RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘2019’

CP+ 2019: Sigma interview – ‘Optical design is always a battle with the design constraints’

07 Apr
Sigma CEO Kazuto Yamaki, pictured at the CP+ show in Yokohama, Japan.

Last month at the CP+ show in Yokohama we spoke to executives from several major manufacturers, including Sigma. In our conversation with CEO Kazuto Yamaki we discussed his plans for future L-mount lenses (and cameras) and some of the challenges of supporting multiple mounts.

It’s been six months since the L-mount alliance was announced. How’s it going?

At CP+ our main theme is to show our commitment to the L-mount system. We didn’t bring [out] any totally, brand-new products at CP+ but we showed our commitment to L-mount system by showing our new mount adapter and prime lenses for the system.

The response is better than I thought, initially. Not only from retailers and distributors, but also users who have showed very strong interest in L-mount system. Potential customers are very positive, which is more than I expected: it’s a nice surprise.

You expected it to be harder to convince people?

Yes, because it’s a relatively new system. It’s not a brand-new system, because Leica already had their own system, but as an alliance, this is only the beginning. Panasonic just announced a few products, so compared to the existing systems, particularly compared to Sony system, it’s not [comprehensive]. I was pretty surprised customers showed interest in our system.

The Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art for L-mount is a new lens, but the optical design was laid down at the launch of the Global Vision lens series, in 2012.

Do you have plans to design native L-mount lenses?

We will probably release a few lenses this year, designed for the short flange-back distance.

What are the most important lenses the L system will need in order to be a success?

First of all we need to have more and more lenses. Variety is key. Regardless of whether it’s standard zoom lens, telephoto lens or primes, we need to have more lenses because professional photographers and enthusiasts want to try many lenses. [They don’t] have to be standard or unique, the first priority is to have more. That’s why we announced eleven lenses at CP+, all of which will be available this year.

It might also be a good idea to have unique lenses that only L-mount users can enjoy: we’ll need to think about this.

L-mount lenses from Panasonic and Leica are all fairly expensive, compared to typical Sigma pricing – should we expect your L-mount lenses to be more affordable?

We believe our mission is to provide high quality products with affordable prices. Although I have said we can’t be the cheapest product supplier, we do our best to provide the highest quality product with an affordable price.

Actually the production cost is very high but we minimize the organization, we maintain a very lean organization: we have very few employees in marketing, sales, administration or HR so we can provide products at an affordable price. Our goal isn’t to increase the price more than necessary.

DFD information part of the L-mount standard: will you be writing this information into your L-mount lenses?

I just can’t comment. It’s great technology but I’m not sure we can implement it in our camera because it requires a lot of processing power. We respect the technology but we cannot comment [on] whether we’ll implement in our cameras.

Ahead of the development of brand new lenses designed from the ground up for mirrorless, Sigma has created two MC-21 adapters to convert its Sigma SA and Canon EF lenses to the L-mount.

What about your lenses?

Yes, that’s why Panasonic, Sigma and Leica engineers [are working] together to enhance the L-mount system. We keep upgrading the L-mount system for much more communication between the lens and body to support technologies like DFD.

Sigma arguably started the trend of big, heavy, very sharp primes but now everybody is doing it. Can Sigma create a new segment?

I must admit our position in the industry: people [regard us as] a third-party or accessory provider. Many customers may wish to choose their original manufacturers’ lenses. So, as a lens manufacturer, differentiation is important for us. We always try to bring a unique lens that the body manufacturer doesn’t have.

A long time ago we produced similar lenses with much, much cheaper prices. But today we produce everything in Japan, including parts, so we can’t be the cheapest product supplier. The only way to survive in the industry is to produce unique products. I think big, heavy but super performance was one of the strategies to differentiate ourselves. But today many companies have similar products so perhaps we need to find another [strategy].

The Art series is our heart and we have many users all over the world, so we’ll maintain this lineup

Of course the Art series is our heart and we have many users all over the world, so we’ll maintain this lineup. In order to differentiate ourselves we’ll need to create new ideas for lenses and we’re currently working on it.

I can’t tell you [more] now. Maybe after several glasses of sake!

Is there room in the range for smaller, maybe F2 primes?

The advantage of mirrorless cameras is the small factor. I’m aware some users want very lightweight, small camera bodies and small lenses. They might want to use the big, heavy lenses for some occasions, but for casual shooting, like street photography, they might wish for smaller lenses. I can’t comment but maybe in the future we may be able to deliver such products.

With so many new camera systems on the market now, how do you prioritize which mounts you develop lenses for?

I have a great interest in the Canon R and Nikon Z systems because eventually they will have more and more customers. So we are now investigating these systems. But still it’s too early to make a statement about how we will respond.

Right now we see many new Canon R and Nikon Z users using mount adapters with their existing lenses. So we’re concentrating on optimizing the compatibility of our lenses with their mount adapters and cameras.

We’ve already made sure that our lenses work almost perfectly, without any problem, but we’re looking in detail: maybe there are some minor issues with this specific setting, or with that specific procedure, and so on, so you may still see some minor issues. Our software engineers are now de-bugging those kind of things. But, at the same time, we are looking into how to support the new systems.

Nikon’s wide, shallow mount provides some advantages for optical engineers, but according to Mr Yamaki it’s easier for a third-party manufacturer to design solutions for narrower standards first, and adapt them outwards.

How difficult is it to create one lens design which has to work for several different mirrorless mounts, with their different dimensions?

We have the same challenge in the case of DSLR. The Canon EF mount has larger diameter than Nikon F mount [for example]. We sometimes thought if we only made lenses for Canon EF mount it could be easier but we always overcame such challenges. So we have the experience.

Flange-back distance should not make much difference but [mount] diameter may make some difference. This is a challenge we need to overcome.

It’s true if you need to make a very fast, very high optical performance lens, the Nikon Z mount is very nice. Personally [I believe the short flange-back distance places the rear optical group] a bit too close to the sensor, I’m a bit concerned about reflection problems: it may create some strange ghosting. But its shorter flange-back and bigger diameter gives more options to an optical designer, in theory.

Are the mounts similar enough that you can use one optical design?

If we are to make lenses that are usable for all mounts, we’ll probably optimize to the longest mount. Such a lens could still be used for Nikon Z mount [which has the shortest flange-back distance]. If we optimize to the Nikon system, we can’t use that [lens design] on a [a mount with a longer flange-back].

There is some difference between the mounts but it doesn’t make a huge difference in designing the lens. Of course there are some challenges, maybe if we make exactly the same spec (same aperture and optical performance), a Nikon [Z mount lens] may be 2-3mm shorter but I don’t think it makes a huge difference.

Technically the larger mount diameter give more options to the optical designer

But the mount diameter does make some [amount] of difference when you’re designing. Optical design is always a battle with the design constraints: if the mount diameter is very wide, our optical engineers can use very big diameter lenses in the rear lens group, which makes the design easier. Technically the large diameter give more options to the optical designer but it doesn’t mean we can always design high optical performance lenses. That’s our technique: our technology tries to overcome such limits to provide the best performing lens.

Sigma has been making lenses for radically different mounts for decades, including some weird and wonderful products like this XQ 24mm F2.8 Filtermatic, with built-in filters for black and white film.

Via Wikimedia Commons, credit: Maksim Sidorov

Even in the film era, Sigma supported very different mounts – has anything really changed?

When designing a lens, we try to minimize aberrations, make [the lens] as sharp as possible and try to create nice bokeh in the background: such basics are the same. Mirrorless systems have pros and cons. The pros are that we can make wide-angle lenses much more easily than for DSLRs, just because of the short flange-back distance. But the challenge is the focusing system: if we need to support contrast detection AF or autofocus during movie capture [for example], it’s challenging.

It’s harder to support CDAF?

Yes, if we are to achieve the best optical quality. From an optical point of view it would be ideal to move the whole lens forwards or back to focus. When we had manual focus there were some designs where we moved the whole lenses to focus. But when we started building autofocus lenses we needed to make the focusing lens lighter and smaller so that the motor can support the focusing lens. But the basic physics is the same: the bigger and heavier the focusing lens, the easier it is to maintain optical performance in a shorter focusing distance.

We publish MTF charts but this is the performance at infinity. We optimize at infinity, but naturally the performance degrades at closer distances. If we use a smaller diameter, lighter focusing lens, it tends to degrade more at closer focus distances. That’s the challenge.

There is no ideal world for optical design

In order to support contrast AF we need to implement ‘wobbling’: we need to move the focusing lens back and forth to detect the subject. In order to do that, we need to make the focus lens very light and small and this tends to degrade the performance in the short focal distance.

That’s not always the case, though. Canon doesn’t use that system: they use dual pixel and it works like phase detection, but other manufacturers use pure contrast AF or hybrid AF so the lens has to support that kind of AF operation. Nikon is hybrid, Sony is hybrid. We will probably [implement a hybrid AF system too]. There is no ideal world for optical design, the engineer always has to fight against such limitations.

Does a lens design optimized for CDAF give better performance on cameras that use PDAF?

In terms of speed, yes. If we talk only in terms of focus performance and accuracy then yes, it’s better but the downside is optical performance, in theory. We have many other technologies to maintain optical performance and other companies try to solve the problem with such technologies but in theory it’s challenging.

Sigma’s 50mm f1.4 Art is not a new product, but its lovely rendering of out of focus areas and relative lack of longitudinal CA make it a beautiful lens for portraiture, even now.

When designing lenses, how do you balance things like sharpness with less quantifiable qualities like bokeh?

I think the [main goal] is to make the best possible optical performance for almost all lenses. So we like to minimize the aberrations, the coma, to provide the best quality from the center to edge.

You mention the ‘beauty’ of the image and that’s quite subjective, so it’s not easy to understand the real demand from users. But we [at Sigma] are also photographers, so we do understand these needs. So we may try such a target with some specific lens, so that we [can gauge] response from the customers.

We don’t have a specific plan, but we could have such a product in the future.

Today [our] design software can simulate bokeh: we always check whether the bokeh is ok or not, it’s very important. It’s a subjective matter but still we know what is good bokeh and bad bokeh so we always pay attention to that.

Is the existence of so many new lens mounts a challenge or an opportunity for Sigma?

