Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: jazzy on May 10, 2017, 08:59:48 am
-
I'm sure this must have been discussed before, but I just can't find it.
Just a simple question, is current Fuji G mount full frame (56x40mm) proof?
-
No
That size would crop considerably. Plus IC of lenses is designed around the smaller 44x33 sensor.
Fuji has claimed current lenses will work with 100mp resolution but Fuji is waiting on the next round of Sony 44x33 sensors as there should be a 100mp version coming by 2018.
Paul Caldwell
-
Thank you.
Out of the candidates (Phase One, Hasselblad, Fuji, Sony ..), who could we count on to make the first full frame mirrorless do you think?
-
Nobody
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
-
Thank you.
Out of the candidates (Phase One, Hasselblad, Fuji, Sony ..), who could we count on to make the first full frame mirrorless do you think?
Already happened:
https://www.phaseone.com/a-series
Jim
-
Phase One already does with their A-Series. What do you get from a 'full frame sensor'? Are you expecting native lenses? Or are you looking for a cheaper way to put a larger sensor behind some existing camera than the existing backs?
Given Phase's experience with the Sony 33x44, I wouldn't be surprised for them to do something, but really is that a market they want to play in? Sony have a lot of work to do filling out the lenses for their A series camera, so I'm hard pressed to think they'll want to do another lens line up so quickly. Hass & Fuji are all in on the smaller mount, so why do a larger one if they can get the next gen higher MP chip from Sony?
I asked the same question, if they could shoehorn the current 100mp chip into the X1D and got more or less the same answer.
-
Alpa crossed my mind too.
I'd love a platform able to use so many legacy lenses in as much of their original film size as possible. The Alpa / Phase one a-series seems to use its own lenses only?
-
Given Phase's experience with the Sony 33x44, I wouldn't be surprised for them to do something, but really is that a market they want to play in? Sony have a lot of work to do filling out the lenses for their A series camera, so I'm hard pressed to think they'll want to do another lens line up so quickly. Hass & Fuji are all in on the smaller mount, so why do a larger one if they can get the next gen higher MP chip from Sony?
I asked the same question, if they could shoehorn the current 100mp chip into the X1D and got more or less the same answer.
It may happen, but not as one would think. The V1D Concept Camera that Hasselblad exhibited at Photokina last year apparently "used" the full frame 100MP Sony sensor in a square format with the existing XCD lenses and offered a 75MP file. However, the forthcoming 100 MP cropped medium format sensor from Sony may make that approach with the existing 100MP sensor much less attractive.
-
Alpa crossed my mind too.
I'd love a platform able to use so many legacy lenses in as much of their original film size as possible. The Alpa / Phase one a-series seems to use its own lenses only?
The Alpa / Phase is a pre-tuned setup, but more or less the same as a normal back and Rodenstock lenses. You can use it just like any other Mamiya mount back.
As to old glass and large/newer sensors, it's really not going to get much better than now. Old glass will give a look, but newer backs are at the point where any flaws that weren't visible before are now front & center.
-
Just a simple question, is current Fuji G mount full frame (56x40mm) proof?
I am almost certain that the lenses for the GFX are designed and optimized for its 44x33mm format (55mm diagonal), so that any up to about to about 55-65mm focal length will not work well or at all on the 54x40mm format, where they would require "wide-angle" designs. On the other hand, longer ones (the 110/2 and 120/4 so far) have a good chance of working, since optical designs for "longer than normal" lenses typically have an image circle not much smaller than their focal length, as a side-effect of how non-wide-angle lens designs work. However even then, the diameter of the G lens mount might be too small, or the lens barrels too narrow in places, causing vignetting even if the optics of the actual "glass" produces a big enough image.
On your second question: if what you mean by "mirrorless" is "with EVF instead of OVF", then I think there is little chance of seeing such an "EVF camera system" in a format larger than 44x33mm anytime soon, if ever. (I prefer the positive description "EVF camera", since neither that Alpa/Phase A-Series nor a Leica rangefinder nor a view camera is what anyone has in mind with the name "mirrorless").
P. S. More on jargon: it strikes me as silly to use "full frame" to refer to film-derived formats like 36x24mm and 54x42mm but not to a system in an intermediate format like 44x33mm with all its lenses designed for that format, so that there is no forced crop. Can we reserve "crop" for things like the cameras that use a 44x33mm sensor with lenses mostly or entirely designed for the larger 54x42mm format (so-called 645)?
