According to Winder
the GFX's mount size limits the format size to the current sensor size. This 43.8mm x 32.9mm format, however, is only a (crop-) factor of 1.3 away from the standard FF, 36x24mm format.
That's not a huge improvement.
As Zack Arias (one of Fuji's campaigners) all "educated" us, even a 1.5 (crop-) factor (from APS-C to FF) is "insignificant" and only people with problems care about such minute differences. Now a factor of 1.3 is supposed to have everyone not consider the well-cared for FF market for a slightly bigger sensor built into a camera that has no future to grow the sensor size? That does not make sense, does it?
Given their previous "
no one needs FF, the IQ of APS-C is more than sufficient" advertising, doesn't Fuji have same back-pedalling to do if they want to convince people that their GFX has any IQ advantage over an A7RII, say (just to name another mirrorless)?
I believe it is just a matter of time until sensors larger than 43.8x32.8 will become commonplace, just like it took only time for 36x24 sensors to be pretty much commonplace (and the latter evolution from APS-C to FF as the norm for advanced enthusiast cameras is not over yet). The GFX might be seen as featuring a "giant" sensor now, but as soon as Pentax releases a digital 645 that does not have a crop sensor anymore then Fuji will be lagging behind; with no capacity to catch up due to their mount size.
I think Fuji has unnecessarily limited the potential of their camera by using a "small" mount. If weight and size of lenses are somehow priorities, they could have started with crop lenses (much like you can use APS-C lenses on a "135 format camera" with an APS-C sensor). Having a bigger mount that you don't exploit does not significantly add to the weight and size of a lens. BTW, size and weight of many lens designs are largely determined by how "fast" it is, not so much by the image circle size it supports.
I might be underestimating how big the mount of the GFX would have to be, if it were future-proof for a grown-up MF format like 60×45. It may have unduly up-sized the camera.
Fuji might be selling a lot of GFX initially, but I feel that they closed themselves a door for selling a lot of these camera in the more distant future. I think the GFX format is an unfortunate format that does not give a big boost over FF -- the latter being well-established with a lot of alternatives to choose from -- and has a lot of support in terms of lenses and professional service networks. I think the GFX format will receive pressure from both FF (there will no doubt be advances) and real MF (bigger sensors which will become more affordable). The GFX format may look good now, but won't it be a "pocket MF" product in the future (i.e., a bit of an oxymoron)?
One never knows, however, how much Fuji's "retro"-theme will override any other issues the GFX may have. People are not rational...
Originally posted by copland35 The Fujifilm mirrorless body and its lenses places the rear element of each lens very close to the sensor. This creates a resolution advantage with light rays striking the sensor almost perpendicular right across the sensor.
Well, if the rays are not perpendicular to the sensor to begin with (they aren't naturally with wide-angle lenses) then the shorter the registration distance, the more oblique they will have to become to still cover the edges of the sensor. With very wide angle lenses, manufacturers like Sony and Leica struggled to avoid colour shifts due to the extreme oblique angles involved.
Perhaps that is an issue for old wide-angle lenses only and newer designs can be made telecentric at the image side. AFAIK, however, a short registration distance only helps up to a point in order to avoid using retrofocus designs, but once lenses get wider the "mirrorless = compact"-advantage (<- largely a myth, AFAIC) has to be eaten into by using a (comparatively) longer lens.
Originally posted by texandrews So, like the Sony FF E-mount series, once adapters hit the street there will be a wide variety of lenses available to use with the camera.
I'm not supporting anyone who states that "old lenses aren't good enough" but there can be a number of issues with adapters:
- They introduce more tolerances. At the IQ level the GFX aspires to, this matters.
- They can make AF a challenge. For instance, the metabones adapter on a A7RII sounds like a good idea but I know of one prominent user who said he will have to sell all his Canon glass because it simply does not work well with the adapter.
- They often take some functionality away.
- If you use lenses from different system, you need multiple adapters and mounting and unmounting becomes more of a challenge than it is with a single-mount system.
- Adapters take up space in a camera bag and you have to make sure you've got them with you.