 |
| Leica D-Lux 7 |
2018 has been the year each of the big camera makers made their move into “full frame” (24x36mm with a diagonal of 43mm) sensor mirrorless.
Actually Sony made that move 5 years ago and Panasonic will do so early in 2019 we are told.
The question which I put in this post is why ?
I watched Chris Nicholls’ D P Review video of the Nikon (Nycon, Neekon, take your pick) Zee (or Zed, whatever) 6 camera recently. As usual I found this useful as the emphasis of these video reviews is on the user experience.
In a world when just about any camera can make good pictures that becomes the key differentiator between various models.
Chris pointed out that the Z6 is not much good at follow focussing on moving subjects and the AF struggles in low light. It also lacks a flip out screen suitable for portrait orientation of the camera.
I though to myself, hang on….my little Lumix G85 can do all those things with no trouble at all and it costs about half as much. It also has dual IS which works like a charm.
Prices vary with specials and deals but today one major Australian vendor is offering the Z6 with 24-70mm f4 lens for $4199. The Sony and Canon approximate equivalents are more expensive.
The same vendor has the G85 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 at $2136.
So what do the 43mm sensor cameras offer to justify their considerable price premium over Micro Four Thirds models ?
As best I can tell, the answer is “not much”.
Using the DPR Image Comparison Tool I compared a current mid range M43 model, the Lumix GX9 with the Nikon Z6, Sony A7Mk3 and Canon EOS R.
I can see very little difference between them apart from more high ISO luminance noise in the GX9 images.
In the context of user practice that is less significant than the numbers might suggest due to depth of focus considerations.
A M43 camera will have about the same depth of focus at f2.8 as a full frame one at f5.6.
This means that in low light the full frame model has to use an ISO setting two EV steps higher to compensate for the smaller lens aperture.
The result is that there is little perceptible difference between them in the output pictures.
Outdoors in bright light the full frame models will have a bit more dynamic range than the M43 ones.
But if M43 has enough DR for the subject, and it mostly does, then the technical advantage of the larger sensor is not able to be expressed in the actual output.
On thoughtful consideration it seems to me that the only ineluctable difference between full frame and M43 is that it is easier to get blurry backgrounds with full frame.
This might be an advantage for instance with sports in front of a messy, busy background.
Or it might be a disadvantage if you want everything in focus as is often the case with documentary work.
Now here comes computational imaging which is finding ways to blur backgrounds in convincing fashion so maybe even that which is ineluctable today will become commonplace tomorrow.
So why the rush to full frame mirrorless ?
This is all complete speculation on my part so don’t take any of what follows seriously.
The first question is why mirrorless ?
That one is easy to answer. The DSLR has reached the end of its evolutionary journey. The only way to improve camera capability, improve the user experience and reduce manufacturing costs is to go mirrorless.
The only surprise is that it took Canon and Nikon so long to make the move.
The next question is why full frame ?
1. It seems to me that one reason which is relevant to all the manufacturers is that there is more profit per unit on high price items.
2. Camera makers want to separate themselves as far as possible from smart phones. My guess is they want to take all cameras upmarket into the prestige arena.
3. It seems pretty clear that Canon and Nikon never wanted to go down the APS-C pathway in the first place but were forced there by sensor manufacturing costs. Both companies have shown half hearted support for their crop sensor lines.
It would not surprise me at all if Canon and Nikon were to quietly phase out support for their APSC lines.
Sony wants to be number one in the camera market which means number one in the mirrorless full frame sector and they appear to have succeeded.
All they need to do now is design products which people actually enjoy using.
Panasonic says they intend to deliver 8K video by 2020 and they cannot do this on the Micro Four Thirds platform.
Technically this seems logical but it leaves me wondering “who wants/needs 8K video”.
Hardly anybody owns an 8K TV set or even a 4K one so why the push for 8K ?
Again this is just me guessing but maybe the goal is to create a seamless blend between still and video. The user just presses the button and decides later if 32Mpx stills or video are required.
Summary We live in interesting times. Enthusiast photographers have the luxury of being able to make good pictures from almost any camera they might decide to buy.
My frustration is that nobody is making the camera I want to buy. More about this in the next post.