Will Fujifilm Make The Same Mistake?

[Aswald]

I hope he doesn't and that Sony doesn't suddenly just dump their A mount clients like this. It would be a PR disaster for them to do so.

 

There are actually gems in the so much more mature Sony A mount lens lineup. I also don't know what happened to the old Minolta 200mm f/2.8, which is a lovely portrait lens. The Minolta/Sony 135mm f/2.8/T4.5 STF lens with the apodization filter is one of the most amazing portrait lenses I know. Astonishing actually. But it's very hard to work with it when you lose a half stop of light with the A to E mount adapter making it more like a T5.6 lens. It's just so simple really: native lenses are best.

 

It's an irony that I am probably the Sony FF mirrorless fetishist's public enemy number one, when I probably own much more expensive Sony/Minolta glass than most of them ever will.  

 

Those are some pretty legendary lenses. I know the 135mm F2.8 lens well as my uncle used to shoot with it. Beautiful. It's a shame to put such beautiful glass on an adapter to an E mount!

[Aswald]

Do you mean none of them says "Sony!"...??

    I'm afraid I'm not quite up to their standard yet!

[Aswald]

Sony FF with it' s big lenses, reminds me most of the 120 format cams for slower paced work. Like my Mamiya 6 or my Hasselblad 503CW. Great cams, but not the ones I tend to take for everyday work...

 

I thought the same thing......someone tried to imply this over at another forum and got a avalanche of posts convincing him otherwise.

[andyfromboston]

Any system has its issues. If Sony had chosen to really focus on APSC mirrorless, add IBIS to that and bring its lenses available up to Fuji level, would they have had better products? I don't know, maybe. Is the A7 series a mistake for Sony? No, of course not. Pick it apart however you want, but Sony is selling a ton of these things. FF mirrorless has improved Sony's position in the market. That's how you measure success or failure in business.

[deva]

The Sony A7 cameras look quite good to me. For still photography, I have no interest in them. I prefer the size of the Fuji X cameras and lenses. I now have an X-Pro2 to go with my X-T1. Their image quality is sufficient that I consider any further improvement pedantic. I've taken and seen lots of images from both these cameras that are as good as can be... meaning the photo content so overwhelms whatever tiny technical flaws are there that they simply do not matter. Like an audio signal with a noise floor of -110 dB or -113 dB... the 3dB just does matter in any practical sense.

 

I find the obsessive race to (an imaginary) perfection a bit off-putting. The technical image quality today is so very high, yet the higher it goes, the more obsessive becomes the quest. 

 

I do have some interest in the A7S for low light street video. 

[Sator-Photography]

Those are some pretty legendary lenses. I know the 135mm F2.8 lens well as my uncle used to shoot with it. Beautiful. It's a shame to put such beautiful glass on an adapter to an E mount!

 

I think I might own that lens too. It's a lovely one as well. Once again, I really wish they would reissue it with a refresh. 

 

I hope the Minolta legacy gets a fresh lease of life—if Sony are successful in relaunching their A mount DSLT line. To be honest, I want them to succeed, hence the motivation for trying to prick the FF mirrorless bubble, built as that is on irrational "hula hoop" type market mania. Some may say "The Market" hath Spoken: Full Frame Mirrorless is a Raging Success. Unfortunately, "The Market" is hardly a Divine Oracle, and runs in cycles and waves. I fear the FF mirrorless craze is more like a dot.com bubble. Historically bubbles, including the dot.com bubble, have always been driven by novel technology. There was also a 19th century railway stock bubble driven by train technology. In our case, the technological novelty of FF mirrorless is driving an irrational tech bubble that is unsustainable, because it isn't based on any fundamentals that make much sense. The more mature A line Minolta legacy represents a more secure base for stable technological development of a kind that is far more sustainable in the long-term, and there is plenty that is innovative in DSLT. 

Edited April 6, 2016 by Sator-Photography

[Aswald]

I think I might own that lens too. It's a lovely one as well. Once again, I really wish they would reissue it with a refresh. 