It’s both. The more mounts, [the] more opportunity: the most active companies will survive in this very chaotic market. But we need to work very hard.

I personally regard this as an opportunity. If we stay only on the very conventional, old systems, we cannot stimulate the market. But on the other hand, this is a very, very big challenge for manufacturing, for our factory. Especially because we make everything ourselves, we make most of the parts and components. So if we make a much wider lineup, it [could] easily confuse our production system.

If we relied on many suppliers we could respond to demand by just changing the size of our order

If we relied on many, many suppliers we could respond to demand by just changing the size of our order, and buy from a different supplier: it’s easy to control. But we make everything by ourselves: we need to change a setting on the machine for each part, so every, let’s say, hour we change, it deteriorates our productivity and efficiency, and we very easily lose the profit margin from manufacturing. This is very challenging.

Will you need to change the way Sigma is organized?

Yes: I’ve been explaining this challenge to my staff for more than a year. The toughest time for [manufacturing] will come in maybe 2019, 2020, 2021 because we will maintain our current lineup for DSLR while also expanding to include more mirrorless [lenses]. So our product line will increase by 50%, maybe as much as twice. This will be very, very challenging for manufacturers like us.

Mr Yamaki, pictured here in Sigma’s factory in Aizu, Japan. Read more about the facility in our detailed tour, here [2015].

Will you need more factory space?

We do have plans to expand the factory. We will start construction of a new building in the same location for an assembly line to build the very modern, high performance lenses. We are putting more and more technology into the assembly line: checking performance and adjusting the lenses.

The assembly line is getting longer and longer so we need more space. We will start construction on two new buildings near the same location. But we’re doing this just to keep the pace with the modern technology, not to expand the production [volume].

Are you planning to create lenses for Fujifilm’s X-mount?

I have [had] many questions about it. I know that some [Fujifilm] customers are wishing for us to make lenses for them. It’s always a matter of priority. We know there are many good customers of the Fuji system and they’re perfectly matched with our ideal customer but [Fujifilm doesn’t] really disclose the protocol between the lens and camera, so we need to do the reverse engineering by ourselves.

It’s a really time-consuming process so we need to prioritize support for Sony E mount, our L-mount system, existing DSLR mounts and Micro Four Thirds.

So you’re balancing the cost of reverse engineering against the potential market size?

Yes, that’s true.

In other words, because you know that Nikon and Canon mounts will be popular, the cost of reverse-engineering can be justified?

Yes.

Sigma is working its next generation of cameras, which unlike the SD-series of old, will be built around the mirrorless L-mount and will feature full-frame Foveon sensors.

What is Sigma’s future as a camera manufacturer?

I have explained that our mission is to create unique lenses, a unique product for the customer and eventually I hope the customers have more choices. They can choose ordinary products from camera manufacturers and unique product from lens manufacturers [like us].

Our future camera business will be even more extreme: I’d like to deliver even more unique cameras that the big players may not deliver to market. We like to be a unique camera manufacturer in the future.

Unique in what way?

Right now I can’t say: you will see at some point in the future.

Are you hoping to make the type of camera that some people might want but that companies the size of Canon and Sony wouldn’t target?

When we launched the first DP it was the first compact camera to feature a large sensor. We [were consequently in] a very unique position but it’s not unique anymore, so we will pursue another solution to make us unique.

What potential benefits should a customer expect to see from a full-frame Foveon sensor?

The basic technology is the same, there is no complete silicon change. People can expect better image quality simply because of the sensor size: APS-C and Full Frame are quite different, so people can expect better performance.

I gave a presentation [to a Japanese audience at CP+] and we announced the basic spec of the [full-frame] sensor [currently being developed]. It’s 20 megapixels times three, so about 60MP. They’re not tiny pixels: they’re relatively big pixels so each pixel can capture enough light. And we’ve gone back to the original pixel structure: 1:1:1, so people can expect very nice, rich data from the sensor.

I hope they like it, but the Japanese audience [at the presentation] has a poker face: they don’t show their feelings on their faces, so I didn’t see a clear response, but I hope they’ll like it [laughs].

What improvements are you mainly targeting?

We tried to improve all aspects [readout speed, color separation, noise performance]. With this sensor we tried to improve the high ISO performance but color separation is the same: we maintained the same characteristics as before. It’s challenging: if we keep the same characteristics it’s challenging for the high ISO performance but it means we can reproduce better color gradation between blue, green and red.

Color specta derived from Raw images, with Foveon (top) showing much smoother red-to-green transitions and greater ability to capture violet tones that exist beyond the blue filter that the three Bayer cameras can capture.

This image [demonstrated by Mr Yamaki in the interview and reproduced above – the upper strip is from a Foveon sensor, the lower three are from three different Bayer-pattern sensors] is taken by a Foveon sensor. Foveon can capture greater graduation between each color. This is from a Raw file but if the Raw data has the correct response to each wavelength then we can render all these colors in processing.

One of the projects we have at the moment is to recreate this nice color graduation in the final image. You can’t create this graduation from nothing so while we retain the same color separation, we’re trying to improve the processing.

What’s the response been like to adding DNG capability?

When we announced DNG output, [our customers] were very excited but after they tried it they were a bit disappointed by the quality because the pre-processing was a little bit different. So most of the customers that I know prefer SPP, despite the [penalty in] processing speed.

Are you working on enhancing the DNG performance?

We’re always trying to improve the processing in the camera. Our Sigma Photo Pro software can do some pre-processing that DNG cannot, so we need to do that pre-processing in the camera and write it into the DNG file. The power of the in-camera processing is limited: when it comes to PCs, the processing power available is much [greater]. But we always try to improve the pre-processing in the camera.

What are the other products in the market you’ve been impressed by?

So far I like Canon, the 28-70mm F2 and the 50 mm F1.2. Their [RF] mount system is quite impressive.

But it’s noticeable that they both use slower, ring-type focus motors -presumably Canon has had to make that same image quality / speed decision…

This is the same challenge for all manufacturers.

Editor’s note: Barnaby Britton

The last time we spoke to Mr Yamaki was late 2018, at Photokina, where he had just announced the L-mount alliance with Panasonic and Leica. In the intervening six months it sounds like his team of engineers has been pretty busy developing a ‘unique’ Foveon-equipped full-frame L-mount camera, as well as ensuring a wide range of native L-mount lenses by the time it is launched (which we expect to happen later this year).

Of course the 11 L-mount lenses that Sigma has launched so far this year are only ‘new’ in the sense that they’re newly machined for L-mount: optically these are the same designs that we’ve seen before, going back to the launch of the Global Vision range in 2012. This fits with Mr Yamaki’s initial L-mount strategy of ‘more and more lenses’, with perhaps some unique optics coming a little later.

Reassuringly, despite the eye-watering cost of most L-mount lenses currently on the market from Panasonic and Leica, Mr Yamaki seems set on his long-standing strategy of quality at ‘an affordable price’. One of the ways of keeping prices down, of course, is to standardize optical designs across lenses made for different mounts. This is not a new challenge for Sigma – Canon EF and Nikon F mounts are radically different, for example, and the company has been offering versions of the same lenses for both, for more than 30 years.

When faced with the challenge of standardizing optical designs, it makes more sense to design for the most limiting mount first, and work outwards

In this interview Mr Yamaki confirmed a couple of things that we’ve long suspected: firstly that, in theory, systems with a wide mount and short flange-back give the optical designer more options, especially when it comes to creating certain kinds of lenses. And secondly, when faced with the challenge of standardizing optical designs for radically different lens-mounts, it makes more sense to design for the most limiting mount first, and work outwards from there. As Mr Yamaki says, ‘if we optimize to the Nikon system, we can’t use that [lens design] on a [a mount with a longer flange-back]’. But if he starts by looking at – say – creating a lens for Sony E-mount, adapting it to a wider mount should be relatively straightforward from an engineering perspective.

Of course, for that to happen, Sigma must first reverse-engineer the Z-mount. Nikon – like Canon, and Fujifilm – does not disclose details of its mount standard to third-parties. According to Mr Yamaki, the cost of the R&D required is easy to justify for major mounts, where sales are guaranteed. The flip-side, of course, is that for systems with a relatively small market share, and / or a large range of attractive native options already in existence – like Fujifilm X – it’s a trickier proposition.

Another complicating factor is the mixture of different autofocus technologies currently used by camera manufacturers. Some use pure contrast-detection, some on-sensor phase-detection, and some a combination of both. Mr Yamaki’s description of the optical and functional limitations imposed by the need for CDAF support is fascinating, and rather than unpack it again here, I refer you to his concise explanation, above.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on CP+ 2019: Sigma interview – ‘Optical design is always a battle with the design constraints’

Posted in Uncategorized

 

CP+ 2019: Canon interview – ‘we want to capture as many customers as we can’

06 Apr
Left to right: Naoya Kaneda, Go Tokura, Yoshiyuki Mizoguchi and Manabu Kato

We were in Japan earlier this month for the annual CP+ show in Yokohama, where we sat down with senior executives from several camera and lens manufacturers, including Canon.

  • Go Tokura – Chief Executive, Image Communication Business Operations
  • Naoya Kaneda – Group Executive, Image Communication Business Operations [lenses]
  • Yoshiyuki Mizoguchi – Group Executive, Image Communication Business Operations [camera]
  • Manabu Kato– Deputy Senior General Manager, Utsunomiya Optical Products Plant

This interview was conducted with multiple people via an interpreter. As such, it has been edited for clarity and flow, and responses have been combined.

Looking at the EOS R system, can you explain why we’re seeing very high-end lenses but consumer-level camera bodies to start with?

With the EOS R system the target was all about taking the optical capabilities to the next level and achieving the highest image quality, so from that end we wanted to really optimize what the lenses can do: that’s why we’ve started with so many L-series lenses.

With the bodies, we were introducing a new system and expanding what we offer. We’re looking to capture as many customers as we can, that’s why we approached this segment of enthusiasts. And we wanted to make it affordable as well, because we wanted to capture as large an audience as possible.

And because you can adapt our EF lenses, the breadth of options is appropriate for that segment, too.

Should EOS RP customers expect more affordable lenses in future?

Yes, you can expect that.

How do you strike the balance between developing RF and EF in terms of resources?

