what is full frame? No this is NOT a Troll

Hopefully this will not degenerate... (some hope :-)

What is "full frame"?
Think about it. There are many formats of film size from 8*10 field
cameras down to 110 film. Probably more if you include special purpose
film for X-rays, spies, other medical, instrumentation etc

There are also several formats of digital sensor size.

All these are their own frame size. The are all "full frame" within
their own design parameters.

So why would you want a Digital frame size to be the same as a
particular film size? Especially when all the lenses for the film
cameras will work on the digital ones but not the other way around?

As far as I can see this "full frame" for DSL's is just a marketing
gimmick feeding people's egos. The digital "frame" I have in my DSLR is
"full frame" in its own system.

However instinctively I feel there probably is an argument on technical
grounds for the frame 25MPG and up DSLR's who are chasing the medium
format market to use a larger sensor. But does it need to be the same
as the old 35mm film size? On that score the Medium format cameras do
have digital backs.

Do digital sensors have to be related to the old film sizes? If so why?


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In article , Chris H wrote:
Hopefully this will not degenerate... (some hope :-)

What is "full frame"?
Think about it. There are many formats of film size from 8*10 field
cameras down to 110 film. Probably more if you include special purpose
film for X-rays, spies, other medical, instrumentation etc

There are also several formats of digital sensor size.

All these are their own frame size. The are all "full frame" within
their own design parameters.

So why would you want a Digital frame size to be the same as a
particular film size? Especially when all the lenses for the film
cameras will work on the digital ones but not the other way around?

As far as I can see this "full frame" for DSL's is just a marketing
gimmick feeding people's egos. The digital "frame" I have in my DSLR is
"full frame" in its own system.

However instinctively I feel there probably is an argument on technical
grounds for the frame 25MPG and up DSLR's who are chasing the medium
format market to use a larger sensor. But does it need to be the same
as the old 35mm film size? On that score the Medium format cameras do
have digital backs.

Do digital sensors have to be related to the old film sizes? If so why?


This is what the old lens system uses, and all the new DSLR's,
else your wide angle goes to hell. Large sensors are better
today.

greg

Chris H wrote:
[]
As far as I can see this "full frame" for DSL's is just a marketing
gimmick feeding people's egos. The digital "frame" I have in my DSLR
is "full frame" in its own system.

I prefer the DX size of DSLR as it provides me with lighter weight, more
compact and easier to carry lenses.

Do digital sensors have to be related to the old film sizes? If so
why?

In almost all compact cameras there is no relationship, and a lot of the
population are quite happy taking and enjoying their photos with such
cameras.

Cheers,
David

In article , Chris H
wrote:

As far as I can see this "full frame" for DSL's is just a marketing
gimmick feeding people's egos. The digital "frame" I have in my DSLR is
"full frame" in its own system.

you use olympus, right?

the term 'full frame' has meant a 35mm film sized frame, or 24 x 36mm
for a long time, well before digital. the term originated 50 years ago
when olympus came out with camera that had a frame size of 18mm x 24mm,
one half the size of a 35mm negative. olympus called it half frame and
referred to the standard 35mm camera as full frame. ironically, it's
usually the olympus 4/3rds users who argue the most that their system
should also be called full frame.

http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/camera/pen.cfm

Do digital sensors have to be related to the old film sizes? If so why?

zillions of existing lenses cover full frame and a larger sensor will
have better image quality than a smaller sensor so why not take
advantage of it?

In message , David J
Taylor
writes
Chris H wrote:
[]
As far as I can see this "full frame" for DSL's is just a marketing
gimmick feeding people's egos. The digital "frame" I have in my DSLR
is "full frame" in its own system.

I prefer the DX size of DSLR as it provides me with lighter weight,
more compact and easier to carry lenses.

Do digital sensors have to be related to the old film sizes? If so
why?

In almost all compact cameras there is no relationship, and a lot of
the population are quite happy taking and enjoying their photos with
such cameras.

That was what I thought for 98% of the P&S users. I was just thinking
about why the fuss at the DSLR end of the market as the two technologies
(DSLR and 35mm film) are completely dissimilar.

What with Dxo (RAW processor) and Photoshop it seems irrelevant with
most of the pro-sumer and better DSLRs that the DX frame size is not the
same as the 35mm frame size.

The need for "full frame" DSLR's seemed to come down to the egos of the
pedants arguing. In reality the DSLR "frame" or sensor sizes are
completely separate to the 35mm film cameras other than the fact you
can usually use the 23mm lenses on the DSLR's

As far as I am concerned the DX format sensor in my DSLR is Full Frame
for that type of camera. Is there really any sensible reason why not?