 

I hope the Minolta legacy gets a fresh lease of life—if Sony are successful in relaunching their A mount DSLT line. To be honest, I want them to succeed, hence the motivation for trying to prick the FF mirrorless bubble, built as that is on irrational "hula hoop" type market mania. Some may say "The Market" hath Spoken: Full Frame Mirrorless is a Raging Success. Unfortunately, "The Market" is hardly a Divine Oracle, and runs in cycles and waves. I fear the FF mirrorless craze is more like a dot.com bubble. Historically bubbles, including the dot.com bubble, have always been driven by novel technology. There was also a 19th century railway stock bubble driven by train technology. In our case, the technological novelty of FF mirrorless is driving an irrational tech bubble that is unsustainable, because it isn't based on any fundamentals that make much sense. The more mature A line Minolta legacy represents a more secure base for stable technological development of a kind that is far more sustainable in the long-term, and there is plenty that is innovative in DSLT. 

 

Although not quite at the price level, I feel that the Sony's A series market is like Leica's. The most obvious owners of the system are either professionals with requirements which fits and or enthusiasts with deeper pockets. Although the initial "jumping the bandwagon" rush is over, many have jumped nonetheless. Photographers who want high megapixels, compact bodies and love bigger "best" quality lenses money can buy will still buy into the system. Hopefully the success of the A7 series will spin their DLST format back to life again. I'm sure when the "hype" of their mirrorless is somewhat lessened, they'll start to pay attention to what their professional customers say.

 

I've used Sony's products all my life. Over the years, from the success of their compact cassette Walkmans, mini compos, CD players, high end hifi, they've had a whirlwind history of ending successful products prematurely. I've heard that they are discontinuing their Experia smartphone line. The superb Z5 may be the last of the lot.

 

Hopefully your article will cause a change in their outlook and who knows.......keeping fingers crossed.

[RightAngle]

That most definitely was not an interesting read. 
Sator, you are explaining how some Sony fanboys are after your scalp, which might be the case, but it seems a bit like a lame defence for the many half-baked arguments you bring to the table. It's not about Sony or Fuji or Canon, it is about writing articles, common sense and logic.

 

"I keep repeating that it's a critique of professional grade full frame mirrorless"
This is a term that we see constantly used for explaining how autofocus, some sensor size, available lenses or whatever isn't up to the task. It's just an empty term though. Professional work means simply being paid for your photography and there are so many different types of work, from those requiring manual focus to those being done with compact cameras, that the term is so wide as to be virtually meaningless when applied to specific technologies or their performance. 

"more serious professional grade work"
What does that even mean? Is a landscape shot with an a7r not "serious"? Empty term to suit whatever nonsense you come up with.

"None of these innovations are unique or inherent technical characteristics specific to mirrorless."
True, however, they are currently available mostly on the mirrorless side, so they are an advantage for mirrorless in the real world. Same like a nice wide grip isn't unique to DLSRs, but is an advantage for those cameras.

"Even if one of them was foolish enough to do so, why would we believe even a word of this?"
Why would we believe your words and what are you saying? You are basing yourself on the assumption that Sony made E-mount without thinking about future FF development, why? Can you explain this? You have only made empty claims that E-mount is problematic. There isn't an "optimal" mount size and flange distance - it's a choice. And why are R&D costs such an issue? Should we just stop developing new technologies and stick forever to the tried and true DSLR? 
 

"AF with DSLT should be just as fast as a DSLR, and definitely faster than mirrorless. With an equipment bag loaded with several proper professional lenses, there is a size advantage to DSLT/DSLR. DSLT already has an EVF with exposure preview. If Sony upgraded their A line to have 5-axis IBIS (on a wider diameter mount better able to take it), and then added their best sensor, why on earth would I want to ever consider buying one of their FF mirrorless cameras ever again?"
So, it is all about AF? That is your definition of "professional"? What is that size advantage to the DSLT you are talking about and what will happen in a few years when mirrorless AF, which has been improving consistently until now, arrives at the speed of DSLRs and is also inherently more precise?