Because this is a different system, you might expect us to have different teams working on the EF and RF lenses, but that’s not the case. We actually have the same optical engineers, the same mechanical/manufacturing engineers working on both EF and RF. In other words; everyone involved is a dedicated expert, skilled in terms of developing interchangeable lenses.

For the immediate future we will be focused on RF lens development

Because we’ve launched RF just recently and we believe there are a lot of gaps to fill in that system, for the immediate future we will be focused on RF lens development.

What’s the logic behind making a system that isn’t compatible with your existing EF-M mirrorless system?

When we started to design the RF lenses we didn’t want to compromise on what we can do. We wanted to develop RF to its full potential, so we wanted the latest specifications, state-of-the art technology and design. In the process of developing a no-compromise system, it became apparent that this wouldn’t be compatible with EF-M.

The cameras that use the EF-M lenses tend to be the smaller sizes which may be [oriented towards] a different customer, so we’re looking at what those customers want and we’ll develop according to that response.

You haven’t considered an APS-C RF camera, then?

I can’t tell you what the future plans are going to be, but it is the customer who directs us into our development, so if the customer requests that, it’s something we’ll try to respond to as best we can.

Is there a trade-off to be made between offering the best image quality and being able to offer fast, quiet focus, that you get from using Nano USM?

Nano USM is a technology we’ve very proud of having developed. The first time it was used, three or four years ago, was in an EF-S lens [the EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM] where it was all about raising the speed and also that it’s silent. That both catered to the needs of videography but also helped to raise the autofocus speed.

Canon doesn’t give many details about its Nano USM technology. It appears to be based on pulsing blue waves of some sort

To go with Nano USM you have to design with a lens with lightweight focus elements. It’s a new technology so we’re always looking for ways to adapt it to the different requirements of the cameras they’re used for. Because it can give silent, high speed AF we have a strain of development in place to expand the ways we can use Nano USM. So we’re looking into how we can adopt it in the different cameras that we have.

For each of the lenses that we develop, we always think about what we want to provide. With the large lenses you see in front of you [the 50mm F1.2 and 28-70mm F2] that was all about really achieving the optical quality performance, that’s why we decided not to use the Nano USM. But we did use Nano USM in the 24-105mm F4: that is for video and stills. We thought it would be more appealing and would help provide the features required for such a lens.

Almost all of the EOS R lenses announced so far are ‘L’ series. What does ‘L’ mean in 2019?

For a lens to be called ‘L series,’ it has to have the latest technology that Canon can offer. In other words, it’s about making sure the performance is the latest and best we can provide at that time. Because they’re designed for use by the professionals and enthusiasts, we want to provide them with a better choice of lens. So whenever we introduce an L series that’s what we mean: we want to offer a better lens for such a segment.

Canon has revealed plans for 15-35mm, 24-70mm and 70-200mm F2.8 L lenses for the RF mount

And, of course it also has to be dust-proof, etc: the durability aspect of it. That also has to be in place, given the situations these photographers will be using them in.

When you’re designing for mirrorless: what are main differences, compared with designing for DSLR?

It’s difficult question to answer simply. With the move to mirrorless the aim is to optimize the space where the mirror box used to be – that was what we were looking at. This allows us to make the lenses smaller and also to raise the optical quality.

What are you trying to achieve with the F2.8 trio?

We’re making sure that the new system and lenses are able to contribute value to the product the professionals produce: which in this case is their photography.

For them to be able to see that difference, to see the improvement is really what dictates how we design the lenses. It’s literally all about making sure we can offer that level of higher quality, higher value features for this professional segment.

We’re making sure the new system and lenses are able to contribute value to the product the professionals produce

The Nano USM question you had kind of relates to that. It’s all about making sure we have the better autofocus, the silent autofocus and also the 70-200mm to become smaller.

Other advances can be see in the wide zoom: it used to be that it started at 16mm, but now it allows for 15mm. And also with the image stabilization feature as well. All of these are about making sure we can actually provide the better value for these professional users: it’s about providing this new value.

With the three golden [lens] series that you’ve mentioned, the RF mount allows us to open up these possibilities for them.

In terms of making the new 70-200mm smaller, how difficult was it to decide to move to an extending zoom design?

We’ve not actually disclosed that it is going to extend or not, but we do have the extending mechanism in other lenses we make. So we do have the experience and know-how in-house: we have the capability to introduce such a feature in a new lens.

Canon won’t confirm its RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS (left) is an extending design. But it is.

To be clear, though: I have not said that it’s going to be an extending design. [Laughs]

And the advantage of fast and silent AF: is that primarily for video shooting?

With the silence of autofocus, yes we’re looking at the video. But we’re also working to improve the smoothness of the focus. All of this is in response to what people are looking for in terms of videography.

The current RF cameras offer 4K but with compromises. How do you see video features evolving in RF lineup?

We believe mirrorless cameras can be good for video shooting for the high end. They do their job well both for videography and still photography. Having said that, we always know there is a need for improvement in terms of specifications and the potential that we can provide for video photography.

We are working … so we can provide for better videography

For the EOS R and RP models, we’re aware of some of the dissatisfaction people have commented about our video features, and we are working to respond to this so we can provide for better videography, both in terms of the lens and the camera.

What are priorities for sensor development? Speed, pixel count, dynamic range, video?

Looking at our entire product lineup, yes, all of the points you mention are priorities for us. We need to evolve in all aspects of those things and that has to do with how we can upgrade our sensors.

The sensors used in the EOS R and RP don’t offer the best dynamic range in their respective classes, and both offer cropped video with significant rolling shutter.

In other words, we will be developing sensors so that we can maximize the potential that they can provide. But we always need to look at the camera it’s going into: to make sure that that sensor provides the best features or value characteristics that each camera’s concept requires.

It might be speed that’s important in one camera, as opposed to pixel count in another. So the camera dictates what sort of sensor we develop. But we are developing sensors to cater and optimize for each of their features and performances.

Are you ready for the Olympics in Tokyo next year?

Our plans are on track.

We have not disclosed any specification or details about the Olympic year model. But we’re making sure that by [the time of the Olympics] we are able to provide a product with the feature that’s most important, which is reliability of the camera. This is for professionals, for professional use as a tool. We need to provide a reliable camera, so that’s what we’re aiming for.

Do you think we’ll see more mirrorless than DSLR at the Olympics?

Even now I think a lot of competitors are all looking to design high-end mirrorless, so we will probably see more of this coming in.

Having said that, I’m not so much interested in the distinctions between mirrorless and DSLR. At the end of the day for the professionals are looking for the ultimate result that they can get from their professional tools. They’re looking for the reliability once again, and also the operability, the usability, ease-of-use: these are very important for these professionals. In other words, it’s these factors that are most important, not whether it’s a DSLR or mirrorless camera. It’s not so much about saying it’s a contest between mirrorless or DSLR.

In the long-term can you see Mirrorless replacing the DSLR?

There is a trend towards mirrorless. They’re the cameras being developed and produced, so there might come a time where that might happen. And Canon is making sure we’re not behind with that trend.

Canon has been working on a variety of novel camera concepts, four of which were on show at CP+.

Last year you showed us some compact camera concepts, more evolved version of which are now on the show floor. How is the development going?

I guess you’ve seen the four models. What we’re doing now is getting the customers response or the user response to see what sort of thing we can improve on. So we’re actually in that brushing-up stage, if you will. We would definitely want to get these cameras on the market soon, if we can.

In the light of the changes in the market, what does Canon have to offer mainstream/casual users?

Like the prototypes that you see, it has to work with smartphone as well. We believe there is something that can be done to co-exist with the smartphone.

we believe there’s a new… casual capturing market

So, in addition to the ILC and the compact camera market, we believe there’s a new genre of capturing: a new casual capturing market if I may say. I think there is potential for new developments to be had in that spectrum.

Editor’s note: Richard Butler

Perhaps the thing that surprised me most was Canon’s openness in this interview. Historically very few companies have been willing to even imply that their sensors or their video performance might need to improve, so the teams’ responses came as a refreshing surprise.

Similarly, it was interesting to hear Canon’s executives make clear that they’re currently focused on RF lenses. It’s an understandable course of action, given the company’s need to make the system look comprehensive and appealing as quickly as possible, but it’s still striking to hear such complete focus stated on-the-record. The implication, of course is that EF lens introduction will slow down for a while.

I didn’t think we’d ever hear Canon execs entertain the idea that sensor performance might need to improve.

As you might expect, Canon was very keen to talk about how seriously it takes its pro-level offerings, even to the point of almost confirming that there’ll be an ‘Olympic Year’ pro camera in 2020. While we tend to focus on technological improvements, Canon is stressing the importance of reliability (something that we can’t really capture in reviews, since it can only really be confirmed with hindsight).

I personally didn’t think we’d ever hear Canon executives even entertain the idea that mirrorless might one day replace DSLRs in the market (we’re so used to hearing ‘there’s a place for both’), nor allow even the slightest implication that the company’s sensor performance might need to improve.

There was an acknowledgement potential trade-offs between image quality and optimal autofocus performance

The intention of making a pro model isn’t much of a surprise, given the company’s focus on high-end, ‘L’ series RF lenses (eight of the ten lenses promised so far will wear the ‘L’ designation). But again, in amongst talk of ‘the latest technology’ and ‘the highest quality’ there was an acknowledgement potential trade-offs between image quality and optimal autofocus performance. If anything that just leaves us all the more keen to find out how the forthcoming Nano USM-powered F2.8 ‘L’ trinity will perform.

At the other end of the market, Canon was the only company we spoke to at CP+ that publicly confirmed that it’s searching for a market beyond enthusiasts and professionals (the audiences at which most recent announcements have been aimed). Promises of trying to “capture as large an audience as possible” with the EOS RP aren’t fully backed-up by the RF lenses announced so far, but the continued development of the compact prototypes suggest we should take Canon at its word when it says it believes “a new casual capturing market” could yet exist, if they can create the right product.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on CP+ 2019: Canon interview – ‘we want to capture as many customers as we can’

Posted in Uncategorized

 

CP+ 2019: Sony Interview – ‘First full-frame, then APS-C’

06 Apr
Kenji Tanaka, VP and Senior General Manager of Sony’s Business Unit 1, Digital Imaging Group.

At the CP+ show in Yokohama Japan last month, we sat down with executives from several major manufacturers, including Sony. In our conversation with Sony’s Kenji Tanaka, we discussed various topics, including how the full-frame mirrorless market has evolved, and why he believes Sony will maintain its competitive edge.

