Imaging Resource posted an Interview with Sony manager Mark Weir. There are many info about the A99 and other new cameras but there is an interesting part regarding the RX1 and the the possible FF NEX-7 alike cameras.
The RX1 was developed to be as compact as posisble and that’s why it has near-silent in-lens shutter and no interchangeable mount. And when asked about the possibility to make a FF E-mount camera (in rangefinder style) he answered: “Well, I think everyone understands that if we can make the VG900, we could make a still camera variant of that.” and “Well, I don’t think it’s really the issue of the flange, although the flange does take up some space of its own. But I think that in the context of a mount system, it’s somewhat impractical to develop a mount system that presumes that there will be a shutter in every lens and there will be no focal plane shutter. I think the real issue is whether or not there is a focal plane shutter, because if there is, then there is a certain degree of flange back distance that’s almost automatic.”
You gave us the VG900 and the RX1….now it’s time for the NEX-9 🙂
—
Sony preorder list:
A99 body Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Jessops, Wex UK, Wex Germany, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH and more links at Alphacameradeals.
A99 with kit lens links Alphacameradeals.
RX1 Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK ,Wex Germany and more links at Alphacameradeals.
NEX-6 body Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK, Wex Germany Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH and more links at Alphacameradeals.
NEX-6 with kit lens Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Jessops, Wex Uk ,Wex Germany and more links at Alphacameradeals.
NEX-VG900 Amazon, BHphoto, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, Wex Uk and more links at Alphacameradeals.
NEX-VG30 Adorama, Amazon, BHphoto, Wex UK, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, and more links at Alphacameradeals.
Sony E-mount 16-50mm Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, and more links at Alphacameradeals .
Sony E-mount 35mm Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, and more links at Alphacameradeals.
Sony E-mount 10-18mm Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Wex UK, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH, and more links at Alphacameradeals.
Sony A-mount 300mm f/2.8 Amazon, BHphoto, Sonystore DE–UK–FR–IT–ES–NL–SE–FI–CH.
130 Responses
The FF NEX is inavoidable. Just a question of time.
🙂
It’s also going to cost two grand :/
Yes, it is not going to be cheap, but for that purpose there are other cameras (NEX models) available.
Two? More like three…
Or ten grand from Hassleblad!
If it’s 3. Then, it saves you over 5 grand compared with buying the Leica. Right now, there’s no other option.
every nex ff camera will come with a free summilux lens. enticing enough?
Why exactly 24×36? If that’s hard or impossible to implement then try 22×34 or even smaller. Just as big as you can. There is some FF fixation around…
Because of the large number of lenses that were, and still are, designed exactly for that format. I also guess that what many are fantasizing with is the idea of a Sony FF sensor with Leica M lenses, designed for 36×24.
those lenses would be fine with slightly smaller sensor; marginally different focal length is not a big problem
People don’t want Leica M8s (1.33x crop), people want Leica M9s. People want to use 35mm lenses like they were designed. But you can try to convince companies and the market to follow your advice. Good luck.
Vignetting would be reduced if using a sensor just a few mm smaller in either dimension.
The maximum economical size is normally less than about 26 mm x 33mm – this would not require stitching which is a significant extra expense.
yes it can be done, but it defeats the purpose of the NEX system.
You don’t have to buy it. I will, on the other hand.
And what exactly is the purpose of the NEX cameras? Are they not just compact mirrorless with interchangeable lens cameras? Sensor size has nothing to do it. I would pay $2k for a FF NEX in a heartbeat. I mean, an APS-C NEX-7 was already $1350. The FF NEX will also surely have the newer AF engine + more goodies. Totally worth the extra $700.
In other words: we will have to wait for an electronic shutter first.
My thought exactly.
Sony R1 has a electronic shutter, so they know the trick.
This is the tricky part admitted by the man:
” But what’s really on everyone’s mind, I would imagine, is an E-mount interchangeable lens camera together with E-mount full frame interchangeable lenses, and that’s a different discussion.”
I don’t think Sony would release a FF NEX without any native FF E mount lenses.
As the first model I can imagine a slightly larger NEX-7 like body with adaptor for a-mount lenses. It would also allow the use of e-mount lenses creating circular images open for cropping to various proportions.
This. They don’t have to release new lenses. A normal NEX taking e-mount lenses, but able to use A-mount at full circle, as well as legacy lenses also full circle. Not really any difearent than the marketing behind the vg900.
