On September 25, 2018, Germany’s Photokina In 2018, Sigma, Leica and Panasonic announced the joint development of the L-mount.

The L-mount was born with the Leica SL in 2015.

In 2013, the 100th anniversary of the 135, Sony took the lead and pushed the 135 full-frame specification into digital mirrorless.

The birth of Sony α7 was announced, and the FE mount specification based on the E mount was launched.

As early as 2012, the VG900 came out, also equipped with 135 specifications and an unnamed FE bayonet. It is usually considered to be a test of the water, and the α7 announced the feasibility of this, and was born at the same time. There are also FE system lenses.

The 135 specification is generally considered to be set by Leica on the Ur-Leica model in 1913. It used 35mm film already used in the film industry, but it was 90 degrees across, achieving a larger area than a single frame. . In 2015, based on the original T-mount, Leica also advanced to the 135 specification, Leica SL, and the full-frame L-mount.

Full-frame mirrorless mount, sorted by launch year

Hasselblad once launched its own full-frame model as FE, but we know that Solar should be regarded as OEM machine, not an open bayonet work.

43 is an open platform, and openness is a major feature.

As long as any company wants to, come and register, and then you can join and use the trademark.

Even this is too open, so that some manufacturers produce related accessories but have not joined the alliance, while lenses and other products are selling well.

This of course brings some problems. For example, the specifications of the bayonet have changed between E-M5 (2012) and EP5 (2013).

The new L-mount seems to have this potential, but unlike Olympus, it does not set up an independent "production committee" - this is a common way for Japanese companies to do things, to avoid Disputes, developed together - but still in Leica's own hands.

This approach has both good and bad sides. But time will be the true judge.

Another idea of ??the M43 is the introduction of in-camera correction.

In the film era, the quality of the optical system was almost entirely determined by the lens subsystem;

In digital, you can play tricks and use in-camera processing to correct aspects of lens performance deficiencies. , such as distortion processing.

Lumix’s “magic cake”, the G 20mm F1.7, has huge distortion, which is of course a compromise in a compact space. But most people don't know this, because all M43 fuselages have a 20/1.7 correction guide reference, and this correction can be made in Live View.

This idea liberates the system lens design more. Maybe the exchange lens of the subsidiary factory has to worry about various body conditions, but it has already taken the lead in fixed lens digital cameras, such as RX1 and Leica Q, and a more compact 1-inch model.

Will L series bodies complete this transformation with the help of Panasonic’s M43 experience?

Well worth looking forward to.

Leica was the first company to do autofocus. Although autofocus appeared, it had almost nothing to do with Leica in the end.

This is quite a sad situation.

Leica holds M and R mounts in the 135 format. In 1964, Leica launched the SLR mount for the latter, which is not as famous as the M mount for rangefinders.

The M mount is its own, but in the 1970s, the West German Leica Company cooperated with the Japanese Minolta Company to launch the Leitz Minolta CL with an electronic attempt. This move subtly helped The M mouth evolved. After a brief exodus, the M6's performance improved.

The larger-format S series is obviously not a product of the same level. Since 1998, updates have been relatively slow.

In 2014, Leica started a new bayonet journey with the Leica T (Typ-701).

It is also a relatively late manufacturer to join the digital mirrorless market.

Some amateurs cannot understand the electronic viewfinder of "digital mirrorless" and simply think that "there is no reflector", so they think that the rangefinder using an image sensor can also be included; this is naturally not appropriate. .

SL was launched as a full-frame model in 2015. The original T-mount was renamed TL-mount. The definitions of physical and electronic contacts are actually the same. It just depends on whether the loaded Full-frame image sensor.

Sigma is more famous for its lenses than its camera bodies.

They only have a production plant in Aizu. But every lens is calibrated by a special A1 instrument before leaving the factory.

Sigma currently operates the SA mount, which is a mount owned by Sigma itself and only used by Sigma itself.

For some DIY enthusiasts, this bayonet is "very similar" to EF - of course there are historical reasons for this, but it has limited impact on ordinary users.

Based on previous experience with Sony FE, Sigma will launch MC-11 adapters for EF-FE and SA-FE, so you may be able to look forward to the following adapters:

Very good Maybe you bought an L-mount machine, even if it is not a Sigma brand, but in the end you still bought a durable and possibly inexpensive Sigma adapter ring.

Even with AF.

Foveon is the developer of the X3 sensor. After working with Sigma for many years, it was acquired by Sigma in 2008 and became a subsidiary.

High computing requirements have brought about unfriendly applications, and the long-term weak height sensitivity has also limited the X3’s shooting themes. The SA mount may also be a problem, and the SD series of SLRs may not be as popular as the DP series with fixed lenses.

