Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?  (Read 3845 times)

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« on: October 27, 2013, 10:52:21 am »

In the past, I have been consistently skeptical about the prospects for a square sensor camera, but maybe it is a bit less UNlikely now, due to the rise of mirrorless system cameras. The reflex mirror and VF prism are a headache for a square sensor, because, for example, going from 36x24mm to 36x36 requires a larger, heavier, noisier mirror, a larger heavier focusing screen and prism, and a deeper lens box that requires longer back focus distance on all lenses, a disadvantage for normal to wide angle coverage. On the other hand, a mirrorless system with good hybrid on-sensor AF reduces the problem to just needing a somewhat larger and more expensive sensor to get the same image size most of the time, once one acknowledges that most final displayed images are in oblong shapes from 4:3 to 16:9 (video), while square images are mostly for Instagram, Facebook, and website avatars.

Who might do it? I would guess at one of the "second-tier" companies already exploring territory other than the still-dominant SLR mainstream ruled by Canon and Nikon. Maybe Ricoh-Pentax, to move beyond the flop of the Q system and its K-mount mirrorless attempt? Maybe Fujifilm or Olympus, who keep looking around for new niches?

One constraint on cost is the 26x33mm maximum field size for fabbing a sensor without on-silicon stitching, but that would still fit with up to 24x24mm, working with existing mainstream "APS-C" lenses. I would prefer expanding an existing format, covering the whole image circle for which lenses are designed, even at the cost of some vignetting near the corners of the square with some shorter focal lengths, on the basis that those will almost alway be cropped away (like the multi-aspect ratio sensors that Panasonic used to make) but that might lead to some user confusion and complaints.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 11:18:40 am by BJL »
Logged

Hulyss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 734
    • H.Bowman
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2013, 11:09:29 am »

In the past, I have been consistently skeptical about the prospects for a square sensor camera, but maybe it is a bit less likely now, due to the rise of mirrorless system cameras. The reflex mirror and VF prism are a headache for a square sensor, because, for example, going from 36x24mm to 36x36 requires a larger, heavier, noisier mirror, a larger heavier focusing screen and prism, and a deeper lens box that requires longer back focus distance on all lenses, a disadvantage for normal to wide angle coverage. On the other hand, a mirrorless system with good hybrid on-sensor AF reduces the problem to just needing a somewhat larger and more expensive sensor to get the same image size most of the time, once one acknowledges that most final displayed images are in oblong shapes from 4:3 to 16:9 (video), while square images are mostly for Instagram, Facebook, and website avatars.

Who might do it? I would guess at one of the "second-tier" companies already exploring territory other than the still dominant SLR mainstream ruled by Canon and Nikon. Maybe Ricoh-Pentax, to move beyond the flop of the Q system and its K-mount mirrorless attempt? Maybe Fujifilm or Olympus, who keep looking around for new niches?

One constraint on cost is the 26x33mm maximum field size for fabbing a sensor without on-silicon stitching, but that would still fit with up to 24x24mm, working with existing mainstream "APS-C" lenses. I would prefer expanding an existing format, covering the whole image circle for which lenses are designed, even at the cost of some vignetting near the corners of the square with some shorter focal lengths, on the basis that those will almost alway be cropped away (like the multi-aspect ratio sensors that Panasonic used to make) but that might lead to some user confusion and complaints.

I agree with your technical analysis but not with the bold statement. I may misunderstand the meaning of your sentence...







Logged
Kind Regards -  Hulyss Bowman | hulyssbowman.com |

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2370
    • The Last Word
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2013, 11:39:37 am »

In the past, I have been consistently skeptical about the prospects for a square sensor camera, but maybe it is a bit less UNlikely now, due to the rise of mirrorless system cameras.

I don't know how unlikely it is, but I'd like to see it. Consider what could be done with a 36x36mm sensor and an aspect ratio control like the D4, so you could have, with lenses intended to cover the 35mm format image circle:

36x24mm (35mm hor)
24x36mm (35mm vert)
33.08x27.4mm (8x10 hor)
27.4x33.08 (8x10 vert)
30.6x30.6mm (square)
36mmx36mm (crop in post)

All within the 35mm format imaging circle, except for the last one. You could also use a lens with greater than usual coverage as a shift lens, doing the shifting in post.

I had not heard of the 26x33mm single chip limitation. If that's true, are all the full frame sensors stitched? Seems surprising. [edit: I read your earlier post about this and I now understand what you're talking about: the stepper. Thanks for the insight.]

Jim

« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 03:50:12 pm by Jim Kasson »
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2013, 02:40:31 pm »

Hulyss,
You are perhaps overlooking my use of the word "most", even though you also bold-faced it. I know well that some fine photographic images are produced in square format; I even have one that I bought hanging on my wall. But they are vastly outnumbered by fine images in oblong formats from 5:4 up ... and also vastly outnumbered by Instagrams, for better or for worse!