Please note that this interview was conducted partly via an interpreter, and has been edited for clarity and flow.

How do you think the full frame market will evolve, now that lower-cost products like the Canon EOS RP are becoming available?

As more competitors jump into this market, I think that’s a very good thing, because customers have more choice. Our aim is to grow the industry. So when competitors jump in, that’s good.

A wide range of options is a very good thing

The EOS RP is a different kind of challenge from Canon, for entry-level customers. When they eventually enrich their entry-level lenses, that would be a very powerful story. But at this point, I cannot judge who the target customer is [for the EOS RP]. Thinking about the camera industry in the long term, a wide range of options is a very good thing. I’m very positive about it.

Canon would probably say that the RP is intended to appeal to entry-level customers and first-time ILC buyers. How do you intend to attract those kinds of photographers?

This is our one-mount strategy, which only Sony has. Initial entry is in APS-C, and the next step is full-frame. I want to make a kind of ‘step up ladder’.

Sony’s a7 III is one of the most competitive cameras in its class, offering advanced stills and video features at an attractive price. But its MSRP is undercut by the new Canon EOS RP.

Sony is no longer alone in the full-frame mirrorless market – are there any particular companies that you regard as more serious competitors than others?

Every one of our competitors is strong, and we respect each of them. For the [sake of] growth in the industry, we’re thinking about computational photography, and how to incorporate these technologies.

I first encountered this kind of technology more than 20 years ago, and it’s created a new future for imaging. So [while] of course we’re very respectful of our current competitors, the next step is we have to learn more things from computational photography.

So perhaps your most important competitors right now don’t make cameras?

That could be.

How will Sony maintain its competitive lead?

Sony is a technology company that provides technology in which customers may find value. I want our technology to be the reason people are attracted to Sony, not the price. Of course the balance is very important. When you get to price points of $ 3000, $ 4000, that’s a different matter, but the most important thing for Sony is technology. That creates customer value.

Technology will lead customers into the future.

Technology will lead customers into the future. That’s the kind of scenario we want to create. Last year we said that speed and AI would be our new technology drivers, and since then other mirrorless companies have tried to develop these technologies. It’s already happening.

Previously, our main target was professional, but this year we announced the a6400, not only for professionals, targeted a little more widely. We need to create a message for a different kind of customers, but basically our products contain advanced technology, and advanced technology make [makes] customers happy to shoot. I want [Sony] to become a company that drives technology – that’s the kind of message I want to send.

Smartphones like the Google Pixel 3 have changed the way that millions of us create images, and have become primary cameras for an entire generation of photographers.

Do you think Sony has an advantage here?

Yes, of course. We have an R&D section within Sony, it’s a real asset. The world of imaging is growing, and the speed is getting faster. I want to invest in the kinds of technologies that drive the world of imaging, and […] create a cycle. Computational photography is one aspect, lenses are another. I’m very positive for the future. At my core, I’m an engineer. I want to create a camera to enrich your life as a photographer.

How long have you been working on technologies like AI?

It’s very difficult to determine a starting point, but ten years ago I was an engineer, and at that time my interest was neural networks. So the seed for the technology goes back more than ten years. More recently, about five years ago we started developing deep learning. Of course at the same time our team was trying new technologies so it’s very difficult to say exactly when we started. We’re developing new technologies all the time, Sony is that kind of company.

Is it more important to Sony that you sell more cameras, or make more profit per camera sold?

Haha, do I only have two choices? the most important thing really is technology. That’s what creates new features. To develop new technologies of course we need money. Sometimes our strategy is [to create] high value products, and sometimes our approach is to increase the volume of customers.

Sony’s new APS-C a6400 (left) offers incredibly advanced autofocus and high-speed shooting features in a very compact body.

Some people have the perception that Sony is more focused on full-frame than APS-C, is this accurate?

Full-frame is the best platform to deliver our technologies. But of course these technologies need to cascade down for APS-C customers. So we will focus on both groups of customers, but [the] timing is a little different. First full-frame, then APS-C. It has been said that Sony has ignored the APS-C market, and our answer is the a6400.

Do you think there’s an opportunity for Sony to create GM lenses for APS-C?

Yes, I do, but I don’t know how they would be branded. Maybe not as ‘GM’, but high quality lenses are definitely an option [for development].

Do you think APS-C is a format that could be used by professionals?

Honestly speaking, for still photography, full-frame is [more appropriate] for professionals. But for video, APS-C is good for both amateur and professional customers, because it’s size is close to Super 35mm, [which is a] video Image sensor format.

Are you interested in creating an a7S-type product, geared towards video, within the APS-C lineup?

That is possible, I think. For example, looking at the US market, at the BlackMagic Pocket Cinema Camera, I think that’s a wonderful product for professionals. Not only for high-end amateurs. The sensor size of that camera is Micro Four Thirds, and [Sony’s] APS-C is bigger.

Mr Tanaka has expressed a keen interest in the BlackMagic Pocket Cinema 4K Camera, could hint at some of Sony’s future plans.

Are you interested in developing cine lenses for APS-C?

It’s possible, but looking at the market size, full frame is maybe a bigger opportunity. If we focused only on cine, the market would probably be too small, but the so-called ‘creators’ market is a little bigger.

What kind of products do you think would suit this market?

I have many things in my mind but I can’t tell you the details today! As you know well, stills and movies are completely different. Some people think that 30 or 60fps stills shooting is the same as shooting a movie, but the mentality of stills photographers and videographers is completely different. That kind of fusion, I don’t think [it’s realistic]. We want to create new cameras for both kinds of creators.

So you don’t think it’s possible to create a perfect ‘fusion’ camera for stills and video customers?

No.

Have you always believed that? Sony has really been a key developer of hybrid video-enabled cameras, like the a7S line.

Many people have enjoyed the a7S II as a video camera, but originally we designed it for stills photography users. So if we’re going to create products [specifically] for video shooters, we’ll have to modify them in the future.

It’s easy to add 4K/60, but beyond these specs, a lot of customers have other demands

How do video shooters want the camera to be changed?

We’ve had a lot of feedback from the market, including from DPReview! The basic expectation is for things like 4K/60, 10-bit 4:2:2, and a lot of manufacturers are doing that right now, but I want to think in a different way and create something that goes beyond the expectations of our customers. It’s easy to add 4K/60, but beyond these specs, a lot of customers have other kinds of demands, and that’s what we’re researching.

Judging by Mr Tanaka’s comments, the aging a7S II might be replaced by a much more revolutionary product that ‘goes beyond the expectations’ of his customers.

Your new cameras can shoot HLG video for the new generation of displays, how will this technology influence stills cameras?

JPEG is an old format, limited to 8-bit. Movies are going to 10-bit, and stills should become 10-bit as well. So of course we’re researching how to compress stills to 10-bit. The new standard will be 10-bit. There are many such formats already in the market, but we need to study which one is best for the customer.

Smartphones have high dynamic range displays, so the [impetus] will probably come from smartphones. Television development is a bit slower, but everything will be 10-bit [eventually]

The Tokyo 2020 Olympics is just a year away – do you think that by then we’ll see a lot of sports photographers using Sony?

We’re just beginners in that field, compared to Canon and Nikon. We’re currently going step by step, taking feedback from journalists and sports photographers, and we’re running a positive cycle, right now. What I can say today is that you can expect activity [from Sony] for big sports events.

Editors’ note: Barnaby Britton

Technology, technology, technology! That’s the message from Mr Tanaka this year, above all others. Although Sony is (finally) facing some serious competition in the full-frame mirrorless market, it appears that Mr Tanaka welcomes the company. He certainly doesn’t appear to fear the competition. As he says, while Sony respects all of its competitors, its most important rivals might not be the ones currently making cameras.

As a technology company first and foremost, former engineer Mr Tanaka confirms that Sony has been researching AI and deep learning for at least a decade. Lest we forget, Sony also makes smartphones, and in fact the camera and smartphone divisions were recently merged. When Mr Tanaka talks about wanting to invest in ‘the kinds of technologies that drive the world of imaging’ I’d be surprised if he’s thinking exclusively of the traditional consumer digital imaging market.

Inside that marketplace though, it’s clear that Mr Tanaka views full-frame as the preeminent format for delivery of Sony’s technologies to photographers, as well as being a superior platform for professional users. Given the company’s focus on attracting enthusiast and professional users – and that whole ‘technology, technology, technology!’ thing, it shouldn’t be a surprise therefore that Sony’s APS-C lineup has been pretty much put on ice the past couple of years. Mr Tanaka did hint at greater emphasis on APS-C in the near future though, including – crucially – the possibility of some high-end lenses to come.

It seems possible that Sony is interested in developing a dedicated, compact, affordable large-sensor dedicated video camera

There’s no such thing as a ‘perfect’ stills / video camera according to Mr Tanaka, and perhaps the most surprising thing to come out of this interview, for me, was his obvious interest in the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K. It’s unusual for a senior executive to so openly – and so specifically – praise a competitor product in an interview with press, and I doubt it was a throwaway comment. From this, coupled with Mr Tanaka’s reminder that APS-C is a bigger format than Four Thirds, and his earlier comment that APS-C is close to Super 35, ‘a video image sensor format’ we can draw some tentative conclusions.

It seems at least possible that Sony is interested in developing a dedicated, compact, affordable large-sensor dedicated video camera. That’s the kind of product that could prove disruptive. Even if such a camera doesn’t come to fruition, Mr Tanaka’s slightly dismissive remark that tinkering around the edges of the a7S II’s feature set, adding things like 4K/60 is ‘easy’ should give filmmakers hope. Sony, historically, doesn’t do ‘easy’. Whatever they end up looking like, it seems likely that the next generation of video-centric cameras from Sony will be anything but iterative.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on CP+ 2019: Sony Interview – ‘First full-frame, then APS-C’

Posted in Uncategorized

 

CP+ 2019: Zeiss interview – ‘Let’s do something new’

31 Mar
Elliot Shih, Senior Product Manager of Zeiss, holding the ZX1 at the CP+ 2019 show in Yokohama, Japan.

Zeiss is preparing to launch its first camera for more than a decade, in the form of the ZX1 – a high-end, Android-powered compact, with a full-frame 37MP sensor and premium lens. We caught up with Senior Product Manager Elliot Shih at CP+ recently to learn more.

