05-04-2013, 02:35 PM
Quote:Honestly, FF mirrorless is a phantom pain. The images delivered from a Fuji are superb already and why bother with extra weight (from heavier lenses) ?
Contax G & Leica M lenses cover FF and are small
05-04-2013, 02:35 PM
05-06-2013, 01:51 AM
Ask Markus about the vignetting ...
And 90mm are about the finish line in these system. A 300mm lens will be barely any smaller than on a DSLR.
And 90mm are about the finish line in these system. A 300mm lens will be barely any smaller than on a DSLR.
05-06-2013, 07:29 AM
Quote:Ask Markus about the vignetting ...Yep. Peak value measured is above 5 EV, IIRC. And no, that wasn't a cheap 3rd-party lens...
Vignetting numbers are generally much higher on the M9 than what we're used to with a DSLR (any sensor size).
Quote:And 90mm are about the finish line in these system. A 300mm lens will be barely any smaller than on a DSLR.The Leica 135/2.8 is already quite large. On a small camera (that's what we're all hoping for when dreaming of a full-frame mirrorless, right?) too large and too heavy. The combo is already quite arkward to handle.
-- Markus
felix
05-06-2013, 08:27 AM
Quote:The Leica 135/2.8 is already quite large. On a small camera (that's what we're all hoping for when dreaming of a full-frame mirrorless, right?) too large and too heavy. The combo is already quite arkward to handle.
-- Markus
When I dream of full-frame mirrorless, I'm thinking about something that looks like a modern version of an Olympus OM-4TI or a Nikon FM3a, but with a slightly shorter flange distance (~36-42mm). Well, maybe that's just me :lol:
But I agree that small sensors (and thus smaller and lighter lenses) make more sense for rangefinder-esque mirrorless cameras.