"Well maybe to adapt lenses, but non-native AF lenses perform so inconsistently"

According to whom? The Roger Cicala article you linked to?

 

"But then I thought to myself why it was that (other than Leica) nobody else is building FF mirrorless systems. I started to suspect that most of these companies like Fuji, Canon, Nikon, and Pentax already know perfectly well that the blow out in lens size means that the size advantage of mirrorless doesn't scale up to FF. "

Or, maybe, there are other aspects to what these companies are doing? Maybe Fuji simply are interested in their niche and the two big ones prefer to squeeze every last dollar out of the technology they already have? Why aren't they putting EVFs in their cameras like the DSLT, if they know things so well? How come their mirrorless endeavours are such half-baked stuff?

"Mirrorless APS-C and M4/3 make sense, but not mirrorless FF."
That doesn't make any sense - it is simply a different sensor size. What you fail to acknowledge is that Sony's FF is barely 2.5 years old. We haven't seen all the possibilities. 

Fatal mistake? You do sound like a hater, which is way worse than the fanboys you are talking about. 

Edited April 7, 2016 by RightAngle

[Iansky]

To my mind it is very much a case of "Horses for Courses" and there will always be those that favour one brand / format over another.

 

Surely, the aim is to get out, shoot photos that make the taker and those who view them smile and enjoy the image, it is not down to the equipment but the person using it.

 

Even though I use Nikon Full frame for my aerial work, I have now used the Fuji for some sport events and found it smaller, lighter (kinder on the shoulder) and very capable and the combination of new sensor, very capable AFC tracking on the X-Pro2, bigger buffer and other benefits are leading me to consider trading my full frame kit in for the new XT2 if it meets / exceeds the capability of the X-Pro2!

 

I also find that Fuji is very much a "listening" company that takes on board feedback/suggestions from many users and produces cameras photographers want rather than having designers/engineers produce what they perceive we need.

 

All in all I am happy with what I currently use and my future path will be dictated by what Fuji offers in the XT2 based on all that feedback...............either way, the choice of equipment has never been greater than it is now and there will never ever be a one size fits all photographic tool.

[Aswald]

I've been reading.......size is now no longer considered an advantage of the mirror less format. Always with a caveat emptor due to the lenses.

 

So what Sony is literally doing, is compete at dslr level.

[bhu]

Sensors keep improving farther beyond the abilities of the human eye. Full-frame, or larger, sensors and big, fast, long glass will be useful for capturing images people would not normally see with their own eyes.

 

I am happy with the APS-C sensor. It will still capture more than is humanly possible with Fuji's great sensors and lens selection but there is less to carry around.

 

Fujifilm may, eventually, need to introduce a <1" sensor size if the sensitivity and read-out speed of future sensors continue improving. Sony and others' cell phone camera modules will also be creeping up-market.

 

Most people want photographs of what they can see and want them too look like what they see but there will also be interest in the world they cannot normally see, too, so I expect larger-than-necessary sensors that reveal hidden worlds will also have a place.

[milandro]

most people don’t have any idea of what we are talking about, let alone know that they need it.

[Aswald]

Hahaha....

[MSW]

"Will Fujifilm Make The Same Mistake?"

Probably not since one of their representative has said publicly they have no interest in FF.  There are recent hints that that's not the case regarding MF.  If the MF is tru I hope they are aiming at Pentax prices rather than Leaf or Hasselblad prices.

[Aswald]

"Will Fujifilm Make The Same Mistake?"

Probably not since one of their representative has said publicly they have no interest in FF.  There are recent hints that that's not the case regarding MF.  If the MF is tru I hope they are aiming at Pentax prices rather than Leaf or Hasselblad prices.

 

Let's hope it's lower than Pentax prices.......well, it'll definitely not be pentax sizes!

[JaapD]

People have different expectations with ‘mirrorless’. Most seem to think that it is equivalent to ‘small’. I don’t know who said that, where this was coming from or who have convinced them that this is the case. Possibly the 4/3 camera range is responsible for this, but here it’s also about sensor size as we all know.

