If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
What Rich can do...
On 9/7/2011 6:06 PM, RichA wrote:
Moved to a 4:3 format. This would have allowed for smaller, higher quality lenses than are needed to support an APS 3:2 format since a 4:3 format occupying the same sensor area would be less wide, putting less pressure on the lens design to support such a width. Plus, it would have made more sense because most 3:2 images end up cropped at the sides for 70% of their applications anyway. That extra side waste has made it much more difficult and expensive for Sony (and then Nikon and Canon) to do mirror-less systems which has/will result in poorer quality lenses overall. Time to ditch the ancient film format. What issue would that be? What Sony lens (E Mount, I assume) do you own? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
What Rich can do...
"Bowser" wrote in message news On 9/7/2011 6:06 PM, RichA wrote: Moved to a 4:3 format. This would have allowed for smaller, higher quality lenses than are needed to support an APS 3:2 format since a 4:3 format occupying the same sensor area would be less wide, putting less pressure on the lens design to support such a width. Plus, it would have made more sense because most 3:2 images end up cropped at the sides for 70% of their applications anyway. That extra side waste has made it much more difficult and expensive for Sony (and then Nikon and Canon) to do mirror-less systems which has/will result in poorer quality lenses overall. Time to ditch the ancient film format. What issue would that be? What Sony lens (E Mount, I assume) do you own? For lens designers, the easiest (ideal) format is 1:1. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
What Rich can do...
"Charles" wrote in message
... [] For lens designers, the easiest (ideal) format is 1:1. Yes, but today many displays are 16:9 or approximations thereof, and many prints are still 6:4. David |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
What Rich can do...
"David J Taylor" wrote in
: "Charles" wrote in message ... [] For lens designers, the easiest (ideal) format is 1:1. Yes, but today many displays are 16:9 or approximations thereof, and many prints are still 6:4. David If the be all and end all of outputs was 2 meg displays and tiny prints, then in addition to 3:2 formats, we should have stopped at 3 megapixels. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
What Rich can do...
"Rich" wrote in message
... [] If the be all and end all of outputs was 2 meg displays and tiny prints, then in addition to 3:2 formats, we should have stopped at 3 megapixels. No, because you may wish to crop. For example, if only half the linear size is needed for a particular image, a quarter of the sensor area, then a 12 MP sensor/lens is required for a 3 MP result. Many people are delighted with HD TV on large screens, and that's only just over 2 MP. David |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Get Rich | Daun Johnson | Photographing Nature | 0 | January 31st 06 06:53 AM |
Get Rich | Daun Johnson | General Photography Techniques | 0 | January 31st 06 06:53 AM |
Get Rich | Daun Johnson | Other Photographic Equipment | 0 | January 31st 06 06:52 AM |
Get Rich | Daun Johnson | Large Format Photography Equipment | 0 | January 31st 06 06:52 AM |