Larger format

[Moglex]

In another thread KmH posted this:

Read this Pro's, May 10 blog entry.

In the blog entry mentioned the writer, a professional photographer, mentions that he believes that Canon and Nikon should be working on a system that is larger than FF.

Of course, in the 'old' days no SLR manufacturer could unilaterally come up with a new size because it would have required the cooperation of film and process equipment manufacturers.

Now, however, there is no reason whatsoever why Canon or Nikon could not come up with, say, a 4.5cm x 3cm sensor camera and matching lenses.

I know I'd invest in such a system, but is this blogger on to something or is it just pie in the sky?

 

[iamacyborg]

Leica's already working on the S2 system, which'll have larger sensor than FF. There are also rumors on Nikon making a digital medium format sized camera.

They'll both be prohibitively expensive.

 

[ann]

Hassy has one, last time i checked it was over 40 thousand dollars

 

[Plato]

Hassy has one, last time i checked it was over 40 thousand dollars

I seem to recall that the price dropped to only $35,000. Chump change.

 

[Overread]

Heh and there you have the reason why Canon and Nikon have not pushed into the market as agressivly. The product is highly limited in market due to its pricing position and its harder to break into a market where film is very much still dominant for many. So there is less of a market to pickup on and there are already highquality companies established in the area - so not only do you have a limited product to market, but its also highly expensive and you have to compete with established markets.

Add to that the fact that if your company is new to the area you not only have to make a camera, but accessories and new (larger more expensive) lenses as well.

 

[KmH]

The formats already exist. They are known as medium and large format and have been around way longer than 35mm.

Hasselblad an Mamiya both make digital backs in medium format.

Back in the day, the vast majority of pros shot medium or large format. Then this dinky 35mm format started becoming popular and all the old guys said it would never take over from the larger formats. Oops.

Many of todays pros still use medium format for their most critical work and the 35 mm FF for the everyday stuff, just like Yuri does.

 

[Josh66]

One thing that might be cool would be a square format, like 36mm square. That would use more of the image circle, and wouldn't require new lenses.

edit

Not sure about the size. 36mm would probably have pretty strong vignetting in the corners...

 

[Moglex]

LOL

Perhaps I should put my camera list in my sig as others do to save people wasting their time telling me about MF cameras.

I did consider a digital back for my hassy but the price was just a step too far.

The problem with the current MF cameras using digital backs is that you end up with a camera designed to cover, typically, 6cm x 6cm and a much smaller sensor meaning that you have all the disadvantages of the larger lenses required but are not making full use of their field of coverage.

Certainly it would be a major job for any manufacturer but neither Nikon nor Canon are wont to shy away from big jobs. Clearly they would do copious amounts of market research before undertaking such a task but these things do scale to a certain extent and a system scaled up 10-20% from an FF DSLR would be a very different beast to a 6x6 with a digital back.

Given that Yuri is a pro and is the sort of person Canon and Nikon are quite likely to consult when considering the feasibility of such a project I wonder if his assertion that it's something they should be working may be something more than purely wishful thinking.

 

[Moglex]

Not sure about the size. 36mm would probably have pretty strong vignetting in the corners...

If you used 36mm square you would take the corners outside the current field and would probably have to crop back in post processing.

If you put a square format sensor within the current field you would end up with a smaller 'long' dimension and I doubt that many people would see that as adequate payback for not having to turn the camera on its side.

 

[Dwig]

One thing that might be cool would be a square format, like 36mm square. That would use more of the image circle, and wouldn't require new lenses.

edit

Not sure about the size. 36mm would probably have pretty strong vignetting in the corners...

Sure would. If using 35mm full frame lenses, the maximum square image would be approximately 30mm x 30mm.

 

[ann]

Moglex

listing your equipment wouldn't have helped me i never read those list; so i would have replied anyway and someone probably would have slapped my hands

 

[epp_b]

Hassy has one, last time i checked it was over 40 thousand dollars

And that's pretty much the point. Sure; technically, Nikon or Canon could come with a medium format digital and it would probably be quite good.

But practically speaking, to whom are they going to sell a $40,000 camera? I can't imagine why Hassleblad users would throw away their gear to jump ship and it's not like existing system users are going to flock to it because of their collection of lenses and accessories (such lenses wouldn't be able to cover a medium format image circle anyway).

The might have a chance of success if they made some soft exchangeable, adaptable mount that could use medium format lenses of any brand ... but who are we kidding here?

Sure would. If using 35mm full frame lenses, the maximum square image would be approximately 30mm x 30mm.

Still, that's actually not a bad idea. 30x30 does actually give you a bit more surface area than 36x24 (900mm^2 vs. 864mm^2).

So you get a square frame, you still get as good as or better performance than full frame and you don't have to buy new lenses to use it.

 

[Moglex]

Hassy has one, last time i checked it was over 40 thousand dollars

And that's pretty much the point. Sure; technically, Nikon or Canon could come with a medium format digital and it would probably be quite good.

But practically speaking, to whom are they going to sell a $40,000 camera? I can't imagine why Hassleblad users would throw away their gear to jump ship and it's not like existing system users are going to flock to it because of their collection of lenses and accessories (such lenses wouldn't be able to cover a medium format image circle anyway).

The might have a chance of success if they made some soft exchangeable, adaptable mount that could use medium format lenses of any brand ... but who are we kidding here?

You're assuming they would jump from 24x36mm right up to 6x6 cm. Obviously they are not going to do that. Why would they? They could have done that any time in the last 50 years.

Scaling up somewhere between 10 and 20% is an entirely different kettle of fish.

In the days of film there were sound, practical, reasons why you could not have an arbitrary range of primary image sizes but that's not the case any more.

I can see no photographic or business reason why a sensor size of, say, 40 x 28mm could not be a good prospect. 30% extra image area and neither the camera nor the lenses would need to be scaled more than ~ 10% in size.

Sure would. If using 35mm full frame lenses, the maximum square image would be approximately 30mm x 30mm.

Still, that's actually not a bad idea. 30x30 does actually give you a bit more surface area than 36x24 (900mm^2 vs. 864mm^2).

So you get a square frame, you still get as good as or better performance than full frame and you don't have to buy new lenses to use it.

But how many images end up being square?

You'd lose a lot of primary image area when taking shots that would end up rectangular (the vast majority) just to end up with a 4% increase in area when you took a perfectly square shot. I can't see many people going for that particular tradeoff.

 

[Plato]

One thing that might be cool would be a square format, like 36mm square. That would use more of the image circle, and wouldn't require new lenses.

edit

Not sure about the size. 36mm would probably have pretty strong vignetting in the corners...

Sure would. If using 35mm full frame lenses, the maximum square image would be approximately 30mm x 30mm.

This post does not exist. I forgot to put my brain in gear.

 

[Moglex]

One thing that might be cool would be a square format, like 36mm square. That would use more of the image circle, and wouldn't require new lenses.

edit

Not sure about the size. 36mm would probably have pretty strong vignetting in the corners...

Sure would. If using 35mm full frame lenses, the maximum square image would be approximately 30mm x 30mm.

Since FF is 36X24 why isn't vignetting a problem?

If you draw a circle such that the corners of a 36 x 24 rectangle just touch it and then draw a square by extending the vertical sides of the rectange to 36mm you will see that it would require a significantly larger circle to encompass it.

Edit: I'll leave this here in case anyone else doesn't see the problem instantly. (I had to think about it for a minute - I very nearly made the same post as Plato. )