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.