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:04:19 +0100, Chris H wrote:

Do digital sensors have to be related to the old film sizes? If so why?

There are a couple of advantages to the 36x24mm format, and to larger
sensors in particular:

- All lenses developed for analog cameras will still work at their full
potential.
- You get a shallower depth of field to play with.
- Larger sensors capture more light, which increases resolution and/or
decreases noise.

Ofcourse, the main disadvantages are cost, size and weight of the system.
It's not a marketing gimmick, bot it's not necessarily better either. The
choice depends on your needs/wishes.





--
Regards, Robert http://www.arumes.com

In message , nospam
writes
In article , Chris H
wrote:

As far as I can see this "full frame" for DSL's is just a marketing
gimmick feeding people's egos. The digital "frame" I have in my DSLR is
"full frame" in its own system.

you use olympus, right?

Wrong.

the term 'full frame' has meant a 35mm film sized frame, or 24 x 36mm
for a long time, well before digital.

For 35mm film. What about other larger or smaller formats?

the term originated 50 years ago
when olympus came out with camera that had a frame size of 18mm x 24mm,
one half the size of a 35mm negative. olympus called it half frame and
referred to the standard 35mm camera as full frame.

That was a film camera. Not a digital camera.

ironically, it's
usually the olympus 4/3rds users who argue the most that their system
should also be called full frame.

http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/camera/pen.cfm

Not seen that. Not had an Olympus camera either.

Do digital sensors have to be related to the old film sizes? If so why?

zillions of existing lenses cover full frame and a larger sensor will
have better image quality than a smaller sensor so why not take
advantage of it?

Fair enough but it does not answer my question. The "full frame"
referred to 35mm FILM cameras. Digital is completely different other
than the similarity in size and external appearance to 35mm cameras and
the fact that most can sue the lenses originally for 35mm film cameras

SO you have a Digital sensor frame size. It does not need to be
connected to the 35mm film size.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In article , Chris H
wrote:

Fair enough but it does not answer my question. The "full frame"
referred to 35mm FILM cameras.

so what? 24x36mm is full frame. it doesn't matter if it's kodachrome,
velvia or cmos.

Digital is completely different other
than the similarity in size and external appearance to 35mm cameras and
the fact that most can sue the lenses originally for 35mm film cameras

and that's fairly substantial.

SO you have a Digital sensor frame size. It does not need to be
connected to the 35mm film size.

many digital cameras have very different sensor sizes than film,
including most p&s and certainly cellphone cameras.

Chris H wrote:
Hopefully this will not degenerate... (some hope :-)

What is "full frame"?
Think about it. There are many formats of film size from 8*10 field
cameras down to 110 film. Probably more if you include special purpose
film for X-rays, spies, other medical, instrumentation etc

All correct. But by general convention and consensus the 24 × 36mm is
considered 'the' full frame format because it is by far the most
commonly film format.

So why would you want a Digital frame size to be the same as a
particular film size?

Because then you can make best use of existing equipment like existing
lenses.

Especially when all the lenses for the film
cameras will work on the digital ones but not the other way around?

Huuuu? What gave you that idea? First of all there are no special
"digital lenses". All of them are purely analog in the first place, so
the term 'digital' is a non-starter. And although apparently some
manufacturers have optimized some lenses for digital photography like
special rear coating to reduce back reflection or more perpendicular
illumination of the sensor, there is nothing in there stopping you from
using those lenses on a traditional film camera.

Do digital sensors have to be related to the old film sizes? If so why?

Technically: no!
Practically: yes.

jue

Chris H wrote:
[]
The need for "full frame" DSLR's seemed to come down to the egos of
the pedants arguing. In reality the DSLR "frame" or sensor sizes are
completely separate to the 35mm film cameras other than the fact you
can usually use the 23mm lenses on the DSLR's

I wouldn't have said "egos" or even "pedants". There are some advantages
and some disadvantages to the bigger sensor, so it's useful to have a
quick way of distinguishing them.

As far as I am concerned the DX format sensor in my DSLR is Full Frame
for that type of camera. Is there really any sensible reason why not?

I suspect that history and current usage dictates that 36x24mm = "Full
Frame", but for your camera, and mine, "full frame" just means not
cropping. Note the initial capitals!

Indeed, there are some DSLRs and some Compact cameras which do offer
"reduced frame" as a way of cropping (for using DX lenses or gaining
apparent focal length). Some Nikon DSLRs and some Panasonic compacts do
this.

Cheers,
David