I am afraid that with all these demands for new lenses, it will be considered to complicated to Sony. When the reality is the people who really want this and will pay a premium already have the legacy lenses.
Exactly, just release the damn camera and they will realize how quickly it get sold. People that keep whining about the must-have native FF lens would end up not buying it because it’s too expensive at $3000. And they would point their finger at the D600.
Just a single 50/1.4 (or 43/1.4, or 35/1.4) would do for starters. APS users could use the lens, too.
just sell SAL50 f/1.4 with LA-EA3 already mounted on the body.
Then not only NEX APS-C users will be able to use it, but also SLT and SLT-FF users. It doesn’t get any better then that! 😉
I think the near universal reaction to the lack of native E mount lenses makes it clear that’s not what the market wants. Nobody wanted to use the A mount 35/1.8 and 50/1.8 on NEX, despite the existence of adaptors.
I sometimes wonder if the complaints about lenses were from non-Sony users, and those that would never buy into the system anyway. It was about the only slight weakness, but hardly a dealbreaker in its intended market where 90% consumers choose a single zoom.
The problem with this suggestion is that those who like 35mm, like me, would complain about it. I reckon Fuji hit the sweet spot with 3, even if its wider angle 18mm was not as great as many expected it to be.
Contax, when they launched the G rangefinder camera, had 28, 45 and 90 a their initial offerings. Not too long after, 35, 21, 16 and a zoom were added and they were incredibly successful regardless of the price they commanded.
That would spell the death of the A-mount. Once Sony start making full frame lenses with in-lens stabilisation, they will gradually move toward producing only E-mount equipment.
I think that you don’t know what you wish for. An E-mount full-frame camera would have to have huge lenses. The E-mount and the short flange-back distance in the E-mount are detrimental to the full-frame concept.
Just buy the RX1…it’s enough for everyone 🙂
exactly. we already have a considerable amount of users whining about the APS-C NEX’s “big” lenses. What more for this FF NEX.
not exactly u donkeys. an m-mount pancake lens (yes fullframe) together with the m to e adapter is still smaller than any apsc lens nex currently offer.
also can just put in autofocus but make it a slower lens
Tell me which 23/24/25mm lens is pancake offering the image quality of the Zeiss Sonnar E mount which has sharp edges and corners.
Voigtlander 40mm 1.4, not good.
Voigtlander Nokton 35mm 1.4, not good either
This man has taken many of these VC lenses to the test:
http://www.slrlensreview.com/
Also, the Voigtlander 25mm is small, but its f4 so I wouldnt count it as a realistic solution to the Zeiss Sonnar.
Leica’s own 24mm is a 2.8 (1.3 stops slower) and is not that much smaller than the Sonnar. The 24mm Summilux, with the adapter, makes it longer than the Sonnar.
Quality before size.
The Zeiss ZM25 while not a pancake is about half the physical size of the Zeiss 24/1.8 for NEX.
Why? Because it’s a symmetrical design and short flange.
And the ZM25 covers a 50% larger image circle as well, being designed to work on full-frame.
But I think the point Patrick is that those all cover a full-frame sensor. Right now with a lot of NEX E-mount lenses, we’re getting full-frame sized lenses that cover an APS-C sized sensor. Ergo, give us the full-frame sized sensor and marginally bigger lenses. Plus, fast wide angles tend to be big and so with a smaller sensor you need faster, wider lenses which are bigger. Really you should be comparing the ZE 24mm to the Leica 24mm but the ZE 24mm to the ZM 35mm since they give you an equivalent experience. The ZM is no bigger and covers a full frame while producing excellent quality pictures at essentially the same price (2.0 vs 1.8 but it seems the ZE only really gets good at 2.2 anyway).
As you pointed out, let’s look at the Voightlander line. Compare the size of the fast 21mm to the fast 35mm to the fast 50mm. The lenses get SMALLER as the speed INCREASES. For those of us who shoot mostly 30-50mm but don’t want to be constrained by the RX1’s one lens option (as nice as it may be) a full-frame NEX shouldn’t necessary mean bigger lenses for the same angle of view lenses.
Yes, but it does not offer wide angle shots.
Because of the flange back distance of 28mm on the M-mount vs. 18mm on the E-mount. Add 10mm+ to the M-mount full-frame lenses to see how an E-mount lens would look like. And also the e-mount would need additional length besides the 10mm because the e-mount flange covers the corners of the full-frame sensor.
