[ogl]

I heard that DMF could be launched at last.

[ewalk]

I heard that DMF could be launched at last.

I'll bite - from Pentax? Any estimated release date? Or are you just kidding?

[lithos]

I find square format totally useless. It is rare that my images get published in a square format. The only magazine I know of that is square format is "Dealer Deluxe" in France. In some ways I wish there was a sensor closer to 645. That format is almost a perfect fit for all media being published.

Ben

Yeah. I find square shots helpful sometimes, like putting chromatic notes in a piece of music. Being a somewhat unpleasant-looking format, they jar you a bit, sorta make you take notice.

But my stance is that I'd rather crop a square from a rectangle than crop a rectangle from a square. Because I just don't use squares that often.

I hope Pentax does bring out a 645-esque camera. For starters, it'll help them get back on top in terms of pro sales (and therefore, brand recognition for the "Yeah, but pros don't use that brand of camera" types).

Apparently it's nearly done, anyway, so here's hoping. Just hope they put the sensor in the landscape position.

Actually, I would not be surprised if Pentax brought out the 645D in a 35mm SLR-type package that was actually smaller than the EOS 1d.

[carpediem007]

I agree with most everyone here about the "perfect" format...

It always seemed like such a waste shooting 6x6 when all that ever got printed was 645/67. Sometimes it might be nice to have one original that can be cropped either way, but whenever I think I've found something that might get published I shoot it in portrait and landscape format anyway...

Also, I for one find it difficult to compose/frame for a square...

So I'll keep using my Pentax 645N and the Mamiya RB67; still film, but very very affordable and scanning the really good stuff isn't to much of a hassle (doesn't happen to often anyway)

Medium format haptic (plus potential film wastage concerns) have a positive influence on my kpm (keepers per thousand); I love 6x7 and 645...

Cheers,
Michael

---

Last edited by carpediem007; 02-19-2009 at 01:29 AM. Reason: Clarity?

[GaryM]

A square format would take full advantage of the imaging circle from a lens, so it's the most sensor real estate you can get other than a round sensor (don't even want to think about that one!). I would love to see a square format DSLR, but in order to make it viable it would have to have user-selectable aspect ratios. Many users may not like composing in a square format, and they could select an aspect ratio that suits their preference.

[jay]

A square format would take full advantage of the imaging circle from a lens.

We should put our listening hats on and read what has been said in this thread.

-- A square format, covering the APS-C image circle, would have to be narrower than APS-C, which means your wide-angle glass would be even less wide. Especially after the horizontal crop that so many people would perform (since the horizontal format is seen as the most natural -- as the stereovision of the human eyes creates a horizontal image in our minds)

-- any sort of non-optically-symmetric lens hood (petal hoods) would vignette the top and bottom of the image.

And it doesn't seem to fix an actual problem. Square images are much less common than horizontal or vertical, so many photographers would prefer to have their sensors optimized for those two formats. If Pentax were Canon or Nikon, and made 5 different "pro" cameras, they could afford to have one that was square. But this body would have to appeal to ALL pro shooters, since this is basically the one shot they have.

This has gone from a believed-to-be-true rumor to a thread of people talking about how cool it would be to have the square sensor.

Lame.

[clodomir]

hello ! sorry about my ignorance, but what does"DMF" stand for ? square format ? so a ("a") KxD could be a "645" or "6x7" or equivalent ? still using actual lenses ? both FF and APS-C ? whow ! K3D, 22 Mp, square sensor that's it ?

[quarc]

hello ! sorry about my ignorance, but what does"DMF" stand for ? square format ? so a ("a") KxD could be a "645" or "6x7" or equivalent ? still using actual lenses ? both FF and APS-C ? whow ! K3D, 22 Mp, square sensor that's it ?

Digital Medium Format, and medium means bigger than full :-) I am sure it will not be a 6*7 :-( Probably not even a 6*6 or 6*4,5, probably somewhere around 5,5*4. But it has been rumourder for years, I would think it is too late now. Pentax Medium Format photographers has found other solutions by now.

[lithos]

Saying that you like the freedom square formats give you - not having to choose between landscape and portrait - is like saying you like to take the engine out of your car and so not have to worry about repairs (because you're not driving it). That's just what it seems like to me.

I'd love to have the money to be able to say things like "I'd buy it, it'd be interesting..." but I don't.

The format that makes the most out of an APS-C lens's image circle is, as jay and others have pointed out...is an APS-C sized (and proportioned) sensor.

[Matjazz]

I don't think square is such a bad idea. It has many advantages as others have written before. The question is if it's economically feasable. It would need bigger mirror laong with pentaprism, masking mechanism more af points and AE areas (for vertical). But on the other hand it wouldn't need all the additional buttons on vertical grip.
The only indesputable technical problem I see are hoods.

[Adrian Owerko]

I don't think square is such a bad idea. It has many advantages as others have written before. The question is if it's economically feasable. It would need bigger mirror laong with pentaprism, masking mechanism more af points and AE areas (for vertical). But on the other hand it wouldn't need all the additional buttons on vertical grip.
The only indesputable technical problem I see are hoods.

What if the whole lens mount could be rotated from landscape to portrait? That would solve the problem of the lens Hoods.. K Mount with a TWIST (:

[Blue]

They could improve the shake reduction in a square sensor camera since it wouldn't be shot in a vertical hold. In other words, they could save some space that way.

[borno]

I loved my mamiya 6x6 tlr so I think square would be hip plenty of extra room for cropping to whatever aspect YOU want. (I don't think it will happen though)

[Blue]

I loved my mamiya 6x6 tlr so I think square would be hip plenty of extra room for cropping to whatever aspect YOU want. (I don't think it will happen though)

I inherited my grandfather's C3 in the fall. Those things are amazing.

[cheesehead]

First, I'll believe the square sensor when I see it. I still think it's not likely.

But - I take a lot of my shots at events, with a long telephoto. Tripod or monopod. I have to pick an orientation and then stick with it - if a moment comes up that would be better with vertical orientation, too bad. Even handheld, in the time it takes me to rotate & recompose, the shot's gone. I'd love to have the square format with viewfinder lines showing where the "standard" crops would be.

OTOH, for some people & what they shoot, changing the camera orientation is no big deal. You don't need a square format, especially if it costs more, and you probably think it sounds silly. And for you, it would be.