More Medium Format Talk [CR1]

[KyleSTL]

Maybe we are going to have the equivalent of metabones to adapt L lenses on the canon medium format...

As for the bodies; if Canon opts to buy Phase-One or some other producer, it can easily inherit that company's existing line of lenses. If the body system it supports has a longer flange distance than the EOS system, then that's great; because then Canon can use .5x wide-converters mounted between the lens mount and the EOS lens to adapt the lens for the MF camera.

Impossible, a wide-converter inherently requires a shorter flange distance than is native to the lens (unless someone knows differently). That is the reason that the Metabones uses only SLR lenses with only mirrorless cameras (not APS DSLR cameras).

Also, there are multiple digital medium format sizes:

44 x 33mm (Pentax 645D, Hasselblad - multiple, Mamiya Aptus 8 & Credo 40)
45 x 30 mm (Leica S2)
48 x 36 mm (Mamiya Aptus 5 & 7)
49.1 x 36.7 mm (Hasselblad - multiple)
53.7 x 40.2 mm (Hasselblad H4D-60, Mamiya Aptus 12 & Credo 60 & 80)
56 x 36 mm (Mamiya Aptus 10)
56 x 41.5 mm - Film '645' Format
70 x 56 mm - Film '6x7' format

Essentially, digital has not yet quite made it to the medium formats everyone refers to from the film days. The Pentax 645D doesn't have nearly the same advantage over FF cameras as 645 film did over 35mm.

Size and weight comparison:

Canon 1D X Canon 5D Mark III Leica S2
1540g 950g 1410 g
158 x 163 x 84 mm 152 x 116 x 76 mm 160 x 120 x 80 mm

So the Leica S2 is slightly larger than the 5D Mark III (although almost 50% heavier), and lighter than the 1D X (and much smaller). Medium format doesn't have to be huge like a 120/220 camera as Leica has shown (although, again the sensor is smaller and can therefore have a smaller mirror and a shorter flange distance than the film formats).

 

[Inst]

I suppose I mean shorter, I guess.

I'm looking at Mamiya Press and other Rangefinder 6x9 systems.

I think if Canon opts to use a rangefinder-style MF system with wide-adapters for EF lenses and EVF, it would have a winner.

Such a rangefinder-style MF would then be a competitor not only to existing MF systems, but also to Canon's own 1DX line and Nikon's D4.

===

Of course, the big question is whether or not Canon would be able to produce an economical 6x4.5, 6x7, or even 6x9 sensor.

 

[KyleSTL]

I suppose I mean shorter, I guess.

I'm looking at Mamiya Press and other Rangefinder 6x9 systems.

I think if Canon opts to use a rangefinder-style MF system with wide-adapters for EF lenses and EVF, it would have a winner.

Such a rangefinder-style MF would then be a competitor not only to existing MF systems, but also to Canon's own 1DX line and Nikon's D4.

===

Of course, the big question is whether or not Canon would be able to produce an economical 6x4.5, 6x7, or even 6x9 sensor.

Ah, I see what you are saying, but your thinking is backwards.

The Metabones wide adapter only works by making the image circle smaller with a higher intensity of light per unit area of image sensor plane (i.e. FF -> APS-C), hence the aperture advantage of 0.7x. A tele-converter (like Canon's 1.4x and 2x) works by enlarging the image circle to increase the 'reach' of a lens which inherently has an aperture penalty equivalent to its focal length multiplier.

In theory (depending on the native flange distance of the proposed Canon MF system), Canon could produce an adapter to use their MF lenses on FF DSLRs with an aperture advantage. I doubt Canon would produce a teleconverter to enlarge the image circle for FF lenses to fill a MF image sensor.

 

[Inst]

I think I've thoroughly confused myself as to what I mean.

I mean that if Canon releases an MF camera in the rangefinder / EVF format, what Canon can do is to just release a 2x teleconverter specialized for their unit.

The point is that the MF camera instantly gains access to all of the EOS EF mount line-up, so that you don't need to miss out on any of the versatility of an FF camera lens range, only perhaps the best possible image quality, since pushing the light from an FF lens through a teleconverter to fit a MF camera will likely, at the very least, degrade resolution, and in the worst case scenario give you pea soup.