-
Hi Bill,
Thanks for chiming in.
I am pretty sure the lenses are optimised for 44x33 mm. Sony has announced 100 MP sensors in 44x33 format coming under 2018 and I would expect those sensors showing up in new generation cameras from Fuji, Hasselblad and probably others. I would hope the new sensors have on sensor PDAF, that allows for fast focus on EVF cameras.
Optimising the lenses for the smaller format probably allows for even better image quality and possibly lower cost compared to lens designs that cover a larger area.
Best regards
Erik
I am almost certain that the lenses for the GFX are designed and optimized for its 44x33mm format (55mm diagonal), so that any up to about to about 55-65mm focal length will not work well or at all on the 54x40mm format, where they would require "wide-angle" designs. On the other hand, longer ones (the 110/2 and 120/4 so far) have a good chance of working, since optical designs for "longer than normal" lenses typically have an image circle not much smaller than their focal length, as a side-effect of how non-wide-angle lens designs work. However even then, the diameter of the G lens mount might be too small, or the lens barrels too narrow in places, causing vignetting even if the optics of the actual "glass" produces a big enough image.
On your second question: if what you mean by "mirrorless" is "with EVF instead of OVF", then I think there is little chance of seeing such an "EVF camera system" in a format larger than 44x33mm anytime soon, if ever. (I prefer the positive description "EVF camera", since neither that Alpa/Phase A-Series nor a Leica rangefinder nor a view camera is what anyone has in mind with the name "mirrorless").
P. S. More on jargon: it strikes me as silly to use "full frame" to refer to film-derived formats like 36x24mm and 54x42mm but not to a system in an intermediate format like 44x33mm with all its lenses designed for that format, so that there is no forced crop. Can we reserve "crop" for things like the cameras that use a 44x33mm sensor with lenses mostly or entirely designed for the larger 54x42mm format (so-called 645)?
-
I am almost certain that the lenses for the GFX are designed and optimized for its 44x33mm format (55mm diagonal), so that any up to about to about 55-65mm focal length will not work well or at all on the 54x40mm format, where they would require "wide-angle" designs. On the other hand, longer ones (the 110/2 and 120/4 so far) have a good chance of working, since optical designs for "longer than normal" lenses typically have an image circle not much smaller than their focal length, as a side-effect of how non-wide-angle lens designs work. However even then, the diameter of the G lens mount might be too small, or the lens barrels too narrow in places, causing vignetting even if the optics of the actual "glass" produces a big enough image.
On your second question: if what you mean by "mirrorless" is "with EVF instead of OVF", then I think there is little chance of seeing such an "EVF camera system" in a format larger than 44x33mm anytime soon, if ever. (I prefer the positive description "EVF camera", since neither that Alpa/Phase A-Series nor a Leica rangefinder nor a view camera is what anyone has in mind with the name "mirrorless").
P. S. More on jargon: it strikes me as silly to use "full frame" to refer to film-derived formats like 36x24mm and 54x42mm but not to a system in an intermediate format like 44x33mm with all its lenses designed for that format, so that there is no forced crop. Can we reserve "crop" for things like the cameras that use a 44x33mm sensor with lenses mostly or entirely designed for the larger 54x42mm format (so-called 645)?
Thank you for your response. I'm clear about the limitation of Fuji G mount and also agree on the jargons, however until there is more universally adopted terms, "full/crop" still a convenient and understood way to talking about them.
And yes, I do mean mirrorless with EVF. Would you care to elaborate why you think there's little chance to seeing them with 56x40mm sensor?
-
Because Fuji and Hassi committed to the smaller format and won't create a second lens line up.
Phase needed long for the XF, which is a great system. But releasing a new camera with a whole new set of lenses ? Wouldn't bet on it.
Sony and the rest, I don't think they have any interest at all at the moment. They are happy with FF 36.
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
-
All Phase needs is an adapter like Hasselblad made to use existing glass. The sheer mass of the most of the modern BR zooms might be an issue, but it could be done.
Phase will in time need to have a similar product, but more than likely it will not appear till 2018.
