Your sarcastic comment is borderline asinine since it is completely obvious why the NIkon, Canon and Sony FF cameras have the same size mounts as those for smaller sensors - to serve an existing user base with a very large pool of existing lenses. It is a fait accompli and there was no sensible economic option to introduce a larger mount for these manufacturers and a very strong economic incentive to make it work with the existing one.bakubo wrote:It is clearly the reason that the A900/A850 (with FF sensor) lens mount is so much larger than the A700/A550 (with APS-C sensor) lens mount.Danjojo_Resurrected1 wrote:Does this sound right when talking about how large the mounts and lens diameters are for 4/3's and NEX systems?
"...made larger than a film equivalent would have been to maximize the possibility of telecentricism in lens design, as sensors don't work like film and don't collect as effectively from divergent light rays. This is a given of digital photography."
This is from RubberDials over at Dyxum, he went into a few more posts that had a lot more detail, but basically explaining how the mount seems large enough for a FF sensor but not if you want the right quality. This would seem it will be a long time until we have the tiny lenses of those older film cameras....new technology down the road maybe.And the D3x/D3s/D700 lens mount is so much bigger than the D300s/D90 lens mount. And the 1ds4/5DII lens mount is so much bigger than the 7D/50D/550D lens mount.
Anyway, I can't say for sure. I suspect that this might be a case of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing though.
Also, just a reminder. We were talking about a non-interchangeable lens, i.e., fixed to the body.
The adequacy of the mount for the job is another matter, and where there is no existing lens and user base and manufacturers have been able to start from scratch (4/3, Samsung NX, Sony NEX) mounts have been made conspicuously larger than they were in the film era. (The 4/3 mount for example is twice as large as the imaging circle and would comfortably accommodate a 135 sized sensor.) The reasons for this are known to anyone who understands the difference between digital and film lens design and the different behaviours of the two recording surfaces. Before I began posting on the very long Dyxum NEX thread I thought this was more or less everybody but it appears that it is actually only a handful of regular posters in the A mount and Alpha community, of which I am one and you apparently are not.
There is no point in you making any further comments relating to lens design and sensor and mount size - even in your own thread - until you acquaint yourself with these differences. You could start by reading my contributions to the first three parts of the long NEX thread at Dyxum, but there is a lot of stuff on the web.
!!) is on the way out. If a rear LCD was better in all ways then I would be okay with that, but clearly a rear LCD is not better in all ways. It is better in some ways, but much worse in other ways. I hate to see that for their own financial reasons the companies are rushing to having only a rear LCD. 