Basically, the E-mount is not good for full-frame. It has not been designed as such. I’m sure that Sony is banging their head against some walls because of this, and as a result they did the RX1, in order not to lose the market opportunity.
This is just nonsense.
First, the mount throuat can be significantly smaller than the sensor – a good practical example is the m39-mount (the predecessor to Leica M) – 39mm throat and 135-film.
Second, the angular response of the sensor is an issue, but it is also something which can be improved and with enough effort eliminated (might need multi element microlenses).
Also, contrary to what you say, the short flange allows for even smaller throat for the lenses to useful for FF.
After having read the interview, I still feel unable to say how feasible a FF E-mount camera is. I find the interview quite confusing.
Why FF???
I dont care for FF its like Apple, it´s just hipp 😀
Cause it’s been the standard for personal photography for 100 years. Huge marketing and bragging rights to get back to that position in digital.
A carriage was also standard for 100 years and now?
you still want a carriage?
😉
A carriage is better than a buggy!
Sony just needs to develop a FF E mount camera, and with their partner Zeiss they should be able to develop some lenses as they did for the M mount, like a 18mm f4 Distagon, a 35mm f2 Biogon and a 50mm f2 Planar, but with AF and if it’s possible (quite difficult though) with OSS.
Zeiss won’t do OSS
Yea, they told in one of interviews that in-lens image stabilization compromises picture quality, therefore they won’t use it in Zeiss-branded lenses.
mm just zeiss cant do a lens stabilized, they are nuts
That’s true. Well, than leave OSS out, that makes it just easier. To include OSS usually complete lens redesigns are needed.
Just use those lenses as they are !!! That’s the point. There’s currently no way to do that except on film or the Leica m9.
You people are asking so much (new lens lineup), when a minimal offering (VG900 in NEX form), would be a quantum advancement.
I really don’t undertand the answer.
Is there anybody able to explain?
VG900 works without shutter in lens or other tricks, so?
http://www.steves-digicams.com/knowledge-center/why-digital-cameras-have-mechanical-shutters.html
I get it, but VG900 can take stills and video.
So what’s the problem with doing a compact?
This – http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7197/6967182861_dc33c27d96_z.jpg
http://www.japanexposures.com/2010/09/06/ms-optical-super-triplet-perar/
John, have you actually used the Perar? It’s edges are not good on the Nex-7 and the M9.
GH. It’s an example. There are plenty of small wide RF lenses that work great on the Nex and GXR.
The comments here are ridiculous. Many seem to be trying to talk Sony out of this, and by showing off their knowledge. Only Sony really knows what’s feasible. The one truth is that there is a potential product which people will pay a premium for
John, many M wides still have issues on the 5N, although it’s more subtle. The GXR is much better in that regard, but we’re only talking an aps-c sensor, here. A fullframe version of the GXR sensor would likely still have problems with M wides…not to mention that Leica’s lenses are obviously very expensive, and we don’t know how much it would cost for Sony to produce such lenses.
GH, People use those lenses, not in-spite of limitations but instead because they work great on cameras like the 5n (both size and IQ). And there’s no reason for Sony to duplicate that work, there’s an entire ecosystem that already exists. Full frame just provides extra options of e and a glass.
I think the real issue is that in order for all light rays to hit the FF-sized sensor the rear element has to be large and goes way past the mount throat (like what is seen with the RX1 lens), and this in turn takes away space for a focal plane shutter. FF E-mount can be done on the VG900 because the camera probably uses only part of the sensor so the light doesn’t need to hit every pixel.
If you want a small FF lens, yes, what you said is true for a good wide angle. But if they use retrofocus design for all wide, it would not be a problem. Keep in mind that the Nikon F has smaller throat mount.
And that has nothing to do with reality.
The rear element can be small, it doesn’t have to go past the throat. If it is far from the throat, there will be some extra vignetting, but no more than what the (near) symmetrical lenses would cause.
Also, the focal plane shutter is very close to the sensor surface (for optical reasons).
No it can’t. Digital needs non-retrofocus wideangles. Have a read of this test of a retrofocus M-mount Zeiss on a NEX and learn something about the differences between film and digital imaging and one of the many reasons why there’ll never be a FF NEX 9.
http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/663-zeisszm28f28nex?start=1
The Biogon vignettes to 0.6EV even at F8 and there is colour shift and soft corners caused by the smaller exit pupil and non-retrofocus design. This from only a 28mm, not even a very wide wideangle.