Paul Caldwell
-
Not so sure Phase will jump in. My guess from looking at the Fuji GFX Facebook page and other random sources is that well over 95% of the buyers of the GFX are coming from Fuji X series cameras and DSLRs, and they would never have been real potential customers of the Phase XF system. Phase One is really not losing much money, if any, with the kind of customers it has traditionally relied upon to support its high price point business model. It has no interest in fighting with Fuji or Hasselblad at the low end of the market. Will that change when Fuji has the forthcoming 100MP Sony sensor and Phase has to convince its customer base that they now REALLY REALLY NEED 150MP and 100MP just isn't good enough? Probably not.
-
Time will tell for sure. But for sure there are a lot of non Fuji X series users on the Fuji GFX forum. Reports daily from Canon Nikon Phase One users.
Due to cost factor of GFX many current X shooters have not opted in.
Paul Caldwell
-
Hi,
I would say that it is a good thing that we have affordable medium format. I would guess that building an MFD system based on the GFX or the X1D is something like 2x3 times the cost of top class 24x36 (ignoring sport shooter's cameras and Leica). For that money it seems that the buyer gets a decent increase of image quality.
Traditional MFD is much more expensive. I guess that Hasselblad may need to reconsider it's price structure. Phase One may be more oriented towards 100 MP full frame and they have a great 100 MP sensor from Sony that they sell at a very premium price. Hasselblad of course also sell the same sensor, possibly at a more reasonable price.
It makes some sense to speculate a bit. Sony will produce a 100 MP sensor for 44x33 mm. Fuji says that it's lenses are designed for 100 MP and that also probably applies to the X1D lenses.
So, next year we will probably see 100 MP on 44x33, and I would guess pricing will be close to what we have now. So you can probably have camera body with one or two lenses system yielding 100 MP of perfectly good pixels for something like 10k $US. Will it make sense to spend 3-4 times the amount on a 100 MP 54x40 mm system?
Sony has also announced 150 MP 54x40 mm for 2018, so it is very likely that we will see 150 MP 54x100 mm, but will that deliver on image quality? I am pretty sure it will, using the best Rodenstock lenses on a technical camera.
But, I would assume that the 10 k$ 44x33 mm system at 100 MP may be the sweet spot for great a lot of MFD users. Some users may settle 24x36 mm at say 36-70 MP or 24MP APS-C. In many cases, 4/3 may be the best choice of system, it all depends on needs. Just as an example, Sony makes some nice lenses called G-Master for the A7/A9. But those lenses are big. Having a small camera is no great advantage if you need to carry a bunch of big and heavy lenses.
Fuji has long made a great APS-C system with well designed lenses. Such a system may be optimal if no very large prints are needed. On the other hand, we have the Sony A6500, a great camera with an incredible sensor, but I am not sure that Sony makes a good set of optimal lenses for it.
Just to say, GFX and X1D makes a lot of sense. Those systems bring the wind of change to medium format.
Best regards
Erik
-
Thank you for your response. I'm clear about the limitation of Fuji G mount and also agree on the jargons, however until there is more universally adopted terms, "full/crop" still a convenient and understood way to talking about them.
I know it is quixotic (after all, we still measure engine power output by comparison to horses!) but in a forum like this full of knowledgable photographers, using sizes in mm seems easy, accurate, informative, and free of misleading connotations: 36x24, 44x33, 52x40, etc.
After all that is how large film formats and prints have always been described (but with inches): 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 and so on. Also, is some countries, "36x24" is a common usage for the standard 35mm film formats clearly photographers can handle it. (And those numerical descriptions are shorter than "full frame" or "crop format", so there can be no complaint on that count.)
Anyway, I have "corrected" your subject line!
And yes, I do mean mirrorless with EVF. Would you care to elaborate why you think there's little chance to seeing them with 56x40mm sensor?
Other have made some good arguments, so I do not have much to add. However, Eric's point about the coming 100MP sensor in 44x33mm format does make me think that there is a very small and shrinking range of application where the larger 52x40mm format would show any significant advantage, because the vast majority of scenes cannot sustain even as much detail as a 100MP sensor gives.
Why? In short, due to the trade-off between limiting OOF blurring (requiring a small enough aperture size) and limiting diffraction blurring (requiring a larger enough aperture size), which sets the same limit on total image detail regardless of format. If anything, seeking higher resolution to make use of higher pixel counts requires ever smaller apertures to get the desired main scene elements "in focus" to a tighter standard, and then diffraction effects get worse.
Also, stitching is often a far less expensive alternative with stationary subjects.
-
I'm sure this must have been discussed before, but I just can't find it.
