On 8 September 2011 20:27, Dario Bonazza <dario.bona...@virgilio.it> wrote: > I wrote: > >> Anthony Farr wrote: >> >> What a hoot! >> http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/475/272/html/005.jpg.html >> >> Good luck hand-holding that combo. Anyone know the crop factor for the Q? >> >>> 5x, hence the DA 40mm acts as a 200mm at least! >
So that's 1250mm of full frame equivalence! Even if you could hold it you shouldn't. > While the soon-to-be-announced Nikon should be somewhere around 2.5x. > > Pity that Sony does not make a 4/3 format sensor, as their current sensor > technology will allow them to blow away Panasonic. My dream mirrorless > camera is a m43 shaped like a rangefinder (viewfinder included) with a Sony > sensor. > You probably won't see a Sony sensored m43 camera because Sony isn't part of the Micro Four Thirds consortium, which comprises Olympus, Panasonic, Cosina (Voigtlander), Carl Zeiss AG, Jos. Schneider Optische Werke GmbH, Komamura Corporation and Sigma Corporation. Perhaps Cosina could do an m43 pseudo rangefinder with a Sony sensor, if the fine-print of the consortium's agreement allows it. It's my opinion that the Panasonic 10MP 4/3 sensor, with its poor low-light performance, was the weak link in full sized FourThirds cameras. At least when Kodak made DSLR sensors there was competition and choice, but I feel that their 4/3 monopoly made Panasonic lazy. The subsequent 12.3MP 4/3 sensor is a better match for the competition, but only the premium models got it. The entry level models, where first impressions are made, were left with the old 10MP sensor. Combined with slow kit zoom lenses they performed well below the benchmarks of their day at ISO800 and up, and must have cost Olympus a sizeable amount of repeat business. They didn't make that mistake a second time, the m43 EPs and EPLs (Electronic Pens) were never saddled with the 10MP sensor, and have been good sellers and performers. Sony, Nikon and Pentax were very lucky that the old 6MP CCD, the mainstay of their early DSLRs and later entry level DSLRs, was a good performer with acceptable quality at its higher ISOs. What I can't for the life of me understand is why Sigma, who is a full partner in the FourThirds consortium, kept its DSLRs quarantined from 4/3 even though the sensor was just millimetres different in size. That Foveon sensor in the FourThirds camp would have boosted everyone's sales. While not having any worthwhile low-light performance its unique selling proposition of superb colour reproduction and high sharpness due to interpolation-free capture would have brought a shipload of wedding, portrait and fashion professionals into the fold. But Sigma in its hubris coveted all the sales from those users, sales they then didn't get because image conscious professionals wouldn't be seen dead with a Sigma camera. I can't help thinking that many an Olympus using professional might have added a Sigma 4/3 body to their bag for portrait shooting if such a thing had existed. Nice shooting of your own foot, Sigma, to make a camera that wants to be pro-gear but can only take a Sigma lens. What a joke! Not that Sigma lenses are no good, but nobody's going to jump brands to get one. I notice that Sigma SD1s are being pushed on eBay at less than MSRP. Hmmm, why am I not surprised? > Not so different from a Sony NEX-7 after all... hmmm... mumble mumble... > pity it's a Sony, with their so-so management of their excellent sensors and > a weird flash shoe on top of that. > > Dario > At least they've made their good components available to other brands. They were a supplier of DSLR sensors before they acquired KonicaMinolta, were they not? As they were already supplying other brands and earning good money from it, the benefits of exclusivity weren't clear cut to them. regards, Anthony "Of what use is lens and light to those who lack in mind and sight" (Anon) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.