They didn’t use the new NEX-5N back then. As you may have knowledge about NEX cameras, the NEX-5N have microlenses and that’s why, at one moment, everyone began buying NEX-5N for range finder lenses instead of the NEX-7. I really see possible that kind of lenses being used in a FF NEX-like body.
Why make unqualified statements like this. It is well known the Nex 5 and 7 were shitty. The NEX 5n and Ricoh GXR on the other hand, handle those lenses very well. And it’s the reason people prefer to shoot them!
I’m tired of this. Have you considered that even if the 5n sensor showed no vignetting, no smeared edges no colour shift whatsoever – none – (and this is not the case) – even if it showed none of those aberrations it would mean NOTHING as the 5n sensor is APS-c!!! The sensor is using the sweetspot of the lens and is not even receiving the off-axis rays from the edge of the lens.
customercopy. And I am tired, of people extrapolating on the basis of prior technology, especially when that technology has already proved itself for APS-C. Check out CMOSIS’s new non-spherical microlenses and steps for full frame. To suggest that a company with the resources of Sony are incapable of performing similarly is silly.
The obstacles to the FF NEX are not really restricted to issues about existing or breakthrough technology. The concept of the camera is in itself a conceptual fallacy as it is conceived as a 135 digital sensor in a mount optimised for APS-c using film-designed lenses. It is also imagined as being the size it would be were it a film camera rather than a digital one. This is the principal reason it will never exist, aside from any difficulties of manufacture.
Customercopy,
Maybe you missed it, but the fullframe sensor is already in the E-mount, with a 1/8000 focal plane shutter. It’s difficult to claim a conceptual fallacy if it already exists!
It’s called the Sony VG900.
Sorry I thought you wanted a small footprint interchangeable lens still camera.
The VG900 shoots stills – many video cameras do – this is for video compositing and has nothing to do with stills photography as you understand it. The 135 sensor in the VG 900 doesn’t use the whole sensor area for video, has software correction of vignetting and records at less than a fifth of the resolution of the 24mp sensor.
Since it is recorded and displayed at a much lower resolution video needs far less perfect lenses than still photography. Even so many modern video cams suffer from visible lens aberrations in the corners.
With the exception of news-gathering videography rarely needs wideangle photography incidentally.
Customercopy,
I feel like I am being milked for information now. You should do your own research on the VG900 still capture capability. Also how image-stabalization and overide figures into the size of capture. You can also find some some examples of m-mount short-flange wides being used if you really look hard.
Soon there will be FUJI, Pentax …
We will compare.
IMHO Sony wants to solve the lens issue first – and a Nex7 type body + LAEA3 + Alpha lens is clearly not the answer. Its not an issue with the large form factor of a video camera, but Sony is all about making things small and elegant — see the RX1 — that design cannot be carried over with any kind of hybrid mount.
Here’s what I think is next – a RX1 with a Zeiss zoom lens reminiscent of the old DSC-R1 so it can bury a massive rear element in the body and close to the sensor like the RX1.
A RX2 with 3 focal-length zoom (35/50/70 or 24/50/85) will keep the camera compact while maintaining high IQ, I also think this will be Sony’s next move.
I would jump on a 24mm, 50mm, 85mm RX2!
A 3-focal length zoom would be cool, then you could have even more FL’s with the built in 1.4x and 2x crop modes. I still think the DSC-R1 design will get a re-boot.
I just keep picturing the image of the VG900 bazooka with the LAEA3 and the Zeiss 24-70 lens, only with a Nex body instead of the VG900. I just can’t imagine Sony would make something that goofy just to have a FF EVIL camera when its constantly trying to shrink everything.
Sony definitely is testing the waters with the VG900 though – whether it leads to anything more is anybody’s guess.
I hope 2013 will see Sony bring a FF NEX in a form-factor that appeals to both videographers and photographers.
+1
I would vote for this solution. If the zoom is conservative enough, we could even have a f2-f4 solution to keep the fast lens people happy as well as other focal length’s people happy.
Because the RX1 is already 35mm, maybe a 50-85?