When speculating about possible future products, I like to ground myself in constraints on economic viability in relation to things like the likely price-demand-profit margin relationships, not just asking what is technologically possible.
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2013, 04:33:06 pm »

In a Blue Sky world I'd scrap 35mm-format legacy constraints completely and go with a 45x45mm (or so) sensor. This would let MF users join the party in a more significant way. Make the camera mountless (in the sense of not being hardwired for any particular mount/brand) with a wide variety of mount adapters you could bayonet on & off as needed, each adapter fully compatible mechanically & electronically with that mount's lenses. An EVF camera wouldn't need to be much larger to accommodate the larger sensor. If such a camera had native lenses in addition to all the adapters, those lenses would need to deal with a pretty short register...might be a sticking point.

Not holding my breath on this, of course.

-Dave-
Logged

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2013, 05:13:25 pm »

Hulyss,
You are perhaps overlooking my use of the word "most", even though you also bold-faced it. I know well that some fine photographic images are produced in square format; I even have one that I bought hanging on my wall. But they are vastly outnumbered by fine images in oblong formats from 5:4 up ... and also vastly outnumbered by Instagrams, for better or for worse!

When speculating about possible future products, I like to ground myself in constraints on economic viability in relation to things like the likely price-demand-profit margin relationships, not just asking what is technologically possible.
Well if MF digital hadn't moved to non-square sensors then square images would not be seen as an instagram thing. As traditionally a lot of MF film was indeed square.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

jjj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4728
    • http://www.futtfuttfuttphotography.com
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #6 on: October 27, 2013, 05:15:52 pm »

In the past, I have been consistently skeptical about the prospects for a square sensor camera, but maybe it is a bit less UNlikely now, due to the rise of mirrorless system cameras. The reflex mirror and VF prism are a headache for a square sensor, because, for example, going from 36x24mm to 36x36 requires a larger, heavier, noisier mirror, a larger heavier focusing screen and prism, and a deeper lens box that requires longer back focus distance on all lenses, a disadvantage for normal to wide angle coverage.
Good thinking. I'd like to think someone will try it. It'd be nice to have a camera you do not have to turn for vertical shots.
Logged
Tradition is the Backbone of the Spinele

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #7 on: October 27, 2013, 08:18:32 pm »

Well if MF digital hadn't moved to non-square sensors then square images would not be seen as an instagram thing. As traditionally a lot of MF film was indeed square.
As far as i know, the great majority of those square negatives were printed in non-square crops to "verticals" and horizontals"; the square film format was primarily to accomodate taking both verticals and horizontals with cameras that could not be rotated due to the "top-down" non-prism viewfinders of most early MF cameras. The absence of square options in either sheet film cameras or 35mm film SLR's is another hint that square was never a very popular print format.
Logged

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2370
    • The Last Word
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #8 on: October 27, 2013, 10:51:42 pm »

The absence of square options in either sheet film cameras or 35mm film SLR's is another hint that square was never a very popular print format.

Well, not complete absence:

Zeiss Ikon Tenax 1
Zeiss Ikon Taxona
Robots from 1934 on
Mecaflex

But I take your point...

Jim

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #9 on: October 28, 2013, 10:45:53 am »

Well, not complete absence:
I originally had "complete absence", so it is lucky that I realized there might be some obscure exceptions, and that in this forum, someone would surely find them!

I might as well throw in the original Kodak Instamatic 126 film format of about 28x28mm, from which I have hundreds of square prints in my childhood albums: that is probably the champion for sheer numbers of square prints.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2013, 10:56:20 am by BJL »
Logged

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2370
    • The Last Word
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #10 on: October 28, 2013, 10:52:30 am »

I might as well throw in the original Kodak Instamatic 126 film format of about 28x28mm, from which I have hundreds of square prints in my childhood albums: that is probably the champion for sheer numbers of square prints.

That and all the square Polaroid prints.

But getting back to your point about most square negs getting cropped, while that's true for commercial photography, I don't think it's true for art. Think of all the Holga and Diana images, and the true believers to whom it would be sacrilege to crop them. Or the iconic Hasselblad images, many of which are printed to show the two tick marks.

I personally love the square format, as evidenced by the number of times it showed up in this series.

Jim
« Last Edit: October 28, 2013, 10:59:41 am by Jim Kasson »
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #11 on: October 28, 2013, 11:01:05 am »

That [the Kodak Instamatic] and all the square Polaroid prints.
Indeed, and I see a pattern: cameras designed for extreme ease of use by very "casual" photographers, which therefore avoided the need to rotate between horizontals and verticals. (Rotating would have been particularly fiddly with the bulky Polaroid cameras).

P.S.  With all due respect to the artistic virtues of square images in some cases, Holga and Dianna images are one small fringe of "artistic photography", not in the slightest refuting my claim that the vast majority of artistic photographic images are in oblong shapes from about 5:4 to 3:2.

By the way, that same dominance [not monopoly!] of oblong over square is also seen in paintings and drawings, quite consistently over the centuries and up to the present.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2013, 11:09:16 am by BJL »
Logged

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2370
    • The Last Word
Re: Is a square format camera more likely with mirrorless?
« Reply #12 on: October 28, 2013, 11:16:27 am »

By the way, that same dominance [not monopoly!] of oblong over square is also seen in paintings and drawings, quite consistently over the centuries and up to the present.

My brain makes me agree that you are correct, but my heart wishes it weren't so.

Jim
Pages: [1]   Go Up