More facts about film sizes

You should know that in photography, 6x6 doesnt equal 6x6cm image area, neither is 645 the same as 6x4,5cm nor is 4x5" 4x5", it would just have been too easy. Except for 135 film (small frame) the sizes include the borders of the roll film, making a 6x6 lens have to produce a circle of good quality that can fit a square of around 55x55mm. It varies a lot though. For example, im pretty sure my 6x6 P6 produces a smaller picture area than my 645 fujis do and my 6x12 produces only around 10cm wide a picture.

For large format it gets even more complicated. First we have to take into account that the nominal sizes are those of the film holders rather than the film itself. The film sheet has to be i bit smaller to fit the holder. By chance, this makes the slightly larger 13x18cm format have exactly 5" wide sheets, while film called 5x7" is slightly narrower than 5". In addition to this, there are the borders. For 4x5" format in total that means the image area is about 95x120mm which is between 0.5 to 1 cm smaller in each direction than the name suggests.

Does this affect digital as well? In a way, it does. Making a 60x45mm or a 60x60mm mf back wouldnt make anyone happy except the lens manufacturers. A lot of lenses for regular 6x6 or 645 systems would be quite useless with such a back since the corner would lose light, image qualitey or both. However, on digital backs and cameras, if you look carefully you will find the actual size mentioned. Just remember that while 44x33 is a 645 crop, around 55x55 is a perfectly sized 6x6 sensor.

On top of that, there are so many misconceptions on how film/sensor size affects the photos floating around the internet. I tried to straighten them out during a rainy day this winter.

http://bit.ly/2bFPmKO

I should try to make a shorter and better version of this, i know. But it at least tells how it sorts the myths out from the facts if you can get yourself through it.

Thats all for today, or tonights darkroom class will be a teacher short.

Entry level mirrorless medium format camera

Early summer, i put down my mirrorless medium format wishlist. Reading about the rumoured lenses on fujirumors made me realize a MMF done right could have so much potential. Here is how Fujifilm could make an affordable entry level that would still be attractive in low end medium format price ranges. (Edited the text after fixing some seriously flawed arithmetics)

The only certain known about the hopefully upcoming fuji MMF is the sensor. It will be the Sony 44x33 or not at all in the close future, whether modified to xtrans or not. This gives us a 4x3 aspect ratio which is quite close to optimal for fitting a lot of sensor area in an image circle so the lenses will not have to be too big. Its also gives the images the same proportions as the classic 6x45 film format, making it very suitable for waist level shooting.

Even an entry level MMF camera wouldn't come cheap so it would have to come with something very appealing, much like the x100 attracted a lot of attention and buyers without being the best performer at its going price. It would also have to strip away a lot of the extra stuff we would expect from an expensive Fujifilm camera.

One obvious thing we can expect to lose on an entry level camera is both the EVF and optical viewfinders. Other things that may have to go are big buffers, extra jacks for headphones and mics, dual sd-slots, weather sealing and so on. So would anyone buy a £2000-3000 x-m1 with those things missing?

I wouldn’t and i guess you wouldn't either. But what if i offered you this, but with the sony 44x33 instead of 127 (40x40mm) film?

A rather small (and thus cheap) screen as a wlf with a foldable cover and there you are, a small and retro MMF camera in TLR style but with only one lens, interchangeable or not. Maybe the screen could even flip back so that we can use it like a regular non-evf mirrorless camera when we want to look stupid instead of super trendy.

The X-T2 - the end of an era

Until now, the x series has been all about photography. We have all felt it, the cameras walk, talk and look like cameras. The knobs are in the right places, the needs of photographers have been dictating the firmware updates and development of new models.

With x-t2, the heat produced by 4k dictates the internal airflow design of the camera, some of the precious firmware development resources will be put on video features and bug fixes, not to mention the extra buffer memory that could have been there if all those video modes were not there. If it sells well among videographers, designers of future models will consult both photographers and video shooters regarding ergonomics, button layout and lens needs.

Ofcourse more sales at least in theory will come with more resources to r&d which hopefully can negate some of the drawbacks. But there is no question about it, from time to time there will be choices between what is best for photographers and what is best for videographers and from now on fuji will have to consider both groups. Thats why video cameras and camcorders dont look like still cameras and why spoons dont look like forks.

Let's hope we don't end up with a spork like those sonys and panasonics out there!