Otherwise:
35-70
28-50
40-75
Given the size of a Minolta 24-50/4, it’d be interesting to see something similar range, possibly much faster on the next iteration of this camera
My view is that people that want and will pay 3k for this want sharp primes for IQ.
Also they don’t want zooms because they would have to be made to slow, to cover the image circle, while still maintaining an acceptable physical size. Might as well just go apsc or even u43.
I find his response somewhat simplistic.
Sure the RX1 is compact, but this is because it has a specially designed lens and no focal plane shutter.
Sure a compact FF interchangeable lens camera which accepts only 35mm lenses can be made. But if you want your mount to accept zoom lenses and lenses with other focal lengths your camera becomes bulkier.
Sure, a FF E-mount camcorder can be designed, but if you want a FF E-mount still camera you need to change the E-mount. One thing is to fit a FF sensor in the E-mount which is possible, another is to fit it with its mechanical shutter which is very doubtful.
His response is only destined to keep the rumors going nothing more.
There is no reason why a FF mirrorless would have to be any larger than NEX-3 NEX-5 etc. For ergonomic reasons in this price range a NEX-6 or 7 size may be the practical minimum.
The only two items that need to grow are the sensor – no extra space needed, and the shutter – some extra space needed. Though, in principle the sensor could use a global electronic shutter (the technogy exists already) – if Sony will use the stacked sensors in the large form factors as well, it could become reality in the mirrorless and SLT.
Why spout garbage when you have no idea what you are talking about?
I have a reason to believe Sony might release a FF through the action of Hasselblad. The hints is that Hasselblad must expect Sony would release a FF NEX camera otherwise she should not support the E-mount system at this moment. Hasselblad just like another liason of Leica with Panasonic. But the minor different is Leica is not satisfied with the image quality of M43 that’s why she stay to produce digital RF on her own. Hasselblad now can only survive with the digital MF system and no room for making big profit so he should ask for partnership to expand the camera options under the brand. If Hasselblad can join NEX system, the coming Zeiss lens should be the best option for this luxury combination. But of course, just suppose you know nothing about the ugly design first. Hasselblad should never accept the quality of APS-C so the recent release model should be seen as a marketing hype. The real gem, FF NEX should come later to cope with Hasselblad’s lenses or Zeiss lenses.
For the construction of FF NEX, we already know VG900 can make a FF compatible with E-mount. What Sony will is making E-mount lens which can cover FF. The only problem is Sony have to extend the registered distance from the rear element to the focal plane that help to project a larger image circle on the sensor. Otherwise, the image quality on the edge might drop off so quickly. In fact, it is not necessarily to change the whole system to cope with the lens design. The sacrifice might be the camera body size and lens size which need to be bigger. However, it is worthwhile.
Panasonic, Fuji and Sony
WHO
will be the ONE of the 1st kind of camera – Mirrorless FullFrame 😀
Sigma with Foveon sensor in full frame DP3 :O
How clueless when you included Panasonic in that…
Unlike canon-last follower in mirrorless and nikon-tiny sensor, Panasonic have vision to battle in semi pro and pro segment.
Fuji even more promising to deliver very high quality still cemera. Fuji is smart, they feeds what user need, they get the business. Now they have greed vision again!
Leica was the first with mirrorless full frame – the M9.
The read question is, who will have the first modern and affordable mirrorless FF – apart from the antique finder of the M it’s reasonably modern, but not affordable.
I imagine it’ll be Sony, but probably not for quite a while since they lack the lenses (for APS-C too).
Yes, modern mirrorless FullFrame Still and video
So all we need is for SonyBlad to implement global shutter with variable curved sensors.
🙂
My view of things, and after having read many articles etc., is that the NEX Mirrorless FF camera will be a-mount (and not e-mount).
Just my 2-cents
That would have the disadvantages of both systems and advantages of neither. Large, suboptimal AF (even if on sensor PDAF), large lenses with inferior quality for the price.
Inferior quality lenses?
Guess you have not played with the Zeiss range or quality ‘G’ glass…
Show us better Canikon glass that is equivalent and cheaper.
mmm can you buy a zeiss 200 f2? no? hahaha!
Hmm seems to me he’s saying that if they are working on a full frame nex camera they looking at an electronic shutter ala the nikon j1. This line “I think the real issue is whether or not there is a focal plane shutter,” makes it sound like the cost of a full frame nex will be to eliminate the last mechanical component in the nex bodies and honestly so long as the IQ and flash sync speeds can hold up im all for that (the j1 really struggles with flash sync). Eliminating the shutter as a mechanical component has alot of advantages combine it with true global shutter video and you have a great all-round solution.