Just a simple question, is current Fuji G mount full frame (56x40mm) proof?
I can not quite understand the question, and answers. Why would the GFX MOUNT not accommodate lenses which would cover 56x40mm sensor? Present Fujinon lenses for the FGX mount do not, but is there any reason why, in the future, there would not be lenses using the same mount, but with larger image circle? Is the opening too small (not), distance to the sensor too short (possible)?
-
I think the question is 'can Fuji make a camera with a 54x42mm sensor and the GFX mount?'.
-
Hi,
Possible image circle can be limited by the mount, but also by available shutters. It is quite feasible that the camera would be larger to accommodate a 54x40 mm sensor.
It may be possible to fit the larger sensor within the GFX mount, but that would be another system. That is essentially what Sony has made with the e-mount. The E-mount was initially APS-C, but it has developed into the FE-lens line, covering 24x36. But, FE-lens is a new system quite separate from the original NEX.
Best regards
Erik
-
I think the question is 'can Fuji make a camera with a 54x42mm sensor and the GFX mount?'.
Fuji answered this question back during the announcement press conference.
The GFX mount will not accomidate a larger sensor without a visible crop and all current lenses are designed around the smaller sensor size for IC. This would also mean a visible crop on the larger sensor.
I figure you will see 100mp when Sony decides to produce that particular sensor in the 44 x33 size.
Will Fuji come out with 2 cameras one with the 44x33 and the other with the larger I doubt that will happen but anything is possible.
Paul Caldwell
-
I can not quite understand the question, and answers. Why would the GFX MOUNT not accommodate lenses which would cover 56x40mm sensor?
I agree that the original question is a bit ambiguous, or has perhaps been misinterpreted. I rephrased the subject line to reflect two questions of possible interest:
1) Can the Fujiifilm G mount for the GFX accommodate lenses that cover a larger format like 52x40mm? (the current largest sensor format)
2) Can some or all of the lenses made for the 44x33 format GFX cover these larger formats without problems like vignetting or poor optical correction beyond the 55mm diameter of the image circle of the 44x33mm sensor?
On #1, I am skeptical that the throat is wide enough to avoid vignetting with those larger formats. A rough guideline is that for an idealized perfectly telecentric lens (exit pupil at infinity) the lens mount opening must have a diameter of at least
(sensor diagonal) plus (flange focal distance)/(minimum aperture ratio)
For the G mount, the sensor diagonal is 55mm, the flange focal distance is 26.7mm and the minimum aperture ratio so far is f/2, setting a minimum of about 55mm + 12.4mm = 62.4mm.
If the larger Sony sensor, 54x40mm is used, the diagonal size increases by 12mm to 67mm (and for "645" film format it increases by 15mm to 70mm).
I doubt that the G mount has that extra 12mm of diameter, which would add bulk and weight while adding no value to the 44x33 format. But does anyone have the specs for G mount?
On #2 I have already commented, but to update briefly: the basic optical designs for lenses at long enough focal lengths, say 90mm and up, have a good chance of producing a large enough image circle, but some potential hazards are
- the narrowness of the optical path at the rear of the lens due to a possibly too narrow lens mount diameter,
- design optimization to minimize aberrations over the intended 55mm diameter with the trade-off of poor performance outside that circle, and
- internal rectangular anti-flare baffles which block all light that does not contribute to the intended 44x33mm image.
-
I figure you will see 100mp when Sony decides to produce that particular sensor in the 44 x33 size.
Nest year, 2018. IMX 461, back illuminated. Page 1 of this document from Sony semiconductors:
http://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/products_en/news/detail/170301.pdf
-
I'd settle for a Sony CMOS 48x36 sensor. This is my very personal minimum required sensor size to consider it as a MF sensor.
I'm sure this sensor would have no problems working fine inside the current GFX size and mount.
Hope remains!
-
I'd settle for a Sony CMOS 48x36 sensor. This is my very personal minimum required sensor size to consider it as a MF sensor.
I'm sure this sensor would have no problems working fine inside the current GFX size and mount.
Hope remains!
As the expression goes, "Hope is not a strategy."
-
As the expression goes, "Hope is not a strategy."
If you only knew! 😄
-
SIDE NOTE: FYI - I Talked with Fuji techs yesterday and confirmed, the RAW files are only 14 bits deep!
For those where this matters, like myself, this will not cut it for me.
