming "ping-ping" sounds.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top