Global shutter is proving to be a tough nut crack but will have huge rewards in both video and stills.
I don’t understand this. The VG900 has a focal plane shutter (It has to, to be able to shoot stills). It doesn’t pose any problem to the design of the e mount.
On FF NEX lenses, they can’t please everybody at the start, but I reckon they could please enough people to make a profit with 2 or 3 at launch and another 1 or 2 within a year. Start with 3 primes – something in the 24-35 range, a 50 and a 90 or 100. Add a zoom around 24-120 within a year. Keep the primes around f2 and the zoom around f4 at the long end.
Either include an Alpha adapter with the body or keep it the price very affordable – below cost if necessary. In the second year bring out an ultra-wide around 16 or 18 (maybe with shift or tilt-shift) and something longer, either prime or zoom.
In my opinion, even zoom is not necessary. Just some wide angle zoom is good enough. All primes is really not a problem.
I would tend to agree. I don’t think any zoom that fast is going to be small–remember you need f3.5 for faster for the in-sensor autofocus–so you might as well use the LA-Ex adapter and an existing, very nice A-mount zoom. The FF NEX is going to appeal most to enthusiasts who will care most about primes, just look at Fuji’s system.
Y Sony can’t just say- “ok. FF nex Coming next month”
Off topic,
How do you open the A99 raw files to view them via photoshop or lightroom? I tried to convert them with Adobe dng converter and still have no luck. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
a99 is still a pre-production camera and its RAW is not yet finilised. Adobe will support a99’s RAW files after it comes in the market, as it does for all new cameras.
RAW images for the Sony A99 are for download on the forum below this one. Why would they be for download if we cannot even view them? Anyone have a solution? Would really like to see some full-res raw files.
its a sony so whenever will go FF or apsc , a panasonic 4/3 will be 4ever better
I don’t really get this full-frame obsession, no offense intended.
what is the goal?
– High ISO performance?
– More (actually less) of DOF?
– Getting rid of focal length multiplier?
– …?
APS-C sensors are doing pretty good for noise. I don’t see this as a strong argument. DOF, well that is a different story, it’s nice to have it when you need it. But still can be compensated with wider aperture.(see below though) Focal length multiplier is an issue. But after so many years of APS=C we have decent amount of wide angle lenses and f=35mm’s like never before. There is decent optics for APSC. Of course it is nice to be able to use vintage lenses which still deliver (or surpass in some cases). But they are still somewhat usable.
The real issue is… These all make sense to a certain degree. And that is why we have full frame options in A-mount. And we should have more maybe. And more affordable ones, too.
When we ask for FF nex, are we asking just mirrorless? Or do we want it in the NEX form factor? SLT is like mirrorless, with minimal loss from the translucent film. And I bet it will go away after a while. With hybrid AF.
If it is the NEX form factor and FF at the same time, I guess that is stretching too far. Why? Any FF optics will have to be much larger than existing NEX lenses. RX1 is almost as good as it gets., with a specialized lens. A wide / super wide, or any kind of tele, would be much larger. Like many people say, FF will defeat the whole purpose of NEX.
IMHO e-mount is not a substitute for a-mount. NEX won’t meet all photography needs. It is a more portable and easy-going system, that’s most of what it is. Besides A-mount cameras can be made smaller too. Like the A55 proved. But people asked (some of them at least) for a bigger,/better handling version.
So I say:
More and affordable A-mount FF. Yes.
One day a mirrorless A-mount cam. Yes,
Full frame E-mount: please let my aps-c alone… 🙂
+1
Thats why I stated earlier that “My view of things, and after having read many articles etc., is that the NEX Mirrorless FF camera will be a-mount (and not e-mount)”. Should have added “one day”, and maybe and maybe removed “NEX”
There’s no advantage to a-mount, over using e-mount and providing an adaptor for e to a with straight-through electrical contacts to the lens. The reverse is not possible.
If the VG900 works well, you are right about the flexibility.
if NEX-FF is e-mount and flange 18mm (I Call E-Fullframe) and need existing E mount lense so require adapter E-Apsc to E-fullframe that we will get image fullframe crop , if we not put adapter ,we will get image apsc crop.
if NEX-FF is e-mount and flange 18mm and need existing A mount lense so require new for adapter A to E-fullframe that will get fullframe image , if use laea2 , image will be apsc crop.
