[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


New anti-spam measures have been applied to all boards.

Please see the Frequently Asked Questions page for details.

[Advertise on 4chan]


What was the point of increasing the size of the Nikon mount if they are still only putting 35mm sensors inside the body?
Surely if they wanted to make bigger lenses it would only make sense to make sensors that go up to an optional 100mp?
>>
>>4379711
Making a mount larger than the sensors makes optical focus breathing correction simpler. Nikon’s vision for Z mount has always been video-centric.

What matters more to photographers is cover glass design which alters IR transmission and therefore colors, and the usability of lenses that rely on steep ray angles like leica UWAs. Even E mount is more than enough for you. It can support f0.7 primes and sony can make f1.4s that beat out nikon’s f1.8s. They could even make a pancake, if they had so little self respect they’d release their first externally focusing lens in almost a decade. What they CANT do is design a lens that needs ultra thin cover glass because their sensor cover glass is ultra thick, and the thick glass takes more IR out of colors which is why sony colors look totally neutral and nikon (thin glass) colors have a weird vibrance from the extra IR and how it is processed by the camera into the .NEF format.
>>
>>4379711
They didn't design the mount just for the sensors they're currently using, or thinking about using. The F mount was their big thing for six decades, they can't predict where things will have ended up by 2070 so they just made sure to have a decent amount of space for literal and figurative growth in there.
>>
It's not even that big, literally just 1mm more than Canon RF. By comparison Fuji's G mount is a whole 10mm more.
>>
>>4379711
better potential lens design, greater lens adaptability
>>
>>4379711
The larger mount allows for more light at a given aperture. It's why I switched to Z mount.
>>
>>4379720
Strange, usually IR pollution washes out the image. Are you sure its not just software?
>>
>>4379711
>can adapt everyone else's lens
>nobody can adapt yours
>can go to a >35mm sensor if needed
>mogs sony's baby mount
>>
>>4379720
> the thick glass takes more IR out of colors which is why sony colors look totally neutral and nikon (thin glass) colors have a weird vibrance from the extra IR

this is total mystical nonsense lmao
>>
File: Lenses.jpg (219 KB, 935x1246)
219 KB
219 KB JPG
>>4379711
>What was the point of increasing the size of the Nikon mount if they are still only putting 35mm sensors inside the body?
Better, smaller lenses.
>>
>>4379832
Thats not how optics work. Exit pupil distance and ray angle relationships change, not light gathered. Also image space tele-centricity becomes possible, which is important for video fags.

>>4379877
And thats not a better lens by a mile. No de clickable aperture ring, no internal silent focusing, no filter threads, and it vignettes 3 stops wide open.

Its about as good as the samyang remaster slim if you gave samyang nikons equipment for the sharpness bump. The actual optics in it are hilariously undersized.

Curiously both the 24 and 26 suffer from the same optical problem: they render flat, and don’t have sharp edges or corners at any aperture. Nikon should have made a 24mm f2.8 that was normal instead of a marketing stunt. They also should have copied fuji and leica instead of putting PASM on a retro camera, and added click/declick aperture rings instead of permanently declicked control rings. But if Nikon ever did what photographers think they should have, they wouldnt have ceded the #2 spot to sony and wouldnt be in the process of ceding the #3 spot to fuji. Now canon is adding aperture rings to their design language and is going to surprise drop an ae1 inspired retro camera with r6ii like guts and an aperture ring having f2.8 muffin lineup before 2028 and basically bitch slap nikon down to where olympus and panasonic live.

Don’t tell any rumors sites about the canon.
>>
>>4379877
how is it better if it gets curb stomped by canon’s cheaper 28mm with a smaller mount??? explain this niggors. how can the superior mount have an inferior pancake?
>>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecentric_lens#Image-space_telecentric_lenses
So let me get this straight. z mount is so huge, nikon CAN make lenses with industrial grade focus breathing resistance. 0 size change no matter where the lens focuses.

But basically every fucking lens they make has some noticeable focus breathing. Why?
>>
File: 1662833457457622.png (780 KB, 623x733)
780 KB
780 KB PNG
what's the deal with this pancake autist
>>
>>4379891
Pretty sure the even older EFS 24mm beats the shit out of the nikon 26mm
>>
>>4379894
pancake sister likes shitty lenses because they make her camera more cute and purseable and the bad optics add charm to her instagram selfies

other famous pancake users: taylor swift (olympus kit zoom)
>>
>>4379893
>video
take cyanide, video troon
>>
>>4379899
anon nikon is literally throwing away stills dr to bump up their video specs, if you want videographers to die you want nikon to die
>>
>>4379900
videofags have their own board -----> /v/
>>
>>4379797
>>4379832
>>4379868
>>4379877
These are the correct answers OP.
>>
>>4379711
I think they are potentially thinking about doing a sensor larger than full frame.
>>
>>4379915
But none of it is true, or else canon chads and snoyboys wouldnt be mogging nikon into oblivion rn.
>>
>>4379711
To allow for superior lens designs
>>
>Make a new body with a larger than ff sensor
>Use the old lens mount
>None of the current lenses are designed to cover the larger sensor
What's the point? You're going to have to bring out a bunch of new lenses and label them as larger than ff anyway, it's just going to confuse people, Yeah you'll be able to use then on the ff and crop bodies but you'll just be paying more for a larger and slower lens, no one's adapting modern medium format lenses to ff bodies.
>>
>>4379917
Just imagine how much greater the mogging would be if Sony had a larger mount
>>
>>4380025
>None of the current lenses are designed to cover the larger sensor
shows how little you know.
>>
>>4380028
There's a difference between covering, and being designed to cover. There are some crop lenses that can cover full frame but then you get shitty edges.
>>
>>4379933
superior lenses in just 2 more years nikon bros



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.