The following interview has been edited for clarity and flow.

When did the concept for this camera come about?

We started about four years ago, but we have always been interested in thinking about where and when to return to the camera market, because the last time Zeiss made a camera was the Ikon film rangefinder, in around 2004. Ever since then we’ve been thinking about how and when is the tight time to return to the camera market.

Also a lot has happened in the industry – as background we’re seeing higher penetration of smartphones with more capable cameras, and people are adapting to use the cameras in their phones. On the other hand we saw there is a demand among photographers for more serious photography tools.

If we’re going to make a new kind of camera, it doesn’t make sense to copy something that’s already on the market

The rise of the smartphone has had an impact on the point and shoot market, but there are a lot of benefits and things we can learn from such a different world. So the thought that came into my mind was – well, if we’re going to make a new kind of camera, it doesn’t make sense to copy something that’s already on the market – let’s do something new.

The development of this camera wasn’t quite linear, compared to other consumer electronics products. In the beginning we went quite slowly, but now we’re at the materialization phase, and things are moving quite fast. Now every component we need is working, and we’re starting to see that this is becoming a camera that could work quite well.

The ZX1 isn’t the first Android-powered camera, but it is the first aimed at enthusiast and professional photographers with money to spend on a premium full-frame sensor and lens.

This is not the first time that someone has loaded a mobile operating system into a camera – what makes the ZX1 different?

With regard to earlier products, I think the mobile platform itself, as a technology enabler, is capable of also being the backbone for an imaging system.

The fundamental difference is that instead of trying to make a smartphone in the form of a camera, we’ve tried to make the ZX1 work as a camera, and be positioned as a camera, and as a tool for photography. So, for example, when you first turn it on you should see the live view, not the launcher screen with all its icons. It should be a camera from inside out. That’s why we took open-source android and used it as a technology enabler, but in terms of interaction and user experience, we completely wrote everything and developed everything from scratch by ourselves.

Read about what the Zeiss ZX1 is like to operate

The camera operates using what we call a ‘vertical logic’. You’ll see there’s a slight bend on the rear cover glass, which provides a natural separation between the live view area and the toolbar area, to the right. You can [vertically] swipe on the toolbar area to select different tools, while on the left you can swipe to switch between different modes, like image review, where you can use all the familiar gestures you’re used to from smartphones.

What are your goals for the camera, in the marketplace?

As you can see, the ZX1 is a different kind of product. We’re focused on addressing the target group, and offering something different to today’s digital photographers. So we’re aiming at photographers that need a fast workflow but at the same time superb image quality, which our sensor and lens can deliver.

This is our first attempt, and most of the focus is to build up our competence in terms of image processing. We’re still on the learning curve, for example when it comes to the autofocus system and the image processing pipeline. For a 37.4MP sensor its more than 70MB for each DNG file, so we have a lot of data to handle.

Have you partnered with any other companies on the ZX1 or is this an entirely in-house project?

The design and development are completely in-house. We’re using some external partners to support certain functions, for example the realization of the industrial design, and the design of the user experience.

The square panel on the upper left of the ZX1’s top plate is a plastic cover for the WiFi antenna – not a flash, as we originally thought when we picked the camera up.

Previous attempts at this kind of product failed for a lot of reasons – how have you addressed the weaknesses of those earlier cameras?

Well first let’s talk about optimization around Android. There’s a fundamental difference to how this system works compared to a proprietary system [that you might find in a smartphone]. There’s a different architecture and we made a lot of effort to take out some of the elements of Android that we didn’t need. Most of the algorithms are designed for smartphone usage and not all of those are capable of running inside a device with a larger camera sensor, and much more information to handle in the imaging pipeline. That’s the part that we’ve spent substantial effort on, to optimize in order to make the camera more responsive.

We also made a lot of effort also to maintain Wi-Fi performance. There is a lot of data to transfer with this camera, so if we want the feature to be really functional we have to make sure that the Wi-Fi performance doesn’t struggle. That’s why we have a plastic cover above the Wi-Fi antenna on the [metal] top plate.

We’re very conscious of battery consumption [and] a lot of photographers are very sensitive about battery usage

In terms of boot up time, the ZX1 works the same way as a smartphone. But we’re very conscious of battery consumption. A lot of photographers are very sensitive about battery usage so a lot of the time when they’re not shooting they simply turn the camera off.

The very first boot up sequence takes a while, but when the camera is up and running, a single push of the dial sleeps the camera, but doesn’t turn it off. So the sensor is not running, the screen is off, and very little power is being used. But when you want to take a picture you just nudge the switch again and it wakes up. You can also use the switch to toggle between stills and movie mode.

What kind of battery drain should people expect when the camera is in sleep mode?

I think in sleep mode, during a whole day you can expect something like 10% battery drain. We do have a large battery in the camera, it’s 3190mAh, which is very substantial. In this camera a fully charged battery should last about 250 shots.

Is that a CIPA figure?

No, but we’d expect that to be accurate by CIPA test standards.

Do you have an idea yet of how much the ZX1 will cost?

Pricing is not yet decided but I think given the performance of the lens and the sensor, plus the solid build of the body and the built-in 500GB SSD, I think it will occupy a more premium price band. It will be in the same range as [the Leica Q, Sony RX1R II].

What was the logic behind deciding to give the ZX1 aperture, shutter speed and ISO dials but no exposure compensation dial?

That’s one of the most frequent questions we’ve been getting. One thing we learned is that photographers are more and more conscious of stripping away features that they don’t need. So we wanted to keep the purity of the design, while still making sure this is a serious photography tool.

One of the things that characterizes serious cameras are dials which provide the opportunity to control exposure directly. So we decided OK, we’ll keep the three – shutter speed, aperture and ISO as the only hardware controls. Everything else is built into the digital interface. If a photographer is manually controlling shutter speed and aperture, then the only way they have of further affecting exposure is ISO. So they can use the ISO dial as exposure compensation, effectively.

Does this camera use a leaf shutter?

Yes, it’s mechanically controlled up to 1/1000, and electronic will let you go to higher shutter speeds, using the toolbar [on the rear screen].

Because it’s powered by a full mobile operating system, the ZX1 is a ‘one stop shop’ for the photographer. From image capture, review, rating, editing and uploading, everything can be done on the camera, if you wish.

You really seem to want photographers to do everything on the camera itself – shooting, reviewing, editing and uploading. Is that correct?

For this concept, yes. A photographer might still carry a more capable DSLR for an assignment, but when they are going out for a weekend trip, this is one camera that you can do everything with.

Maybe it doesn’t always make sense to connect the camera to your phone using a hotspot and try to synchronize let’s say 300 Raw files on the road, but let’s give people the choice. We’ve spoken to a lot of photojournalists and they told us that sometimes they just have to rely on what they have. Sometimes they only have a phone, and with this camera they can bring everything they need.

What’s the quickest way of getting images off the ZX1 to a computer or to a harddrive?

In terms of transfer speed, the fastest way is the USB-C connection. With a speed of 5GB/s you’ll be able to export pictures pretty fast. What’s a bit different is that because we’re using Android, the system works like a mini computer, so we can use both master and slave mode for the USB connection.

Whereas other cameras, when you connect over USB, the camera is seen as a drive: it’s in slave mode. But with the ZX1 if you plug in a USB C drive or a memory stick the camera recognizes the storage and you can select the images you want to transfer straight from the camera. The USB C connector is the only interface, so to connect to a TV, or plug in a microphone for example you’d need adapters.

Can users download their own apps or extensions to the ZX1?

At the moment, no. For security reasons its a closed system. We will only support selected applications that we’re working on with partners like Adobe.

Editors’ note: Barnaby Britton

Well; it’s real, and it works. The Zeiss ZX1 is a fascinating camera, and even from our brief time with a prototype model I’d be fairly confident in saying it’s the most convincing Android-powered camera we’ve seen yet. Of course it’s also likely to be the most expensive, by far. If Mr Shih’s estimate of a price comparable with full-frame compacts from Sony and Leica turns out to be true, you can expect the ZX1 to cost somewhere in the region of (at least) $ 4,000, which unlike Samsung’s Galaxy Cameras, will put it well outside of the impulse-buy range for most photographers.

But that’s the future. For now, the ZX1 looks really nice. We don’t know how well the sensor or lens will perform, but it’s a safe bet that image quality will far exceed the abilities of even the best smartphones and likely also popular sub full-frame compact cameras such as Fujifilm’s X100-Series and Ricoh’s GR line.

It will also work differently – very differently – to those cameras, thanks to its integrated Android operating system, which essentially makes the camera into a mini computer. Do you need half a terabyte of built-in storage? Probably not, most of the time, but assuming you can keep the battery charged, this kind of storage capacity could be appealing to photographers working remotely or on long assignments away from home. In some areas of the world, where cellphones provide the only reliable access to the Web, the ZX1 might end up being right in its element.

A shot of the ZX1’s unique ‘swooping’ rear display, and its large-capacity Li-Ion battery which – unlike the camera’s storage – is removable.

If you’re interested in the ZX1 solely as a camera, and you don’t need the ability to run processing apps, you’ll have a harder decision to make. The ZX1 definitely presents an unusual handling experience, but it’s not completely alien. The decision to omit an exposure compensation dial strikes us as a bit odd, but Mr Shih is correct to note that for manual exposure work, the ISO dial does just as well. For A / S-priority shooters things might be a bit confusing at first, but the ZX1 is likely to be perfectly usable, notwithstanding a moderate learning curve.

Speaking of curves (sorry) the swooping rear display is quite something. The ZX1 employs what Mr Shih calls a ‘vertical logic’ to separate access to features and controls from the live view display, and it seems to work. We didn’t get to try full-on image editing on the ZX1 that we saw in Japan, but I can envisage Lightroom Mobile running perfectly well, for those who need to edit ‘on the go’.