Full-frame NEX will be either:
– Same small form factor + huge E-mount lenses (or rear element extending) + adaptors which make any lens long.
– Or like this:
http://j.mp/Q2qkFQ
Right now APS-C is a good compromise. Especially considering Oly/Pana doing great things with much smaller M43.
+1
FF NEX with E-mount is more flexible than your proposed A-mount mirrorless. And the way I see this…If Sony did the VG900, they can do anything else without a problem.
In the lens department, you see how they can take a 35mm f/1.8 lens designed for a 44.5mm flange to sensor distance lens (A-mount) and make another design (maybe a new one just like Sony did for the SEL50F18) for a 18mm flange to sensor distance (E-mount). If Leica does FF lenses for their M-mount cameras and keep a relative small size compared to other FF lenses, Sony can do the same, but just don’t expect cheap lenses.
VG900 implies it can be an E mount with the focus points on the sensor and a straight through adapter for A mount. By being straight through it could be cheap enough to come standard. That would also have the advantage of allowing the greater variety of legacy lenses that can be connected to E mount with adaptors.
Screw Full Frame, give us a Medium Frame Format Sensor for $3000.00
\(^.^)/
impatiently waiting for FF-NEX, credit card in hand.
I will not buy the RX-1, although I am willing to spend that much on a camera–if it is the right camera. Put something like an 18-70 f/2.8 leaf shutter lens in an RX type body, add a viewfinder, and I am all over it.
Think even I would buy that
18-70 F/2.8 Full Frame or what? Depending on your answer, that can be done easily with a 1.0 Type Sensor. With APS-C, it will be a little bit larger, Smaller than DSC-R1 for sure given Sony now can do better lenses. A Full Frame model with such a lens don’t think it’s a great Idea.
Could…would…should…Where is the WILL?
nobody really need FF !!!
the real question is…can they make E-mount Full Frame able lenses comparable in size with current E-mount offerings or M-mount lenses from Leica?
I know Sony can do an E-mount FF camera with a body like NEX-7. The lenses are the part that makes me worry a bit.
I predict plenty would buy it even if they offered no additional lenses. For exactly the reason that people will buy the VG900 (able to use e,a,legacy).
Does anyone know if Sony has the rights to the Minolta 40mm f2 Rokkor-M lens? Honestly just update that with newer coatings and autofocus and it would be enough to launch the system. Even adding ~10mm to the size of the lens it would still be pancake like on the NEX, full-frame. For telephoto I think the LA-E3 is more reasonable.
Personally my problem with the LA-Ex series adapter were the LA-E1 sucked, the LA-E2 was expensive if you didn’t already have Sony/Minolta lenses (like me) and the size hurt for normal lenses (~30-50mm) telephoto and wide angle lenses are usually beastly anyway and I seriously considered investing in some minolta zooms with the LA-E2 instead of the Sony 55-210mm. Now I’m holding off on everything until the FF NEX is released.
dont you think that the RX1 is Sony’s way of testing the waters of a future FF NEX camera?
It makes sense. Because if there are enough folks that are willing to buy that then an interchangeable model would be a no brainer.
A full frame nex based on the price of the nex-7 and rx1 should be about two thousand or 2,100 w the adapter. They can work on lenses later. I got a nex because of the high iso and all the cool old lenses I get to use with it but am sure sony wont do that until the develop some lens options first which kinda sucks.
This. But I also am not sure it will happen soon enough. All this yammering about M-mount will or will not work. We need to see what happens with the VG900. There was a Japanese blog with a few samples but they were mixed to say the least. A shot with a Nokton MC 35mm f1.4 looked very soft. An OM 28mm was VERY weak in the corners.
Take that RX100 sensor, put it in HX200 body, slap a 24-300mm lens in there, instant bestseller!
I really have to question the logic of Sony not coming up with a FF NEX in this cycle. We are ready for it. And we’re also ready for that firmware fix for all of the little nags the NEX7 has.
Sony may worry that a NEX9 FF will kill the NEX7 but I will keep the 7 for tele shots and use the FF and finally get those wide angle shots with 50% more
And stop bantering around the $3k pricetag – body only could/should be around $2200 or less.