Shakeout in the mirrorless market

Started Feb 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
amalric
amalric Forum Pro • Posts: 10,839
Re: Nope.

john m flores wrote:

amalric wrote:

john m flores wrote:

amalric wrote:

Well that is the theory. You could also add that m43, all other things being equal, is sharper across the frame.

I'm having trouble understanding this. So if you take an M43 camera and and APS-C sensor camera, attach identical quality lenses designed for each format, there's something about M43 that makes it sharper across the frame?

There is both evidence and theory for this, altough it is poorly understood by newcomers. It has to do with the short distance to flange and the format.

APS mirrorless has problems at the edges because of the angle rays of light fall on the sensor's wells. m4/3 being shorter avoids this, which is fairly evident if you mount an UWA like the CV 12mm either on a NEX or a FUJI X.

Resolution drops at the edges, there are colour shifts, vignetting etc. The wells are imperfectly filled.

This is said to happen by reviewers even with the Sigma 19mm, which is exactly the same lens for m4/3 and NEX.

Am.

-- hide signature --

I understand the phenomena, but I think it says more about lens design not optimized for the platform than anything else. M43 is likely more forgiving of adapted lenses simply because it has a smaller image circle. Fuji X and NEX do exhibit some issues, but they are younger systems than M43 and maybe it's just a mattering of iterating lens design or perhaps designing sensors to address the issue (a la Leica/Kodak).

It is possible to design lenses that are well-matched to an APS-C mirrorless camera, such as the Fuji XF 14 f/2.8 and the Sony Zeiss 24 f/1.8. The length of the Zeiss glass is telling though, as I suspect it is done to address the very issue that we are talking about but in the process negating some of the advantage of mirrorless.

If anything, the issue supports the notion of a longer flange distance, perhaps something between the NEX/Fuji X and the Pentax K.

Not really. It supports the notion that there should be a *proportion* between the distance to flange and the format chosen. Specifically on old 4/3 lenses were telecentric, they are less so if you halve the distance, but you can then FW correct.

Bad edges in APS are noticeable especially in wides, that is why the Fuji 14mm is cumbersome and expensive. Good lenses don't come cheap in APS Fuji or NEX. They are also bigger and heavier than in m4/3.

Last the resolution loss is so real that both Leica and Sony had to introduce microlenses on the edges for correction, which make the sensor more expensive.

So all in all m4/3 appears the better designed *system* in terms of resolution/price.

Am.

-

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