When the ZX1 was first announced, a lot of commenters dismissed it preemptively as ‘vaporware’ – a flashy distraction that would never make it to market. It seems that the naysayers were wrong (it’s nice when that happens, isn’t it?) but whether the ZX1 will be a success – or lead to more Zeiss camera development in future – remains to be seen.

In one sense, given how long it’s been since the company last made a camera, it could be said that Zeiss has nothing to lose. But in real terms, the ZX1 represents a substantial R&D investment, and one which Zeiss will be keen to recoup. For now, Mr Shih and his team deserve credit for doing something bold and unusual.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on CP+ 2019: Zeiss interview – ‘Let’s do something new’

Posted in Uncategorized

 

National Geographic is now accepting entries for the 2019 Travel Photo Competition

29 Mar

Entries are now being accepted for National Geographic’s 2019 Travel Photo contest, with a top prize of $ 7500 on the line for the overall winner.

The competition is broken down into sections for Nature, Cities and People, and those coming out on top for these subject areas will win $ 2500. Second place winners will get $ 1500 and those in third position will come away with $ 750.

Seemingly to encourage photographers to enter now rather than at the last minute, the cost of submitting an image raises every week from $ 10 in week one to $ 35 in week six – which is the final week to enter before the May 3rd deadline.

The competition requires images be taken within two years of the date of entry, and only minor digital manipulations are allowed. The rules also state that anyone identifiable in the images will need to sign a release form:

‘If any persons appear in the photograph, the entrant is responsible for obtaining, prior to submission of the photograph, any and all releases and consents necessary to permit the exhibition and use of the photograph in the manner set forth in these Official Rules without additional compensation. If any person appearing in any photograph is under the age of majority in their state/province/territory of residence the signature of a parent or legal guardian is required on each release.’

Entrants will also need to obtain permissions from the owner of any private property shown in the pictures – ‘each entrant must be prepared to provide (within five (5) calendar days of receipt of Sponsor’s request) a signed written license from the owner of any private property included in the Submission’. Entry requirements can be studied in full on the Rules page of the website. Residents of 42 of the world’s 195 countries are eligible to enter the contest.

For more information, and to see those images already entered, visit the National Geographic Travel Competition website. For inspiration take a look at our coverage of the 2018 Travel Photo Contest winners.

Official announcement

National Geographic Travel Photo Contest Now Open

The National Geographic Travel Photo Contest is accepting entries from March 18 through May 3. Harness the power of photography and share your stunning travel experiences from around the globe. Enter your most powerful photos for a chance to win the 2019 National Geographic Travel Photo Contest. We are looking for images that show us the world: its people, places, and cultures. Photos that tell the story of a place and travel moments that reveal what inspires you.

Need inspiration? See the 2018 winners gallery and discover which photos took home top prizes.

Visit weekly to see photo galleries of the top entries and see if your photo is featured. Think you have the winning picture? Show us your best.

Categories
Submit to three categories: nature, cities, and people.

Official Prizes
The grand prize winner will receive $ 7,500. Their winning image will be featured on the @natgeotravel Instagram account. Individual category prizes include:

  • First place winners will receive $ 2,500.
  • Second place winners will receive $ 1,500.
  • Third place winners will receive $ 750.

How to Enter and Pricing
Starting March 18, visit the entry page to upload your photo and join the competition. Hurry! Enter early—prices increase every Monday. There is no limit to entries.

  • Week 1 entry fee: $ 10
  • Week 2 entry fee: $ 15
  • Week 3 entry fee: $ 20
  • Week 4 entry fee: $ 25
  • Week 5 entry fee: $ 30
  • Week 6 entry fee: $ 35

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on National Geographic is now accepting entries for the 2019 Travel Photo Competition

Posted in Uncategorized

 

CP+ 2019: Fujifilm interview – ‘We want to show photographers the future’

28 Mar
Makoto Oishi, Product Planning Manager at Fujifilm, holds a working prototype of the forthcoming GFX 100 medium format camera.

At the CP+ show earlier this month in Yokohama Japan, we sat down with senior executives from Fujifilm. During our conversation we covered everything from the upcoming GFX 100, to plans for APS-C and why the X100 still occupies such an important position in the company’s lineup.

Our interview was conducted with three senior executives in Fujifilm’s Electronic Imaging Products Division:

  • Toshi Iida, General Manager.
  • Makoto Oishi, Product Planning Manager.
  • Shin Udono, Senior Manager of the Sales and Marketing Group.

This interview has been edited for clarity and flow. For the sake of readability, responses have been combined.

In the long-run, how do you see full-frame and medium format coexisting?

They definitely will coexist. Especially after we introduced the GFX 50R, we’ve seen a wider audience become interested in medium format and the sales of the 50R look very promising. I think this is a good sign.

Do you have a target for market share of the full frame + market?

We don’t have a specific number, but roughly speaking full-frame accounts for about 1/3 of the market right now in terms of value. It’s growing slightly. Medium format used to be something like 1% but after we introduced GFX, the medium format market has doubled. This is a good start. So we don’t have any specific target numbers, but our mission is to increase the size of the medium format market.

After we introduced the 50S, we checked to see what kind of customers were buying it, and roughly 70% of the buyers were coming from other brands. Mainly DSLR users. These users still keep their existing systems, and the GFX is additional.

The original GFX 50S, a 50MP camera intended to compete with flagship high-resolution DSLRs and full-frame mirrorless cameras.

Do you have a sense of how many of your GFX customers are professionals?

According to our surveys, 20% are professional, and 80% are non-professional. If you look at the GFX 50R, more of those customers are non-professionals. Learning from our experience with the 50R, I think that the customer base is growing. People who shoot street-style photographs like the 50R, which takes them back to the days of our medium format film cameras. Of course the focus could be faster, but they can live with the current system.

Is it important to you that the proportion of professional users increases?

Yes, of course. Especially after the [announcement of] Capture One compatibility, we increased our professional user base, and of course the GFX 100 is coming.

What do you want the GFX 100 to achieve for Fujifilm?

We hope that it will be successful commercially, but more importantly we want to show [photographers] the future – the potential of medium format. I think that full-frame can probably reach 70-80MP, but we need to stay ahead, using the larger format. So it’s kind of a technology showcase, showing our [confidence in] the format. The other side is that it’s a good way of demonstrating the quality of our glass. Our GFX lenses were all originally designed for 100MP resolution.

A prototype GFX 100, showing the large, stabilized 100MP sensor.

Do you have an update on availability of the GFX 100?

It will be before the end of June – within the first half of this year.

When you’re developing lenses for GFX, what was more important – the experience gained from developing lenses for the X Series, or experience developing lenses for large formats?

I think really our experience from the X Series. They were designed to cope with modern sensors, and the need to control the light more precisely.

What kinds of photography do you think the GFX 100 will be used for?

Our immediate [target market] is commercial photographers, people who shoot fashion, landscapes, and so on but we really hope that general full-frame customers will start to look at GFX as a serious option for more general-purpose photography. With the GFX 100, with its phase-detection, back-side illuminated sensor and stabilization we’d like to see more customers adopt GFX.

X Series photographers are more general-purpose, and GFX customers are those who love the look of medium format

Do you see a difference between your X and GFX customers?

It is different – X Series photographers are more general-purpose, and GFX customers are those who love the look of medium format, and the quality. With the 50R we’re expecting to see the gap narrow, because the style of the camera is more suited to snapshooting.

The GFX 100 is one of the first cameras we’ve encountered that can shoot 16 bit Raw. When will photographers see the benefit of 16-bit over 14-bit?

Mostly at low ISO, in very deep shadow detail. The benefit is subtle, even though there is four times the amount of data. It’s tougher to edit. 14-bit will let you shoot faster, which is why we don’t think [16-bit] is appropriate for APS-C.

The X-T3 – the latest in a range of high-end Fujifilm APS-C cameras for enthusiasts.

What does Fujifilm need to do in order to lead in APS-C?

Fundamentally, we need to keep up the pace of development for new devices. New sensors, processors, and the lens lineup. That’s the fundamental strategy. And I think the X-T3 is a classic example. Better focusing, 4K 60p and so on.

We’re positioning APS-C against full-frame, and its faster, and more responsive because of the smaller sensor. So we’re really focusing on speed and of course image quality is [also] important. Versatility is the most important thing, and we’ll keep investing accordingly.

The X-T3 has a major firmware update coming, and Fujifilm has a long-standing policy of updating older models – do you think in the long run this policy has helped or harmed total sales?

We believe in maximizing the customers’ satisfaction, to create a long-term strategy that will make our brand trusted by our customers.

After launching the X-T2, a lot of X-Pro 2 owners started requesting 4K as well

Fujifilm has invested a lot in video, in quite a short period of time. How have your customers reacted?

Four or five years ago, movie functionality was almost ignored [within Fujifilm], but with the X-T2 we added 4K, and more than just resolution we’ve added new profiles, worked on the autofocus and everything else. It takes time, but definitely more and more customers are looking at Fujifilm as a serious video [manufacturer].

After launching the X-T2 with 4K video, a lot of customers who owned the X-Pro 2 started requesting 4K as well. We never thought that users of the X-Pro lineup would care about 4K video. We really hope that the GFX 100’s 4K movie will show people something new, as well.

Do you think there’s room in the X Series or GFX-series lineups for a dedicated video camera?

It’s possible. We don’t have any concrete plans but at some point in the future it might be a consideration.

Fujifilm’s MK lenses are made in X and E-mount versions, in order to appeal to as wide an audience of filmmakers as possible, while Fujifilm grows its native video options.

You have the MK line of cine lenses for X-mount, do you think there’s a growth opportunity there in the future?

Definitely, yes. Good video needs good video-oriented lenses, so it’s definitely a growth opportunity. The level of R&D investment is quite high, but we managed to make it make sense financially by having an E-mount option as well, alongside X-mount. That lets us reach a much broader base of customers.

How have the MK lenses performed in the market?

In line with our expectations. We didn’t anticipate huge sales numbers because although our [video’] customer base is growing, it’s still quite small.

Are the E mount MK lenses selling to small production companies, rental houses…?

Both, but at that price point a lot of end users are buying them directly [rather than renting].

Digital corrections have an impact on image quality

Let’s imagine two lenses, both of which give comparable image quality: one requires no help from software corrections, while the other does, and is smaller and less expensive as a result. Which is a better solution for the photographer?

