2012 FF mystery camera?

Serdar A wrote: rovhazman wrote: it seems that Sony is still in the belief that they have to increase MPs every generation I don't see a problem with that. MPs are not the only things that are increasing with every generation of Sony sensors

I didn't say that it is a problem - I said that this is the way Sony works and that is why I would be very surprise with a new 24mp FF camera.

But if you bring it up, you cannot argue that lower MP means larger pixel size which means more photons per pixel which for the same technology means less noise.
What you see in practice is that the companies push the technology forward and that's allow them to increase MP and increase high ISO sensitivity and increase frame rate simultaneously - and that is great!

But when a camera changes this balance (has lower MP or has lower maximal ISO than the older generation) it is some kind of declaration that the company choose one parameter and willing to sacrifice the other one. Or, it might be that they just pushed one parameter too far and now they want to focus on the other

Personally, I would prefer a balanced camera or two bodies at the different ends. For example, 24mp FF camera with today's technology can be great! Or even better, as the rumors suggest (which as I said before, I don't believe it is going to happen) - two bodies, one with 24mp and one with 36mp (or 48mp - a number that also comes up from time to time).
For 36mp we need to see the results - we don't know how much they improved the technology and it might be that they can get a well balanced camera with 36mp. I think we agree that we cannot say anything by the number of MP by itself. We can only say about the number of MP relative to other cameras from the same generation.

Serdar A wrote: [Had they gone for more MPs with the D3s, they would have to drop the fps which may be unacceptable for the intended market. D3, D3s, and D3x have the same throughput: 12MP at 9 fps or 24MP at 5 fps (118~120 MP/s). Even if Nikon had an 18MP sensor ready for D3s with the same low light high ISO performance (or better), putting it in D3s would mean more than a sensor swap unless they dropped the speed to 7 fps.

I know all that but what I'm trying to show you that with the newer technology just by one generation and without increasing mps how much they improved the ISO performance

aarif wrote: marlon127 wrote: What sony is doing with SLT is the future of digital photography. Canikon is still trying squeeze drops out of old technology that can't be advanced without loosing resolution or stifle innovation. actually I don't think the future is SLT at all it's most likely to be mirrorless

Yes, but “what Sony is doing with SLT” allows us to economically have the main features of the camera of the future today.   

aarif wrote: iezzoni wrote: aarif wrote: marlon127 wrote: What sony is doing with SLT is the future of digital photography. Canikon is still trying squeeze drops out of old technology that can't be advanced without loosing resolution or stifle innovation. actually I don't think the future is SLT at all it's most likely to be mirrorless Yes, but “what Sony is doing with SLT” allows us to economically have the main features of the camera of the future today.    I'm Sorry I don't see that main features of the future in it or is it video AF you're talking about

EVF and the benefits and information that it provides
video AF
live view PDAF
no mirror flap
high fps
etc.

Essentially, all of the benefits of a hypothetical on-sensor PDAF mirrorless camera, except small size and ability to take adapters.

So, my guess (which I think several people have described) is a body with a full-frame sensor built into a body that includes all the features found in an SLR (except for a mirror) including SSS, control wheels, dedicated function buttons, etc. It will have a built in EVF and live view. The mount will be e-mount. This will allow use of e-mount lenses as an APS-C crop on the full frame sensor. But with an LA-EA1 for full frame Alpha lenses (and separate custom adapters for M-mount, Nikon, Canon and other lenses) you now have a full-frame mirrorless. And if you want a good AF full-frame a-mount camera for sports applications you just add the LA-EA2. As long as they keep the mega-pixels down enough to keep the noise down to give me ultra-clean 6400 ISO, that would be the only camera I'd need for the next ten years.

It's a rumor, could turn into nothing. Heck could just mean they remove the AF motor for all we know, or they go to an electronic aperture. But anyways, I would guess there would be 2 serious theories.

1) A mount body, but no mirror system at all, just mirror less with on sensor Phase Detect. So it's a hybrid of E mount bodies and A mount bodies.

2) It's a NEX-9 with a new adapter built for A mount FF lenses. Uses Phase Detect on main sensor.

Since A mount being replaced by E mount with an E to A adapter is the probable future of A mount, the later would make more sense than a stupidly big A mount mirrorless path. But at the same time Using an adapter wouldn't really hit the term "hybrid" very well.

PhotoTraveler wrote: It's a rumor, could turn into nothing. Heck could just mean they remove the AF motor for all we know, or they go to an electronic aperture. But anyways, I would guess there would be 2 serious theories. 1) A mount body, but no mirror system at all, just mirror less with on sensor Phase Detect. So it's a hybrid of E mount bodies and A mount bodies. 2) It's a NEX-9 with a new adapter built for A mount FF lenses. Uses Phase Detect on main sensor. Since A mount being replaced by E mount with an E to A adapter is the probable future of A mount, the later would make more sense than a stupidly big A mount mirrorless path. But at the same time Using an adapter wouldn't really hit the term "hybrid" very well.

Don’t forget about PL mount. Sony uses PL mount on their high-end video cameras, and I would hope that Sony would come up with something to compete with the Canon 4K DSLR.