 

When defining 'mirrorless' myself I only think of ‘no-mirror’ (no autofocus offset errors anymore, no unsharpness caused by flappy mirror) and ‘EVF’ (with all its advantages and disadvantages, improving incrementally until in the end it will surpass OVF).

[johant]

The small size definitely is an advantage of mirrorless cameras for me. Which is why I also do not desire large lenses.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Aswald]

People have different expectations with ‘mirrorless’. Most seem to think that it is equivalent to ‘small’. I don’t know who said that, where this was coming from or who have convinced them that this is the case. Possibly the 4/3 camera range is responsible for this, but here it’s also about sensor size as we all know.

 

When defining 'mirrorless' myself I only think of ‘no-mirror’ (no autofocus offset errors anymore, no unsharpness caused by flappy mirror) and ‘EVF’ (with all its advantages and disadvantages, improving incrementally until in the end it will surpass OVF).

Taking from past models, The Fuji GA645 is definitely not as bulky as the Pentax 645. In that sense, the new Fujifilm MF would likely be more compact than the Fuji GA645. Possibly due to stronger, more efficient materials and advanced smd circuitries. So the assumption that mirror less be smaller isn't unreasonable.

 

As evf technology gets better, so will af technology in ovf. Not sure if you've shot with either the D5 or 1DX.....I wouldn't say that their AF performance is inferior.

 

I believe that one of the criteria for a mirrorless design is also weight efficiency and bulk reduction. Marketing edge, if not for anything else.

 

It's going to be a neck to neck race for a long time yet with SONY leading the pack.

[JaapD]

Let’s think for a moment where the necessity of a mirror came from. As you know it came from the film days where our need was to look directly through the same lens that is going to make the actual picture so that in advance we can see exactly what image (composition, focus, depth of field, no parallax) we are going to make. Nowadays for this we don’t need a mirror anymore. Instead, we even get new functionality with mirrorless such as exposure preview and more.

 

Regarding Fuji’s medium format camera: I hope it will going to be an XXL version of one of Fujis’s current cameras, a bit like the idea (not more than that and not that large!) of a Mamiya7 or a Pentax67.

[Aswald]

Agreed.

 

Until processors can function double the speed that they do now, having a separate AF processor to handle AF job discretely is the main advantage of the dslr system over mirror less. This will be even more crucial in a MF system where there will be more information to compute. At this juncture, I can only think of dual processors as a plausible solution. Dual X Precessor Pro?

 

A giant XPro2?

Edited May 18, 2016 by Aswald

[frod]

I just looked for the lenses I wanted and the body picked itself. Sensor size is such an arbitrary way to pick a system; it seems like folks settle on FF because that's simply as big as they can afford before medium format sends the price through the roof. Most of the excuses seem based around making up for lack of technique; low light performance (low light photos are hardly ever keepers, use a flash!), subject isolation (learn to compose! Razor thin focus with even the subject dripping in bokeh looks awful!).

Edited May 22, 2016 by frod

[milandro]

.” ..size is now no longer considered an advantage of the mirror less format. "

 

 

 

With the introduction of the X-T2 and its needs for the new grip to support the need for energy if you want to shoot 11 shots a sec (as if 8 were too few) Fuji has now set the less than enviable record of having created the largest small camera in the world.

[milandro]

Sensors keep improving farther beyond the abilities of the human eye. Full-frame, or larger, sensors and big, fast, long glass will be useful for capturing images people would not normally see with their own eyes.

 

 

 

 

 

Have you seen this?

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2282054/320-gigapixel-interactive-picture-London-lets-20-MILES-zoom-people-street.html

 

But prepare yourself to a shock with this!

 

@bentley_zoom_inline.0.gif

[Aswald]

With the introduction of the X-T2 and its needs for the new grip to support the need for energy if you want to shoot 11 shots a sec (as if 8 were too few) Fuji has now set the less than enviable record of having created the largest small camera in the world.

 

I was just sizing up my existing camera bag if it would fit the X-T2 + Grip!.........."....largest small camera....", I like that.

[milandro]

a new meaning for contradiction in terms