That’s a very difficult question to answer. Our philosophy is to minimize digital correction, and maximize the optical quality of our lenses. The downside as you mentioned is cost and size. It’s a balance.

Analog correction and digital corrections are different. Digital corrections have an impact on image quality, for example resolution. Even chromatic aberration – you have to [manipulate] each channel, R G B, and it reduces total resolution. Whereas analog, optical correction isn’t really ‘correction’, it’s about the physics of light.

Are there some lenses where you do rely on software correction? And if so, when would you make that decision?

We start with optics, and our designers start from the position of [needing] zero digital correction. And then if the lens looks like it will be too big, or too heavy, maybe we start talking about software. It’s always a balance but we regard optical quality as the first priority.

The XF 8-16mm F2.8 is a powerful ultra-wide lens for APS-C which offers excellent image quality, albeit in a larger and less convenient form factor than some full-frame competitors.

When you introduced the X mount lineup originally you talked about prioritizing optical quality even if it came at the expense of autofocus speed. Has your thinking changed since then?

If you look at the first XF lenses, like the 35mm F1.4, they had beautiful optical quality but slow autofocus because the entire optical assembly had to move for focusing. That was the first generation.

If we redesigned that lens now, probably we would take a different approach, and get a better balance of optical quality and autofocus. This is because we have new actuators, and new optical technologies. Compared to the first generation of lenses, we have learned and developed technologies to make lenses smaller without compromising image quality.

In terms of technologies and production techniques, can you give us examples of how Fujifilm in 2019 is different to Fujifilm in the past?

In terms of production we’ve started to introduce some automated lines. We still depend predominantly on the work of our craftsmen but, for example, when we make resolution adjustments to lenses, we’ve introduced some automation. So instead of a human making manual adjustments to the barrel, it’s done by machine, which is more accurate.

When we started the X Series our focus was much more on stills

Has your material science developed over that time as well?

Yes. Both materials and coating technologies. Several years ago for example we started to introduce Nano GI coating, which we didn’t have in the first generation of lenses.

Another difference from five years ago is the requirement for movie shooting in lens design. When we started the X Series our focus was much more on stills, but our recent lenses have inner focus systems which are much more suitable for video shooting. We do care about those customers.

Do you see potential for Fujifilm to become a major player in the sports and wildlife photography market?

In the future, yes. At the moment our customer base within that segment is small, but the XF 200mm F2 opens the door to those kinds of customers. It will take time, but in the future we see that kind of customer [coming to Fujifilm].

In terms of camera design, what needs to change in order to cater to those customers?

We need to look at sensor and processor first, and performance, speed – we need to look at everything.

If we asked 100 different X100F customers for feedback we’d probably get 100 different answers

Do you have any thoughts on how you could evolve the X100 Series?

If we asked 100 different X100F customers for feedback we’d probably get 100 different answers. What are the top requests? Number one would probably be for better glass, since that lens is a 2010 design. We started at 12MP and now we’re at 24MP, so that’s probably the number one.

Second would be a split between people who really want a tilting screen, and people who really don’t want such a screen. Not much feedback about 4K, maybe weather-sealing is number four, but the most important thing is people don’t want us to change the style or the size. That’s a challenge.

The X100 is where everything began – is it still an important product line for you?

Of course, it’s a kind of symbolic line. That’s why we haven’t changed the naming convention. It’s a lot of pressure – we can’t make any mistakes! We’re already on the fourth generation and there’s a huge customer base that trusts Fujifilm so we need to work hard not to let them down.

The original 12MP X100, which started everything. First announced at Photokina back in 2010, the X100 is now on its fourth generation, and Fujifilm is careful not to update the line too rashly, given its importance to the brand.

We’ve seen some manufacturers open up their lens mounts. What is the logic behind keeping X-mount a ‘closed’ mount, and do you think that might change?

I don’t think we need to change our position. We’ve already created 31 lenses for all necessary focal lengths, so we don’t feel that we need to open up the mount to third parties.

If a third-party manufacturer decided to create X-mount compatible lenses by reverse-engineering, would that help or harm Fujifilm?

I think that from a customer’s point of view, more options are good.

What do you think the next big revolution in digital imaging will be?

From a sensor point of view, everyone is talking about global shutter. That is one thing, which will come at some point in the future. The other thing is more computational and Artificial Intelligence technologies making it into cameras. Probably those two things.

If those two technologies were available to you right now, what would they enable you to do?

The modular GFX! Just kidding. Global shutter would give us more freedom of design, no rolling shutter, things like that. It would expand the shooting possibilities. And AI and deep learning, that would let photographers just press the button and let the camera do everything, without worrying about controls, things like that. That’s the kind of camera that could be created.

Editor’s note: Barnaby Britton

Fujifilm’s Toshi Iida and his team are on a mission to change the world of photography, and they’re hoping that the upcoming 100MP medium format GFX camera will help shake things up. There aren’t too many photographers out there who really need 100MP and Fujifilm knows that, but an ultra high-resolution medium format camera with in-body stabilization and the ability to shoot 4K video is quite the party piece – or ‘technology showcase’, to use Mr Iida’s words.

That doesn’t mean that Fujifilm is just showing off with the GFX 100. There are a lot of things that have prevented photographers from making the jump to medium format before now: size, weight, slow performance and middling autofocus being four of the major ones. The GFX 100 promises to narrow – if not entirely erase – the performance gap, while at the same time extending the image quality gap between full-frame and medium format in a way that no other manufacturer has ever been able to.

The unique hybrid viewfinder of the original X100 isn’t unique any more, because Fujifilm has used it in five other cameras since then

Even if you have zero interest in a $ 10,000 medium-format camera, we’ve seen how Fujifilm uses experience gained from one product to inform the development of others, right from the beginning of the X series back in 2011. The unique hybrid viewfinder of the original X100, for example, isn’t unique any more, because Fujifilm has used it in five other cameras since then, including the X-Pro 1 and X-Pro 2. Likewise in-camera image stabilization, which was developed for the video-focused X-H1 – itself a testbed of sorts for the GFX 100.

While many of our questions at CP+ were focused on the GFX 100 and on Fujifilm’s large-format strategy in general, Mr Iida also had a lot of encouraging things to say for APS-C users. For starters, it seems like Fujifilm’s strategy of adding features to older flagship models via firmware isn’t going to change in the near future. The X-T3 is the most recent camera to get a major boost in functionality, and it’s reassuring to know that even after it’s eventually replaced, its development might not cease.

More than any other manufacturer out there, Fujifilm has really committed to APS-C

While it seems unlikely that the X Mount will become an open standard any time soon, It’s good to hear that Fujifilm won’t fight with third-party manufacturers who create new options for their customers via reverse-engineering. It’s worth noting though that one of the best disincentives to them doing so is Fujifilm’s own APS-C lens lineup, which is extensive, if not comprehensive. More than any other manufacturer out there, Fujifilm has really committed to APS-C, and it will be interesting to see how the lineup evolves as Mr Iida pushes his engineers to create more specialist optics like the XF 200mm F2 for sports and wildlife photographers, and the MK range for video shooters.

Meanwhile, at the other end of the customer spectrum, a lot of us are happy with the fixed lens, stills-focused philosophy of the X100 Series. It was interesting to hear from Mr Iida (and everyone in the room with him) that Fujifilm is very careful about how and when it updates the X100, which occupies a “symbolic” position in the catalogue. We don’t know yet what a next-generation X100 will look like, but judging by the customer feedback (and by Fujifilm’s track record of listening to and acting on that feedback) it’s a pretty safe bet that a new lens will be part of the package.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on CP+ 2019: Fujifilm interview – ‘We want to show photographers the future’

Posted in Uncategorized

 

CP+ 2019 – Nikon interview: ‘The view through the viewfinder should be as natural as possible’

25 Mar
(L-R) Mr Naoki Kitaoka, Department Manager of the UX Planning Department in the Marketing Sector of Nikon’s Imaging Business Unit, pictured with Mr Takami Tsuchida, Sector Manager of the Marketing Sector inside Nikon’s Imaging Business Unit, at the CP+ 2019 show in Yokohama Japan.

We were in Japan earlier this month for the annual CP+ show in Yokohama, where we sat down with senior executives from several camera and lens manufacturers, among them Nikon.

We spoke with three Nikon executives from the Marketing Sector of Nikon’s Imaging Business Unit: Mr Naoki Kitaoka, Department Manager, of the UX Planning Department, Mr Takami Tsuchida, Sector Manager, and Mr Hiroyuki Ishigami, Section Manager of the Product Planning Section IL, UX Planning Department.

Please note that this interview was conducted with multiple interlocutors through an interpreter, and has been edited for clarity and flow. For the sake of readability, answers have been combined.

How do you think the market for full frame mirrorless will evolve?

In terms of hardware, it is likely that mirrorless will catch up with DSLR. But one thing that is a challenge is the time lag of electronic viewfinders. Even though we have a great mirrorless [solution], we cannot beat the optical viewfinder.

For really high-level professional photographers at sports events and so on, I believe that the DSLR will survive. I think there will be a synergy between DSLR and mirrorless, so we can expand the market moving forward.

I hesitate to talk about our competitors, but while Sony only offers mirrorless cameras, both Nikon and Canon offer DSLR and mirrorless, so there are more options for our customer bases. DSLR and mirrorless cameras have their own unique characteristics.

The Nikon Z6 and Z7 feature a high-resolution optical viewfinder which prioritizes clarity and sharpness over response speed. One of the secrets behind the large, sharp viewfinder image is the complex optical unit behind the display panel, which contains multiple lenses including an aspherical element.

The Z6 and Z7 offer very high resolution finders, at the expense of response speed, compared to some competitors. Why did you make this decision?

There are various factors, however we decided on three main pillars for the Z system. The first pillar is a new dimension of optical performance. The second is reliability, both in terms of the hardware and also the technology, and the third is future-proofing of that technology.

The view through the viewfinder should be as natural as possible

To touch on the first pillar, optical performance, we’re really trying to be the best and provide the ultimate performance of the viewfinder. The view through the viewfinder should be as natural as possible. To achieve that goal we did two things – we focused on the optics, and also on image processing.

