12-19-2011, 05:05 PM
[quote name='dave9t5' timestamp='1324312547' post='13918']
A mirrorless K-mount camera would have the same lens-mount register distance as a DSLR/SLR K-mount lens, so it would have more in common with the mirrorless Sony Alpha bodies (than the Sony E bodies). That is, both have an unnecessarily deep and empty space where the mirror used to be (whether it's filled with a pellicle mirror is moot). It's not as optimized or as flexible as a new mirrorless specifc mount.
That said, we are seeing that the short flange distance of the E mount is only an advantage for relatively moderate focal lengths. For the wider-angle lenses, performance improves alot with retrofocus designs which lengthens the effective mount distance. For telephoto lenses, the total length of the lens-to-sensor converges with increasing focal length.
So, and considering that Pentax already has the smallest SLR lenses in the market, a mirrorless K-mount system would still be pretty small. A K-x/K-m/K-r with the penta-mirror hump lopped off would still be pretty small. Even the old ME-Super film bodies were pretty small. A penta-less ME-Super sized digital body with the current DA Ltd pancakes would be a very attractive system.
[/quote]
PZers help…..I’ve got lost in latest development in mirrorles cameras.
Back in form days was simple.
If you need perfect WA and normal lenses up let say 130…140mm get Rangefinder – due to short flang distance ,no back mirror
If you need tele range - go for SLR.
And then arrives digital. Where I’m completely lost
- it seems the photo sites have problem if the light is coming from low angle. This no advantage in WA range
- Long telephoto demands high performance AF – all birds shooters in canon lnad considers 1d….1ds or at least 50d. I don’think that in next decay any mirroroleas can touch this theritory. Isn’t it?
My question to all PZe4rs is :
What are the advantages of shorter lens to sensor distance? /optical,mechanical,weight etc../
A mirrorless K-mount camera would have the same lens-mount register distance as a DSLR/SLR K-mount lens, so it would have more in common with the mirrorless Sony Alpha bodies (than the Sony E bodies). That is, both have an unnecessarily deep and empty space where the mirror used to be (whether it's filled with a pellicle mirror is moot). It's not as optimized or as flexible as a new mirrorless specifc mount.
That said, we are seeing that the short flange distance of the E mount is only an advantage for relatively moderate focal lengths. For the wider-angle lenses, performance improves alot with retrofocus designs which lengthens the effective mount distance. For telephoto lenses, the total length of the lens-to-sensor converges with increasing focal length.
So, and considering that Pentax already has the smallest SLR lenses in the market, a mirrorless K-mount system would still be pretty small. A K-x/K-m/K-r with the penta-mirror hump lopped off would still be pretty small. Even the old ME-Super film bodies were pretty small. A penta-less ME-Super sized digital body with the current DA Ltd pancakes would be a very attractive system.
[/quote]
PZers help…..I’ve got lost in latest development in mirrorles cameras.
Back in form days was simple.
If you need perfect WA and normal lenses up let say 130…140mm get Rangefinder – due to short flang distance ,no back mirror
If you need tele range - go for SLR.
And then arrives digital. Where I’m completely lost
- it seems the photo sites have problem if the light is coming from low angle. This no advantage in WA range
- Long telephoto demands high performance AF – all birds shooters in canon lnad considers 1d….1ds or at least 50d. I don’think that in next decay any mirroroleas can touch this theritory. Isn’t it?
My question to all PZe4rs is :
What are the advantages of shorter lens to sensor distance? /optical,mechanical,weight etc../