Canon Doing Market Research on Medium Format?

[tolusina]

......You must be a dentist.

i hadda dee layed ree acchon

 

[unfocused]

If I were a Canon investor, I'd really need a lot of convincing to consider medium format. It sure seems like a market were the best way to earn $1 million would be to start with $2 million.

 

[LDS]

645 for MF was/is the equivalent of APS-C, most MF systems were 6x6cm or 6x7cm.

Not true. All those formats used 120 or 220 film, and the choice among them depended on the intended use for the camera. Usually 6x4.5 were the smaller/lighter ones (lenses also), and the most useful to be used on-site and carried around, while the 6x7 ones were usually the bulkier ones, and better suited for studio work. Many models could switch form a format to another, many 6x6 models could also switch to 6x4.5 (some could also use 35mm film), if the square format was not ideal for the shot (or more shots from a roll of film were needed), and some 6x7 as well. 6x6 cameras were probably the most versatile format, and a good compromise between size and performance, and thereby the most common. IIRC only Mamiya and Pentax made 6x7 cameras, while Hasselblad, Rollei, Zenza Bronica made only cameras for 6x6 and 6x4.5 formats.

 

[e17paul]

I think that Canon are asking well ahead of time, so that they can develop a sensor. In contrast, Nikon would be able to pull together a product far more quickll, by buying in a 50MP sensor from their usual supplier.

Canon have not mastered mirrorless yet (in my view, not until they have a built in EVF that I'm happy with), but must be wondering how to approach a repeat of the 1987 revolution. It will be a few years yet, but will happen.

 

[Lee Jay]

Medium Format is not needed, IMHO, because full-frame is more than enough. Here are the reasons.

• Very, very few MF lenses actually have more aperture for a given field of view than the fastest full-frame lenses, so there's little or no lens performance envelope advantage to MF.
• The pixel count advantage is artificial. Canon produced a 120MP APS-H sensor that was claimed to work very well, and such a pixel density would be 187.5MP on full-frame.
• What full-frame needs to use these larger pixels counts effectively is higher resolution lenses, which is a process that's already well underway at Canon (17 TS-e, 24TS-e, 16-35/4IS, 24-70/2.8 II, 70-200/2.8 II, and so on). These lenses and others can already support far higher pixel counts than the Nikon D810 has, and also far higher than the 50MP cropped MF sensor that's available now.
• It's technologically possible (according to experts I know) to build a full-frame sensor with native ISOs down to around the ISO 25 range (deeper wells). Doing so will make the sensor size advantage of MF go away when you are not light-limited.

The full-frame system is already well developed as far as accessories and support goes, so it would be much less expensive to develop into a MF competitor by doing nothing but continuing to improve lenses and building a high pixel-count, high-performance, low base-ISO sensor for a full-frame camera. This is all doable right now.

Lee Jay

 

[wockawocka]

I love how it gets so technical on here and numbers get thrown about.

Yet we shoot love and emotions.

 

[ScottyP]

I think we can all see what is next. This return to medium format is sure, in turn, to ingnite the race back into Large Format.

No one can deny the public has been itching to drape a new synthetic version (kevlar?) of the traditional light blanket over their heads, hunch over the tripod, clutching the updated carbon fiber handle of a state of the art flash powder trough.

Party like it's 1899. This could obviously become huge with the steampunk crowd too.

 

[c.d.embrey]

the nikon rumors website claims that no such thing is going to happen but i sometimes wonder if that website is more of an arm of nikon marketing ...

All rumor sites are arms of marketing to some extent. When a rumor site depends on anonymous tips (that's all of them) then the camera companies can manipulate certain rumors. This comes with the territory, and there ain't much that can be done about it.

Both Nikon and Canon Medium Format rumors serve as polls, i.e. would you buy one if it were made. And how better to get Canon/Nikon fans to take the poll than to float a Medium Format Rumor.

 

[c.d.embrey]

645 for MF was/is the equivalent of APS-C, most MF systems were 6x6cm or 6x7cm.

true 6x6 being the most common - but it's certainly a lot closer than the 4.4x3.3 currently being said is medium format - that's almost like calling m43 full frame.