With current technology there is always some time lag, it will take some time and if we want to shorten the response time and compromise in terms of resolution, the [experience] deteriorates. Of course, we’ll continue to try to make the response time shorter.

Is it more important for the viewfinder response to be faster in a camera more geared towards speed?

That depends. In the Z7, our first priority was not speed. Therefore, if we were going to launch a camera focused on speed, we’d need to review [viewfinder responsiveness].

What kind of feedback have you received from your Z6 and Z7 customers?

Very similar to [DPReview’s] feedback. For people who don’t prioritize high-speed shooting, they’re happy with the performance and the portability of the system. In many cases they’ve totally switched away from DSLR.

The Nikon Z6 is a lower-cost companion camera to the flagship Z7, which has already out-sold the more expensive model. According to Nikon, the Z6 has proven especially popular with filmmakers.

Is the Z6 attracting a different kind of customer to the Z7?

When we launched them, we expected that sales would be about 50:50, however the Z6 already has a larger customer base. It’s more price competitive. Video shooters are telling us [the Z6] is very user-friendly, and in the US market, the Film Makers’ Kit has become popular.

We’re going to create easier to use and friendlier equipment for photographers that need to do both stills and video

In the future, would you like Nikon to appeal to serious professional videographers and filmmakers?

If you mean Hollywood or television broadcast videographers, we’re not trying to address that segment. However we are targeting freelancers, one-person team kind of videographers – that kind of shooter. That’s the kind of direction we’re going in.

We’re going to create easier to use and friendlier equipment for those photographers that need to do both stills and video. For example, photojournalists, or wedding photographers.

On the optics side, in the S-series lenses we took great care over the video functionality as well, so for example when you zoom the focus stays there, there’s no defocusing, and there’s no change in the image angle when you focus, either.

Do you think that strategy might change in the future?

We’ll keep an eye on the market, and look at the demands of our customers.

Despite the entry of the Z7 into the market, the D850 continues to be a major seller for Nikon, and in some ways remains a more capable camera for professionals.

Do you plan to increase your production capacity, to make F mount and Z mount products in parallel? Or will you scale down production of one line to make room for expansion of the other?

Even though we’ve now launched Z mount into the market, we still have a very robust [F mount] customer base, and a good reputation thanks to our DSLRs, especially products like the D750 and D850. And sales are still very robust.

I want to grow the Z series and D series at the same time – we’re not weighing one against the other. For example, developing Z lenses alongside F-mount lenses will put a lot of pressure on us, so efficiency of production will be very important from now on, because we really want to maintain production and development of both lines in future. When we can, we’ll commonize parts and platforms, and of course we’ll monitor trends in the market, and where the growth is.

Take a look inside Nikon’s Sendai factory [August 2018]

Can you give me an example of a new, efficient production process in contrast to an older, less efficient process?

We are really interested in automation, and we’d like to automate so we don’t have to depend [entirely] on human labor. For example, we’d like to have a 24/7 operation in our factories.

Since we launched the Z series, our users have been asking us to apply mirrorless technology to the DX format

Do you think the Z mount will eventually be an APS-C platform, as well as full-frame?

I cannot disclose our plans but for today I can say that since we launched the Z series, our DX format DSLR users have been asking us to apply mirrorless technology to the DX format as well. If we employ APS-C sensors [in mirrorless] maybe the system can be made even smaller. So as we go along, we’ll listen to the voices of our customers.

One of the advantages of the narrow dimensions of the 60 year-old F-mount is that the APS-C cameras that use it – like the D3500, shown here – can be made remarkably small. That will be a harder trick to pull off with the larger Z-mount.

We understand some of the benefits of a short flange back and wide diameter mount, are there any disadvantages?

In comparison to F mount, [when designing lenses for Z] we can really guide the light, even right to the edges of the frame. This gives uniformly high image quality across the whole image area. The camera can also be thinner.

There’s no particular challenge or shortcoming in this kind of design, except that the mount diameter determines the camera’s size. You can’t make the camera any smaller [than the height defined by the diameter of the mount].

Does a shorter flange back distance make the mount and lens alignment tolerances more critical? Is it harder to correct for reflections and ghosting?

Generally speaking, when it comes to alignment, no. But there is more risk of sensor damage in [such a design, with a rear lens group very close to the imaging plane ] if the camera is dropped. So we needed to create a system to [absorb shock] in this instance. When it comes to ghosting, it is more critical, so we have to really reduce reflections. Only by doing this were we able to [make the design of the Z mount practical].

Is there a software component to that, or are you achieving the reduced reflections entirely optically and via coatings?

No software is involved.

Editor’s note: Barnaby Britton

Last year was a crucial year for Nikon, and the Z system was a hugely significant move for the company – one on which the future of the manufacturer may depend. Nikon has been careful not to talk about the Z mount replacing the 60 year-old F-mount so much as complementing it, and in our meeting at CP+, Nikon’s executives were again keen to emphasize that they see DSLRs and mirrorless cameras co-existing – at least for now.

Clearly though, as they admit, ‘mirrorless will catch up with DSLR’ eventually. And already, for Nikon, mirrorless has opened the door to a new customer base for the company: filmmakers. While Nikon isn’t targeting professional production companies or broadcast customers (not yet – although the forthcoming addition of Raw video is a strong indicator that they’d like to) I get the sense that the Z6 has been more of a hit with multimedia shooters than Nikon perhaps expected. It certainly seems as if sales figures for the 24MP model have come as a bit of a surprise. It’s unclear though whether the proportionally greater sales of the Z6 compared to the Z7 are a result of the cheaper model over-performing, or the flagship under-performing in the market.

A mirrorless D5 it ain’t, but the high-resolution Z7 is an excellent platform for Nikon’s new range of Z-series lenses

The Z7 was always going to be a relatively tough sell at its launch price, with the inevitable comparisons against the incredibly capable and still-popular D850, and the fact that the similarly-specced (and in some ways more versatile) Z6 was coming fast on its heels. Regardless, Nikon clearly sees the Z7 as living alongside its high-end DSLRs, rather than as a replacement model. As the executives said in our interview, ‘in the Z7, our first priority was not speed’. A mirrorless D5 it ain’t, but the high-resolution Z7 is an excellent platform for Nikon’s new range of Z-series lenses, which are at least a generation ahead of their F-mount forebears in terms of optical technology.

We’ve heard a lot about the benefits of wider, shallower mounts for optical design (and the benefits are real, by the way, especially when it comes to designing wide, fast lenses) but it was interesting to hear about some of the challenges that emerged. Principle among them are the need to reduce aberrant reflections, which can cause ghosting, and the requirement for a robust sensor assembly to avoid damage from impact.

Right now, the Z system is a full-frame system. But in this interview we got the clearest hint yet that this might not be a permanent condition

Judging by Roger Cicala’s tear-down of the Z7 last year, it’s obvious that Nikon really prioritized ruggedness and ‘accident-proofing’ in the Z6/7. It turns out that one of the reasons for this focus on build quality is the close proximity of the stabilized sensor not only to the outside world, but also to the rear elements of Z-series lenses.

Right now, the Z system is a full-frame system. But in this interview we got the clearest hint yet that this might not be a permanent condition. Reading between the lines, a statement like ‘since we launched the Z series, our users have been asking us to apply mirrorless technology to the DX format’ is as close to a confirmation that this is being actively worked on as we’d expect to get from a senior executive. As for how far away an APS-C Z-mount camera is, I wouldn’t want to guess.

There’s always a chance, of course, that Nikon could go the Canon route and use a totally separate mount for APS-C. I doubt it, but Mr Kitaoka did make the point that the width of the Z-mount defines the size of the camera. And the Z-mount, as we know well, is very wide indeed.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on CP+ 2019 – Nikon interview: ‘The view through the viewfinder should be as natural as possible’

Posted in Uncategorized

 

DJI confirms its drones are prepared for the GPS 2019 week rollover event

22 Mar

DJI has confirmed its drones are prepared for the GPS 2019 week rollover scheduled to take place on April 6. The event may disrupt some GPS receivers, but most manufacturers have confirmed that their systems have been tested ahead of time and are prepared for the rollover.

The GPS 2019 week rollover is an event that will take place due to how the Global Positioning System (GPS) works. Receivers are provided with time information from the GPS system, which uses a 10-bit week counter to count weeks from 0 to 1023. Upon reaching the end of that range, the system reverts back to 0 and starts over.

GPS receivers that aren’t prepared for the rollover may incorrectly report a date of 19.6 years in the past (1024 weeks), resulting in some GPS devices displaying a date of August 22, 1999, starting after the April 6 rollover. The first GPS rollover took place on August 21, 1999.

To avoid this complication, manufacturers must push out software updates to prepare their devices for the change. In a brief statement published on March 20, DJI said that all of its ‘platforms have been thoroughly tested’ and will not be impacted by the GPS rollover. DJI drone owners can continue to use the devices as normal.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on DJI confirms its drones are prepared for the GPS 2019 week rollover event

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Waterproof buying guide updated for 2019

13 Mar

Fed up with winter and packing for a trip somewhere warm? We’ve updated our waterproof camera buying guide so you can be sure your scuba selfies look their best.

The Ricoh WG-50 and Fujifilm FinePix XP130 have been removed to make way for their successors – the WG-60 and XP140 – and Ricoh’s step-up WG-6 model has also been added. Our top recommendations, however, have not changed; we still think that the Olympus TG-5 is the best of the bunch.

Read our 2019 Waterproof Camera
Buying Guide

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Waterproof buying guide updated for 2019

Posted in Uncategorized

 

CP+ 2019: Nikon Z7 Eye AF side-by-side with Sony a7R III

04 Mar

Nikon’s booth at CP+ includes Z6 and Z7 cameras running firmware with Eye AF. We tried it out, side-by-side with the Sony a7R III, to see how they compare.

Both cameras do a good job of recognizing the subject’s eye and sticking with it, even when she covers her face for a period of time. They’re similarly fast to find the eye again, afterward. This recognition (and how quickly it requires the eye) is key to the performance of eye-detect AF, as we’re already pretty confident about the Z7’s ability to focus when requested.

We weren’t able to keep the images from the Nikon but will put it to the test as soon as we have the new firmware.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on CP+ 2019: Nikon Z7 Eye AF side-by-side with Sony a7R III

Posted in Uncategorized

 
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »