[photonius]

If we look at the Canon SL1/2 we see that, even though it is APS-C, it still is fat behind the image plane. In fact, just as fat as a 6D.
http://j.mp/2IFwaM1
It can't be as small (slim) as film SLRs used to be (for above mentioned reasons).

Yes, nice example. If we take away the back LCD screen (which film cameras did have), we save already more than half of that space in the back. One can look at various tear-downs on lensrentals or ifixit, one notices all that extra stuff that wouldn't really have to be there - a LCD viewer could be only in the viewfinder in the future. 
Also, note the protruding eye-piece. These things got more "comfortable". In the old days, you had the plastic rubber thingy sticking around the eye piece, that could be pushed almost flat. This is gone these days, now we are stuck with a protruding hard piece, as the SL1 image shows.

---

Thank you for all responses.  
I’m sorry for my late reaction. My initial message was not clear and only Claus Borisbg and partly Photonus tuch it in.


I was really wonder who really needs this FF bodies and razor-sharp 1,4 primes

It's for those artists that want to have only the eyes of the person in the top left corner (or choose your preferred other corner) in a crowd sharp, and the rest blurred...   ;-)

[obican]

As for "not enough DoF": my current recipe to get the DoF I want is also not stitching but stacking.

With a tilt shift lens, you don't extend the DoF by stitching. You do it by tilting . Not the same thing as stacking but in some cases, it's much more practical as you can tilt the focus plane and make a single shot. Would've worked in your example.

[JJ_SO]

As far as I know, tilting (especially with a UWA) will lead to massive distortions of cyclindrical bodies becoming elliptical.

It was a 35 mm lens (I hope to remember correctly), keeping it straight avoids a couple of problems and the max tilt angle of +/- 8.5° is not sufficient in this perspective and with this angle. The bike stood like 65-70° tot he sensor plane.

Stacking is like a CT-scan, whereas tilting onyl leads to a focal plane which has not to be parallel to the sensor. If this focal plane has some depth, I have to stop down - and I don't like to do so as I'd loose sharpness.

[obican]

No they don't really distort cylindrical objects that way. If you place them close to the edge of the frame, they will but that's with every single wide angle lens. Actually you can then shift the lens to counter that distortion.

Also, (according to some back of the hand calculations) 8.5 degrees of tilt is probably enough to tilt the plane of focus to a 65 degrees at a focus distance of half a meter.

[JJ_SO]

Right.

Next time I take the Sinar...