-
SIDE NOTE: FYI - I Talked with Fuji techs yesterday and confirmed, the RAW files are only 14 bits deep!
For those where this matters, like myself, this will not cut it for me.
And ? There is no 50Mp camera which has more than 14bit... so if you need 16bit only the 100Mp backs from phase and Hassi are an option.
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
-
SIDE NOTE: FYI - I Talked with Fuji techs yesterday and confirmed, the RAW files are only 14 bits deep!
For those where this matters, like myself, this will not cut it for me.
I own a GFX. I've spent a lot of time looking at the GFX files. Adding more precision would only digitize the read noise and low signal photon noise more precisely, even at base ISO.
Jim
-
I own a GFX. I've spent a lot of time looking at the GFX files. Adding more precision would only digitize the read noise and low signal photon noise more precisely, even at base ISO.
Jim
Spending a few weeks with an IQ3 100mp in 16 bit mode might change your mind on that :).
-
Spending a few weeks with an IQ3 100mp in 16 bit mode might change your mind on that :).
It'd also eat up a couple terabytes of space and cause a horribly expensive case of GAS. ;D
-
Spending a few weeks with an IQ3 100mp in 16 bit mode might change your mind on that :).
What's the IQ3 RN at base ISO in DN's or counts?
Jim
-
Doug, it doesn't help all as the IQ350 won't do any better as 14bit. It must be a 100 back to get more info.
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
-
Hi Doug,
What is difference between an IQ 380 in 16 bit mode and an IQ 3100MP in 16 bit mode?
Add on question, in what case would it matter?
Best regards
Erik
Spending a few weeks with an IQ3 100mp in 16 bit mode might change your mind on that :).
-
None has the IQ80 has no 16bit. That's why there was the new raw format with the IQ100. Everything before wasn't really 16bit.
Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk
-
[...]So, next year we will probably see 100 MP on 44x33, and I would guess pricing will be close to what we have now. [...]
There is one important aspect to consider. The current 50MP CMOS is a pretty old model, at the end of its life-cycle. That means that Sony is trying to sweep out of that from the storage room, so they can fill that in with some new fresh 100MP. Therefore the price of the current 50MP crop sensor might be pretty low.
If I would want to figure out the future price of the upcoming sensor (and the camera/back it is built in), I would look at the first generation devices' (IQ250, H5Dc, etc) price at introduction.
-
Hi,
The sensor is the same in the IQ250 and H5Dc, but it seems that P1 and Hasselblad makes a hefty surcharge on the MFDB model. The CFV 50c back was priced well under H version, although costs were obviously the same.
I would guess that sensor cost may be in the 1000-2000$ range, probably at the lower end, else Fuji would not be able to sell the GFX at 6500$ in the US.
Hasselblad sells the exactly same sensor at 9000$ in the D1X and for 26 000 in the H6D.
The H5X body costs 7000$. A digital back is a somewhat simpler device than a digital camera. So Hasselblad would be able to sell the H6D for 16 000 $, but it is a different market. Or, used to be a different market. Ming Thein, Hasselblad Chief of Strategy has some things to figure…
Yes, I would think that prices may go up with the 100 MP sensor, but I would guess something like 2000-3000$ initial hike on price.
Best regards
Erik
There is one important aspect to consider. The current 50MP CMOS is a pretty old model, at the end of its life-cycle. That means that Sony is trying to sweep out of that from the storage room, so they can fill that in with some new fresh 100MP. Therefore the price of the current 50MP crop sensor might be pretty low.
If I would want to figure out the future price of the upcoming sensor (and the camera/back it is built in), I would look at the first generation devices' (IQ250, H5Dc, etc) price at introduction.
-
There is one important aspect to consider. The current 50MP CMOS is a pretty old model, at the end of its life-cycle. ... If I would want to figure out the future price of the upcoming sensor (and the camera/back it is built in), I would look at the first generation devices' (IQ250, H5Dc, etc) price at introduction.
I mostly agree, but would more optimistically look at the Pentax 645Z launch price of US$8500, at least for how FujiFilm might price a next GFX model with 100MP 44x33mmm sensor. Phase One and Hasselblad SLR body and back pricing seems to be inflated by "lock-in", through lens ownership and such. These new EVF systems instead need to be priced so as to persuade people to buy a body and new lenses, so more like a "razor and blades" approach.
So I see a good chance of prices staying under US$10,000 for 100MP 44x33 EVF cameras.