However, the testing equipment mentioned earlier, A1, is based on X3, and it seems that the effect for industrial use may be okay.

Sigma has previously launched SDQ and SDH, sd Quattro / sd Quattro H, which are mirrorless models but adhere to the SA mount. The lack of a usable bayonet with future prospects has always been a concern for Sigma, and L is a timely blessing.

sdqh is equipped with an APS-H sensor, which is an improvement compared to the previous APS-C, but it seems to have been lacking the motivation to move to full-frame.

So will we see a full-frame X3?

How can Sigma bring us... With the current production capacity, can the price still be appropriate?

Panasonic brought two machines:

At the same time, it announced 3 lenses:

Panasonic did not work hard in the 43 era and released very few.

The release of M43 was much more diligent, and I personally feel that more M43 lenses may be more relevant and practical than Olympus (Olympus’s use of F1.2 is a bit strange) .

In the past 10 years, these lenses have all had small image fields, so they do not seem to be constrained by the development of the new L mount.

Panasonic has a big business. In addition to consumer products, it is also involved in higher content production fields, such as video-related cameras.

Consumer-grade machines are also equipped with 4K functions as "standard equipment". I hope everyone can quickly get into the 4K rhythm.

On high-end machines, Panasonic has an interesting feature, Dual Native ISO, which allows the machine to shoot at high ISO but suppress noise. It has become quite influential in the industry and is currently assembled in the following machines:

Another urgent demand is 8K video.

Panasonic announced its 8K equipment plan for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics.

4K video, 3840x2160, the area (number of pixels) is 4 times that of 1080P;

8K video, 7680x4320, is 4 times that of 4K.

This kind of iteration that directly doubles the integer is really confusing.

For comparison, take the Sony A7 second-generation series as an example.

The A7S2 has the least pixels, 12 million;

The A7R2 has the most pixels, 42 million.

The difference is only 3.5 times.

By the way, Sony’s A7R2, 42MP, 3:2 sensor, 7952x5304

We may see a firmware upgrade giving 8K capabilities some time after the S1R was launched. And bring Dual Native ISO (of course, it may not come with market positioning and processing capabilities).

After the release of GH5, a firmware brought 6K shooting capability

Hot Shoe. The structure of the boot was also first defined by the Leitz Fodis, but the so-called "heat" comes from the central contact, which electrically triggers the accessory mounted on it, usually a flashlight, to complete the function.

Therefore, in addition to the bulk of the fuselage, another point that people care about is the hot shoe.

Although the hot shoe interfaces currently on the market are essentially derived from the regulations of ISO518, the additional contacts outside the center define a complete set of independent logic flash systems.

At present, Leica, Sigma and Panasonic actually have their own way.

Leica is relatively "unprincipled". Because of the origin of the machine and cooperative development, it often follows the original design; and in terms of manufacturing, it is also related to Nissin. The following models have different hot shoes:

Panasonic currently uses the hot shoe type that is interchangeable with Olympus. This hot shoe was revised in 2014 at the latest.

Although some people may think so, the hot shoe definition is not part of the 43 bayonet specifications. The compatible flash on Taobao will be called M43

Will Panasonic bring their hot shoe to L system machines? Could Olympus benefit from this?

Sigma’s hot shoe is defined on its own body.

Due to the applicability of the X3 to natural scenery subjects, perhaps Sigma’s flash sales may not be so ideal?

Sony has been developing full-frame mirrorless for 5 years, and it has benefited more from the advancement of the image sensor itself, rather than the progress in camera design - this is a good thing and a bad thing, usually one-time We all choose the achievements that have made the most progress to discuss, and the achievements of Sony Semiconductor are obviously very dazzling; in comparison, the pace of camera design itself is lackluster. Maybe more people choose the α7 series models, and then match them with Sigma, Canon or Leica M lenses .

Canon and Nikon embarked on the mirrorless road in 2012 and 2011 respectively, but with the EOS M and 1 series, perhaps the latter has gained more for Nikon; but the fact is that EF-M still has a market, 1 The series has been closed. In September, EOS R and Z will be launched. Although they are 5 years late, it is better than never, right?

Three pillars, the best script.

But these "second-tier" and "non-mainstream" people obviously don't like this script.

Perhaps when the situation is reviewed many years later, L mouth may be the winner.

Judging from the current situation, Sigma, Leica, and Panasonic are not camera companies that are good at computational photography. Will they promote photography in the new era and develop beyond traditional optics?

Olympus?

Olympus can be said to be the mainstay in camera design.

But trapped in the single battlefield of M43

Zhihu on 2018-09-25