Sony's new curved sensor - this is a big deal

Started Jun 16, 2014 | Discussions
EinsteinsGhost
EinsteinsGhost Forum Pro • Posts: 11,977
Re: so... increase body to decrease lens cost - i.e. peeing against the wind, right?

Sony has two mounts:

A-mount: The SLR mount
E-mount: The Mirrorless mount

yes, you're right, technically speaking.

but if you want to switch an A6000 for A7 you will also need to change the lens or lenses, because an 18-55 won't be of much use to you anymore.

functionally speaking the same is actually true the other way around - while your 28-80 zoom will be perfectly usable on A6000 you'll rather get a 18-55 to not miss the wide angle shots. and the 50mm won't be a "nice portrait lens" anymore but just a normal lens.

in the end it's not so much about just being able to have things work together, but rather to have them working the right way. so, yes, the mount is the same, but the perception of a system does change.

Sensor size has nothing to do with the mount. If Sony wanted, they could introduce an E-mount body with a 1" or m43 size sensor too, and be able to use any of the existing lenses.

no, but with the same mount sensor size has everything to do with building a system - different sensor size means different lenses to cover similar perspectives.

But, it is a choice you make in a system with multiple formats. If you are a Canon or Nikon shooter, you go thru the same exercise. However, Sony and Nikon do give you an option of using an APSc lens on FF bodies which can be handy on some occasions, or to those who maintain an APSc and a FF body.

In fact, Sony has extended this convenience between the two mounts. One could choose to carry a Sony a77 II for sports and a7r for landscape and walkaroud with small native or adapted lenses. And all a77II lenses (FF or otherwise) can be used on a7r.

Having this option is a good thing.

 EinsteinsGhost's gear list:EinsteinsGhost's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F828 Sony SLT-A55 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF +12 more
Dave Lively Senior Member • Posts: 1,855
Re: Image stabilisation...

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

I see no issue with sensor based stabilization. But then, it is a very small set of brands that have that: Sony A-mount, Pentax K, Olympus m43 and one Panasonic m43 camera. Rest are optical.

With a curved sensor you would change focus as you moved the sensor side to side.  One side would be front focused and the other would be back focused.

peevee1 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,247
Re: so... increase body to decrease lens cost - i.e. peeing against the wind, right?

steelhead3 wrote:

The 110 format has been popular since film days...if that is your of photographic excellence, so be it.

Except even smartphones with tiny 1/3" sensors now produce better quality images than 35mm film cameras.

Little outdated, are you?

peevee1 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,247
Re: so... increase body to decrease lens cost - i.e. peeing against the wind, right?

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

TrojMacReady wrote:

2 mounts for still cameras, A and E. How many does Canon have?

This whole concept is for fixed lens cameras, even according to their own propositions.

that isn't so obvious to me.

Canon has technically speaking 3 mounts, but if I'm not mistaken they are all physically (dimensions and electronic contacts layout) the same. what changes is flange (EF-M against the rest) and in case of Canon proprietary EF-S lens - artificial mechanical obstruction - if you take any third party APS-C lens for Canon it fits normal EF camera and works on them (i.e. Tokina 12-24 or Sigma 18-125 to name the lens I tested myself).

Sony as such has 4 different options: FF or APS-C and mirror(ed) or mirrorless. although they are to some degree interchangable

but my point wasn't as much about the total amount but about the fact that Sony had introduced quite a lot of incompatibility issues in a short period. if you make a timeline of Canon's AF system mounts then you get:

EF - 1987

EF-S - 2003

EF-M - 2013

since the takeover of Konica-Minolta in 2006 Sony has added 3 new mounts. that's 3 in 8 years compared to 3 in 27 years and explains quite well why people are confused with Sony offering and where the "give us another mount, Sony" jokes come from.

Sony has two mounts:
A-mount: The SLR mount
E-mount: The Mirrorless mount

They also have FZ mount.

Sensor size has nothing to do with the mount.

Nobody cares about mounts or sensor sizes really. What people care about is lens system. If all Sony E lenses (and 3rd party lenses for that system) covered FF image circle from the start, introduction of FE would not be as bad. As it stands, Sony supports 5 lens systems, and understandably unable to support even one of them properly. For comparison, Olympus and Panasonic support half a lens system each. No wonder it has become the best, most complete crop system in no time at all.

FZ-mount is not for use in Alpha system (stills cameras).

It is still another system on which not so big Sony optical department spreads their thin resources.

If you want to include video cameras, I am sure te count will go up for Canon from three to something else, no?

No, their dedicated video cameras are still EF.

EthanP99 Senior Member • Posts: 2,436
Re: so... increase body to decrease lens cost - i.e. peeing against the wind, right?

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

TrojMacReady wrote:

2 mounts for still cameras, A and E. How many does Canon have?

This whole concept is for fixed lens cameras, even according to their own propositions.

that isn't so obvious to me.

Canon has technically speaking 3 mounts, but if I'm not mistaken they are all physically (dimensions and electronic contacts layout) the same. what changes is flange (EF-M against the rest) and in case of Canon proprietary EF-S lens - artificial mechanical obstruction - if you take any third party APS-C lens for Canon it fits normal EF camera and works on them (i.e. Tokina 12-24 or Sigma 18-125 to name the lens I tested myself).

Sony as such has 4 different options: FF or APS-C and mirror(ed) or mirrorless. although they are to some degree interchangable

but my point wasn't as much about the total amount but about the fact that Sony had introduced quite a lot of incompatibility issues in a short period. if you make a timeline of Canon's AF system mounts then you get:

EF - 1987

EF-S - 2003

EF-M - 2013

since the takeover of Konica-Minolta in 2006 Sony has added 3 new mounts. that's 3 in 8 years compared to 3 in 27 years and explains quite well why people are confused with Sony offering and where the "give us another mount, Sony" jokes come from.

Sony has two mounts:
A-mount: The SLR mount
E-mount: The Mirrorless mount

They also have FZ mount.

Sensor size has nothing to do with the mount.

Nobody cares about mounts or sensor sizes really. What people care about is lens system. If all Sony E lenses (and 3rd party lenses for that system) covered FF image circle from the start, introduction of FE would not be as bad. As it stands, Sony supports 5 lens systems, and understandably unable to support even one of them properly. For comparison, Olympus and Panasonic support half a lens system each. No wonder it has become the best, most complete crop system in no time at all.

FZ-mount is not for use in Alpha system (stills cameras).

It is still another system on which not so big Sony optical department spreads their thin resources.

If you want to include video cameras, I am sure te count will go up for Canon from three to something else, no?

No, their dedicated video cameras are still EF.

You can mount ANY 35mm format lens on fz. Its a pro mount that a lot of people use for big budget filming. I dont see anyone complaining using fz mount.

 EthanP99's gear list:EthanP99's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony RX1R Canon EOS-1Ds Canon EOS 5D Mark II Sony Alpha DSLR-A900 +21 more
EthanP99 Senior Member • Posts: 2,436
Re: so... increase body to decrease lens cost - i.e. peeing against the wind, right?

Star wars, avatar, tron, oblivion, elysium and more have been filmed on fz mount.

Very limited use i guess!

 EthanP99's gear list:EthanP99's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony RX1R Canon EOS-1Ds Canon EOS 5D Mark II Sony Alpha DSLR-A900 +21 more
Chikoo
Chikoo Senior Member • Posts: 1,630
Re: Sony's new curved sensor - this is a big deal

If Sony can get it right (make it manufacturer at a "reasonable" price) this could be a game changer bigger than all of this mirrorless stuff (actually, many of will argue that mirrorless wasn't really a game changer - but that is another topic).

This has the potential to make it possible to put really small, simple lens designs on bodies and have IQ on par with the most expensive glass available.

Huh? So we have a new solution. Remind me what is the problem this is going to solve.

peevee1 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,247
Re: so... increase body to decrease lens cost - i.e. peeing against the wind, right?

EthanP99 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

TrojMacReady wrote:

2 mounts for still cameras, A and E. How many does Canon have?

This whole concept is for fixed lens cameras, even according to their own propositions.

that isn't so obvious to me.

Canon has technically speaking 3 mounts, but if I'm not mistaken they are all physically (dimensions and electronic contacts layout) the same. what changes is flange (EF-M against the rest) and in case of Canon proprietary EF-S lens - artificial mechanical obstruction - if you take any third party APS-C lens for Canon it fits normal EF camera and works on them (i.e. Tokina 12-24 or Sigma 18-125 to name the lens I tested myself).

Sony as such has 4 different options: FF or APS-C and mirror(ed) or mirrorless. although they are to some degree interchangable

but my point wasn't as much about the total amount but about the fact that Sony had introduced quite a lot of incompatibility issues in a short period. if you make a timeline of Canon's AF system mounts then you get:

EF - 1987

EF-S - 2003

EF-M - 2013

since the takeover of Konica-Minolta in 2006 Sony has added 3 new mounts. that's 3 in 8 years compared to 3 in 27 years and explains quite well why people are confused with Sony offering and where the "give us another mount, Sony" jokes come from.

Sony has two mounts:
A-mount: The SLR mount
E-mount: The Mirrorless mount

They also have FZ mount.

Sensor size has nothing to do with the mount.

Nobody cares about mounts or sensor sizes really. What people care about is lens system. If all Sony E lenses (and 3rd party lenses for that system) covered FF image circle from the start, introduction of FE would not be as bad. As it stands, Sony supports 5 lens systems, and understandably unable to support even one of them properly. For comparison, Olympus and Panasonic support half a lens system each. No wonder it has become the best, most complete crop system in no time at all.

FZ-mount is not for use in Alpha system (stills cameras).

It is still another system on which not so big Sony optical department spreads their thin resources.

If you want to include video cameras, I am sure te count will go up for Canon from three to something else, no?

No, their dedicated video cameras are still EF.

You can mount ANY 35mm format lens on fz. Its a pro mount that a lot of people use for big budget filming. I dont see anyone complaining using fz mount.

So what? It is irrelevant how good (or bad) it is. The fact is Sony's limited (and dwindling) development, production and marketing resources are sprit between 5 different systems of lenses, which leads to all 5 being inferior compared to competition, with lower choice and higher prices. Looks like the result of bad management and internal infighting.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads