Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Predictions for electronic MFT mount.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Predictions for electronic MFT mount.

    It's probably stating the obvious but I think having an electronic MFT would make this camera even more great than it is. I wonder IF and WHEN it is likely to be available based on the complexity of making the dumb mount talk and what we know about BM generally. Would it even be an option with the first MFT or would that piss off the EF buyers. And if not how long might BM need to get one out there, if at all?
    Last edited by Gwangjuboy; 10-05-2012, 09:47 PM.

  • #2
    The dumb mount will never talk. It has no electronic contacts. An electronic M43 version would need to be a separate model.
    I'm a mechanical, manual lens type of guy, but a powered M43 version would be worth it to use the Lumix 7-14 f4.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Cde. View Post
      The dumb mount will never talk. It has no electronic contacts. An electronic M43 version would need to be a separate model.
      I'm a mechanical, manual lens type of guy, but a powered M43 version would be worth it to use the Lumix 7-14 f4.
      I know, I mean an electronic mount version. My point about the dumb mount is if they turned around and did an electronic one instead. My reasoning is if it isn't that difficult to do the internals like the EF mount it makes me wonder if they could quite quickly do a MFT electronic mount, very soon, or even instead of the dumb mount.

      I hear you on the Lumix. And I'm sure you know there is also a ton of great cheap glass from high end companies, wide and fast with stabilization with new lenses coming out all the time.
      Last edited by Gwangjuboy; 10-05-2012, 10:52 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        It's a bit of a quandary, the topic of a BMCC with an electronic m43 mount.

        It goes without saying that BMD is, um, reliably unpredictable. Overall, I actually think that's OK. It may be the reason for the BMCC phenomena itself.

        I strongly doubt the BMCC-MFT will (surprise!) be an electronic m43 mount instead of passive m43. The question is, when or if they'll release a separate BMCC-MFT-Electronic version sometime later. If they do, the timing could be tricky in terms of PR & customer relations, but relatively speaking, I think not such a big deal as the current months-long delay shipping any BMCC in quantity.

        Personally, I hope BMD does offer a BMCC-MFT-Electronic version maybe sometimes next year. I own several electronic m43 lenses that I'd love to use on such a camera.

        However, the "long term" question is does it make much sense for BMD to mess around with this sort of hardware development, when what they probably need to do is get a S35/APS-C sensor camera out (with perhaps a EF-M mount?) ASAP, perhaps for a NAB 2014 announcement. Before the current shipping mess/disaster, I would have said "NAB 2013", but now I have strong doubts about that idea.

        If nothing else, watching BMD has become a fascinating spectator sport. I'm rooting for them, but I don't know if I'm willing to place any more bets on them*, at least until the dust settles a bit.

        *I'm on record for betting that a bunch of us (but not all of us) will have our BMCC-EF cams before 1/1/13 or otherwise I'll eat one of Marc Hood's shoes. :-)
        www.peterdv.com
        Blog: http://HereForTheWeather.wordpress.com

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Peter J. DeCrescenzo View Post
          *I'm on record for betting that a bunch of us (but not all of us) will have our BMCC-EF cams before 1/1/13 or otherwise I'll eat one of Marc Hood's shoes. :-)
          To be specific: One of my Crocs. You have yet to say right or left and BBQ'd or chicken fried...I just assumed your legal department might have advised you not to get too specific. For example, is a "bunch of us" five or fifty or five hundred?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by mhood View Post
            To be specific: One of my Crocs. You have yet to say right or left and BBQ'd or chicken fried...I just assumed your legal department might have advised you not to get too specific. For example, is a "bunch of us" five or fifty or five hundred?
            Under the circumstances, I hope we can agree that "five" qualifies as a "bunch of us". :-)

            And, by "us", I mean regular paying customers, and who aren't listed on IMDB. ;-)
            Last edited by Peter J. DeCrescenzo; 10-06-2012, 04:13 AM.
            www.peterdv.com
            Blog: http://HereForTheWeather.wordpress.com

            Comment


            • #7
              Although the theory of m4/3 lenses is great, the reality is that a lot of them, especially the Panasonic m4/3 lenses, are really designed to have a lot of in camera digital correction of their lenses, especially on the wider ones.

              That means that Panasonic can make lenses to a lesser (cheaper) standard and let their in camera correction fix it in post....

              The problem is that if you put one of these somewhat flawed lenses onto a non-native mount, you loose that auto correction and the lens all of sudden doesn't perform as expected...

              They aren't terrible...but...the premium price you pay for some of them hurts a bit more when you see them without their *behind the scenes* lens corrections. They include both CA and also some geometric distortion. None of which are probably easily done on MOTION images as easily as they are on STILL images.

              Read point 2 here
              http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

              and this
              http://m43photo.blogspot.com.au/2011...-and-lens.html

              Generating a lot of discussion with stills photographers here
              http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/42479801

              In other words...active mount would be great for sure, but be aware there are some bites....

              jb

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes, very true, JB.

                At this point, before they engineer a BMCC-MFT-Electronic, I'd rather see BMD put their efforts into (in the following order):

                1) Post weekly updates on BMCC-EF status.
                2) Shipping lots & lots of BMCC-EF & BMCC-MFT cams ASAP.
                3) See 1 & 2 above.
                4) Maybe designing & engineering a BMCC-MFT-Electronic (maybe).
                5) Design & engineer a BMCC-like cam with a S35-ish sensor featuring a EF-M mount (?), 4K-ish res, priced @ $4K-ish, announced at NAB 2014 at the latest (and ship within 90 days of its announcement).

                Cheers.
                www.peterdv.com
                Blog: http://HereForTheWeather.wordpress.com

                Comment


                • #9
                  How about VUs, F stops, SSD capacity, file deletion option, etc.? Maybe that could be a 1.5 or a 2.5 on your list?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by mhood View Post
                    How about VUs, F stops, SSD capacity, file deletion option, etc.? Maybe that could be a 1.5 or a 2.5 on your list?
                    Now you're getting into the spirit of it! :-) / :-(

                    (It only hurts when I laugh/cry.)
                    www.peterdv.com
                    Blog: http://HereForTheWeather.wordpress.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
                      In other words...active mount would be great for sure, but be aware there are some bites....
                      I suppose someone with too much time on their hands could add lens correction to a de-bayer algorithm and do the same thing as the cameras do. But I wouldn't hold my breath.

                      In the mean time, it appears that there may be some truly stellar lenses which could be used on the MFT version with an adapter. This ebay seller claims some of the ultra wide angle (e.g. 6mm) Zeiss Super 16 lenses will cover the sensor:

                      http://www.ebay.com/itm/180918389049...84.m1438.l2648

                      Hopefully, it's more than just a sales pitch.

                      Cheers.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Admit One View Post
                        I suppose someone with too much time on their hands could add lens correction to a de-bayer algorithm and do the same thing as the cameras do. But I wouldn't hold my breath.

                        In the mean time, it appears that there may be some truly stellar lenses which could be used on the MFT version with an adapter. This ebay seller claims some of the ultra wide angle (e.g. 6mm) Zeiss Super 16 lenses will cover the sensor:

                        http://www.ebay.com/itm/180918389049...84.m1438.l2648

                        Hopefully, it's more than just a sales pitch.

                        Cheers.
                        For sure.

                        But of course, lenses adaptable to a m43 mount have been discussed since GH1 days, and now the slightly smaller size of the BMCC sensor (aside from its Unobtainium-like availability) and its passive m43 mount adds new, um, dimensions to the ongoing discussion ...
                        www.peterdv.com
                        Blog: http://HereForTheWeather.wordpress.com

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
                          Although the theory of m4/3 lenses is great, the reality is that a lot of them, especially the Panasonic m4/3 lenses, are really designed to have a lot of in camera digital correction of their lenses, especially on the wider ones.

                          That means that Panasonic can make lenses to a lesser (cheaper) standard and let their in camera correction fix it in post....

                          The problem is that if you put one of these somewhat flawed lenses onto a non-native mount, you loose that auto correction and the lens all of sudden doesn't perform as expected...

                          They aren't terrible...but...the premium price you pay for some of them hurts a bit more when you see them without their *behind the scenes* lens corrections. They include both CA and also some geometric distortion. None of which are probably easily done on MOTION images as easily as they are on STILL images.

                          Read point 2 here
                          http://hazeghi.org/mft-lenses.html

                          and this
                          http://m43photo.blogspot.com.au/2011...-and-lens.html

                          Generating a lot of discussion with stills photographers here
                          http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/42479801

                          In other words...active mount would be great for sure, but be aware there are some bites....

                          jb
                          I've never heard before how much the camera processes the image. It certainly puts adamper on a MFT electronic mount and I'm guessing BM is unlikely to jump through the hoops even if it is possible.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The important thing about the MFT mount is the ability to use PL lenses now through an inexpensive adapter. For me. I don't know alot about those other lenses you're talking about, I shot Canon APS-C for a while.
                            Facebook - Angelis Digital Studio

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Peter J. DeCrescenzo View Post
                              EF-M mount
                              Why not E-mount? Same flange distance, much wider availability of adaptors, and just as easily adapted to support electronic Canon lenses.

                              Regardless, I don't think we'll be seeing a super 35 BMCC any time soon.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X