Back in the days of film, most 6x6 negatives were cropped as 6x4.5. The square format could be cropped both as landscape and as portrait.

 

[c.d.embrey]

I could see this. if canon released "full frame" MF, it would seriously cause a lot of heads to turn canon's way in a big hurry as the current 1.3 crop factor adds dramatic and considerable cost to the lens investment with UWA lenses in MF.

I could be wrong, but even the most expensive systems to date were 1.16 crop - none of them produced the fully 60x45 of traditional 645.

Hmmm. Didn't Fuji make both 6x8 and 6x9 Full Frame Medium Format Film cameras ??? That would be a very expensive sensor.

 

[l_d_allan]

How to get on list for evaluation? PLS accept EF lenses !!! 150+ DxoMark?

Seems like Canon engineers could come up with a mount that could also accept EF lenses, and a body that was MUCH MUCH smaller than the Pentax 645z. Smaller than Leica S2?

The MF lenses would obviously be optimized for the full sensor. (unfortunate TLA ... two letter acronym :-\ )

The EF lenses would vignette like crazy, but maybe less than expected. The T/S lenses are basically MF with large image circle. A sensor size where the most common or best EF image circles just touched the top and bottom ... 12mm away .. might be usable. Or less ambitious, touched the left and right ... 18mm away.

Actually, the existing T/S lenses with AF and maybe IS, and without the t/s mechanism might be the initial primes? Or not?

My 35mm f2 IS on this camera would look like a true 8mm fisheye on a full-frame, except rectilinear, obviously. It's image circle would just touch the top, and would be several mm within the left and right. My understanding is that the image circle of primes is larger than might be expected, to have corner-to-corner sharpness.

Maybe Roger Cicala at LensRentals can get an evaluation copy, with NDA?

The 645 and all other digital MF cameras I'm aware of are designed around mounts for 6mm x 6mm film, which is HUGE, and much bigger than it has to be for the 50 mpx Sony.

The MF sensors are "only" 43 x 33mm, which is not that much bigger than ff. The mount is HUGE in comparison to maintain compatibility with ooooooold Hassy and other 6x6 lenses. I wonder how the Leica MF is designed? Does it use the Sony sensor? Huge mount? My impression is that the Leica MF is smaller than the Pentax 645z.

And the initial native MF lenses on the ~0.70 crop sensor would be sensational ArtMf+ primes, but "matched" to the sensor so the "weak link" and "resolution bottle-neck" was balanced ... lenses could just "feed the sensor". "Blow the socks off" the Otus and Arts on the D810 or A7r?

Still dreaming?
Integrate Sony Exmor technology with 14+ EV DR, and also allow MagicLantern's Dual-ISO to be native option to have DR nearer the 20+ EV of the human eye, with new RAW format. ML's Auto-ETTR and Auto-Dot-Tune MFA ... actually all of ML that made sense ... hire A1ex.

150+ DxoMark?

To me, 1 fps or even less would be plenty ... be the opposite from the 1Dx, which has a priority for fps. Maybe only shoot RAW, so eliminate CPU processing "wasted" for the JPEG processing pipeline. RAW histogram and blinkies from ML. ML's RAW video. Use all the CPU cycles for IQ and then AF, not foo-foo.

Flexible 16-bit RAW that allowed selectable compression, a'la what Sony seems to be doing, but much more flexible (and honest :-\ ), and uses all 64k levels. Also allow 17+ bit RAW uncompressed. Not sure what the best default would be? 17-24+ bit RAW's could be huge, and difficult for CPU's to work with.

 

[docsmith]

I actually like this trend. I'll probably never own a MF camera, but the cost is coming down. Right now, I suspect they are aimed at pros that need them and those that are not phased by the price of an Otus lens. That market seems small, but it does exist.

So, buy an Otus lens or a MF camera? When you are in that price neighborhood, I can see a few people going for the MF camera.