 

[ragmanjin]

I seriously hope they don't buy out Phase One. Phase and Dalsa have a beautiful thing going, and throwing Canon's now-outdated sensor tech into the mix would only turn gold to straw — not to mention it would have to be heavily AA-filtered and video-optimized to meet Canon standards. When Phase moved from Kodak to Dalsa, they lost the long exposures but gained worldwide acclaim for their colour accuracy and huge dynamic range. And, finally, after years of co-research and development between the two companies, they've brought hour-long exposures back on a Dalsa sensor, mixing the company's class-leading patented high-ISO pixel binning with Kodak's drool-envoking long exposures from yesteryear. Canon has nothing to add to either side of that; lobster-red skin tones and three less stops of dynamic range with all kinds of noise at any exposure longer than 30 seconds. Which is garbage for us stills-only photographers.
I keep reading posts from users asking Canon to bring in the first affordable medium format system. Look at the Pentax 645D. At the time of writing this, its price is about on par with that of the 1D X. And in true Pentax style, any MF Pentax lens you find in any pawn shop will absolutely work with the system. That, my friends, is cheap glass. Can't be beaten for price. A close second is second-hand Leaf backs attached to Mamiya AFD bodies. You can actually get yourself a whole 20+ MP kit with a couple lenses for less than $5000 if you're looking in the right places, and it allows you to switch between film and digital. I've got the DF+, but my Phase digital back pretty much lives on my Mamiya AFD. Kill the backup before you challenge the master, right? But if Canon buys Phase, they'd be killing the master to become the backup. That just won't do.

 

[Pi]

... and three less stops of dynamic range...

As far as DR is concerned - if Canon just "stitches" a few existing sensors, it would have the same DR, and Nikon would have higher DR. Format matters.

 

[dickgrafixstop]

why all this discussion about sensor size? "medium format" appears to be whatever the vendor says it is as long as it's "bigger" than 24x36.. aps-c size sensors often take equivalent photos to full frame sensors for everyone but maniac pixel peepers. Who's to say that canon won't come out with a roughly 32X32 sensor - gain the square format appeal of medium format,
gain approximately 10-15 % more sensor space with resultant megapixel increase and define it as "medium format" all the while within the normal 35mm image circle.

 

[Inst]

That's why the 500nm process matters and MF matters; for all DSLR sensors Canon uses 500nm, which imposes a minimum pixel size (limits max MP) and limits the size of microfeatures like the A/D converter architecture Sony uses to achieve higher DR.

Canon literally CANNOT produce the same technology Sony is using, not until they move onto a 180nm process.

Even then, when they move onto a 180nm process, what do they do with the existing 500nm fabs?

Hence, start producing MF on the 500nm process fabs and move the rest of the DSLR to the 180nm.

 

[CarlTN]

Maybe we are going to have the equivalent of metabones to adapt L lenses on the canon medium format...

As for the bodies; if Canon opts to buy Phase-One or some other producer, it can easily inherit that company's existing line of lenses. If the body system it supports has a longer flange distance than the EOS system, then that's great; because then Canon can use .5x wide-converters mounted between the lens mount and the EOS lens to adapt the lens for the MF camera.

Impossible, a wide-converter inherently requires a shorter flange distance than is native to the lens (unless someone knows differently). That is the reason that the Metabones uses only SLR lenses with only mirrorless cameras (not APS DSLR cameras).

Also, there are multiple digital medium format sizes:

44 x 33mm (Pentax 645D, Hasselblad - multiple, Mamiya Aptus 8 & Credo 40)
45 x 30 mm (Leica S2)
48 x 36 mm (Mamiya Aptus 5 & 7)
49.1 x 36.7 mm (Hasselblad - multiple)
53.7 x 40.2 mm (Hasselblad H4D-60, Mamiya Aptus 12 & Credo 60 & 80)
56 x 36 mm (Mamiya Aptus 10)
56 x 41.5 mm - Film '645' Format
70 x 56 mm - Film '6x7' format

Essentially, digital has not yet quite made it to the medium formats everyone refers to from the film days. The Pentax 645D doesn't have nearly the same advantage over FF cameras as 645 film did over 35mm.

Size and weight comparison:

Canon 1D X Canon 5D Mark III Leica S2
1540g 950g 1410 g
158 x 163 x 84 mm 152 x 116 x 76 mm 160 x 120 x 80 mm

So the Leica S2 is slightly larger than the 5D Mark III (although almost 50% heavier), and lighter than the 1D X (and much smaller). Medium format doesn't have to be huge like a 120/220 camera as Leica has shown (although, again the sensor is smaller and can therefore have a smaller mirror and a shorter flange distance than the film formats).

Good info and comparisons. I was aware that none of the digital sensors were as large as 6x7 film.

If Canon does their own MF cameras and lenses, why would the price be any less than Phase One?

 

[CarlTN]

I seriously hope they don't buy out Phase One. Phase and Dalsa have a beautiful thing going, and throwing Canon's now-outdated sensor tech into the mix would only turn gold to straw — not to mention it would have to be heavily AA-filtered and video-optimized to meet Canon standards. When Phase moved from Kodak to Dalsa, they lost the long exposures but gained worldwide acclaim for their colour accuracy and huge dynamic range. And, finally, after years of co-research and development between the two companies, they've brought hour-long exposures back on a Dalsa sensor, mixing the company's class-leading patented high-ISO pixel binning with Kodak's drool-envoking long exposures from yesteryear. Canon has nothing to add to either side of that; lobster-red skin tones and three less stops of dynamic range with all kinds of noise at any exposure longer than 30 seconds. Which is garbage for us stills-only photographers.
I keep reading posts from users asking Canon to bring in the first affordable medium format system. Look at the Pentax 645D. At the time of writing this, its price is about on par with that of the 1D X. And in true Pentax style, any MF Pentax lens you find in any pawn shop will absolutely work with the system. That, my friends, is cheap glass. Can't be beaten for price. A close second is second-hand Leaf backs attached to Mamiya AFD bodies. You can actually get yourself a whole 20+ MP kit with a couple lenses for less than $5000 if you're looking in the right places, and it allows you to switch between film and digital. I've got the DF+, but my Phase digital back pretty much lives on my Mamiya AFD. Kill the backup before you challenge the master, right? But if Canon buys Phase, they'd be killing the master to become the backup. That just won't do.

What are you shooting with an hour long exposure?

 

[ragmanjin]

I seriously hope they don't buy out Phase One. Phase and Dalsa have a beautiful thing going, and throwing Canon's now-outdated sensor tech into the mix would only turn gold to straw — not to mention it would have to be heavily AA-filtered and video-optimized to meet Canon standards. When Phase moved from Kodak to Dalsa, they lost the long exposures but gained worldwide acclaim for their colour accuracy and huge dynamic range. And, finally, after years of co-research and development between the two companies, they've brought hour-long exposures back on a Dalsa sensor, mixing the company's class-leading patented high-ISO pixel binning with Kodak's drool-envoking long exposures from yesteryear. Canon has nothing to add to either side of that; lobster-red skin tones and three less stops of dynamic range with all kinds of noise at any exposure longer than 30 seconds. Which is garbage for us stills-only photographers.
I keep reading posts from users asking Canon to bring in the first affordable medium format system. Look at the Pentax 645D. At the time of writing this, its price is about on par with that of the 1D X. And in true Pentax style, any MF Pentax lens you find in any pawn shop will absolutely work with the system. That, my friends, is cheap glass. Can't be beaten for price. A close second is second-hand Leaf backs attached to Mamiya AFD bodies. You can actually get yourself a whole 20+ MP kit with a couple lenses for less than $5000 if you're looking in the right places, and it allows you to switch between film and digital. I've got the DF+, but my Phase digital back pretty much lives on my Mamiya AFD. Kill the backup before you challenge the master, right? But if Canon buys Phase, they'd be killing the master to become the backup. That just won't do.

What are you shooting with an hour long exposure?

Light painting. Star trails. Lower than low light shots. Having the option to flick the shutter, go for dinner and come back to end the exposure offers a lot of freedom and opens a lot of creative doors.