 

[Halfrack]

...., clutching the updated carbon fiber handle of a state of the art flash powder trough.

Can I be there when they try to explain flash powder to the TSA agents?

MF is fun today, even just shooting Fuji pack film (Polaroid) on a Mamiya RZ is cheap.

 

[RobertG.]

For some years you can already stick some Canon lenses to a medium format back and it works well. The cam is called HCAM from Hartblei. See details here: http://www.hartblei.de/en/hartbleicam2.htm.

The current medium format sensor size is just a minor improvement compared to full format IMHO. A real 60mm x 45mm sensor would be something interesting. But a real revolution would be such a huge sensor in a cam with a DSLR-like performance and a mount like the old Pentacon Six, for which adapter rings to almost all other mounts can easily be produced. So the new cam can be used easily also with Hasselblad and other manufacturer lenses. Something like Sony's A7R in a larger format.

If Nikon offers a medium format camera, only a fool would buy one. See their current quality control issues with the D600 and D800.

 

[RLPhoto]

Make it sub-10K and give it some LS lenses. It will sell like hotcakes.

 

[unfocused]

Make it sub-10K and give it some LS lenses. It will sell like hotcakes.

Repeating the same thing over and over again won't make it come true.

I think we can all see what is next. This return to medium format is sure, in turn, to ignite the race back into Large Format.

No one can deny the public has been itching to drape a new synthetic version (kevlar?) of the traditional light blanket over their heads, hunch over the tripod, clutching the updated carbon fiber handle of a state of the art flash powder trough.

Party like it's 1899. This could obviously become huge with the steampunk crowd too.

Given that the phrase dates to the 19th century according to the word detective, perhaps it would be appropriate if you suggested that your Large Format creations would "sell like hotcakes." I think there might actually be a bigger market for your idea than for medium format.

 

[RLPhoto]

Make it sub-10K and give it some LS lenses. It will sell like hotcakes.

Repeating the same thing over and over again won't make it come true.

I think we can all see what is next. This return to medium format is sure, in turn, to ignite the race back into Large Format.

No one can deny the public has been itching to drape a new synthetic version (kevlar?) of the traditional light blanket over their heads, hunch over the tripod, clutching the updated carbon fiber handle of a state of the art flash powder trough.

Party like it's 1899. This could obviously become huge with the steampunk crowd too.

Given that the phrase dates to the 19th century according to the word detective, perhaps it would be appropriate if you suggested that your Large Format creations would "sell like hotcakes." I think there might actually be a bigger market for your idea than for medium format.

Repeating it won't will make you look really stupid when it does.

 

[Lawliet]

IT'S THE SENSORS STUPID!!!!! THE PEOPLE WANT A SENSOR LIKE NIKON HAS IN THE 810!

As long as they include an AA filter.

Go full color per sensor cell.
-No more need for an AA-filter.
-an effective resolution akin to MF within the established system
-with the current stock of lenses, its hard to exceed 16-35/4is, 24-70/2,8& 70-200/2.8IIis as bread&butter lenses. And then there is the latitude of lens selection.
-makes it easy to generate a great video signal, just don't mess it up.

 

[Loswr]

I think that Canon are asking well ahead of time, so that they can develop a sensor. In contrast, Nikon would be able to pull together a product far more quickll, by buying in a 50MP sensor from their usual supplier.

As pointed out, Canon has made a 120 MP APS-H sensor. They've also made the world's largest CMOS sensor, here it is along side a 'full frame' sensor:

As for Nikon simply sourcing a sensor, there's also the matter of both Canon and Nikon funding the development of an entire new line of high end lenses. Not going to be fast or cheap.

 

[Loswr]

Make it sub-10K and give it some LS lenses. It will sell like hotcakes.

Repeating the same thing over and over again won't make it come true.

Well, it worked so well for him with the 135mm f/1.8L IS, I guess he figures it'll work even better for an entirely new line of expensive bodies and lenses. It seems he also thinks calling everyone else stupid makes him smart, instead of just making him look like a petulant child. :