----- Original Message ----- From: "Konstantinos Bibis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 8:00 PM Subject: Re: EOS 4/3 sensor
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Pfeiffer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 1:51 AM > Subject: Re: EOS 4/3 sensor > > > > Actually, a 30.6 x 30.6mm, the limiting factor being the diagonal measure. > > > > While this sounds cool to some, I wouldn't want to give up nearly 6mm of > > negative width just to eliminate camera rotation. > > > > Tom P. > > > > One of us got it wrong. The 36x36 or even 30.6x30.6mm would be the size of the sensor. > You said u didn't want to lose 6mm of the 'negative'. We're not talking negative(fiml) but > image sensor. > None of us would want to give up any of the 24x36mm negative... medium format guys have > enough to laught at us 35-ers about... :) > I figured a 35mm lens could make an image the size of the diagonal of a 35mm frame of film (which works out to 43.26mm) as its maximum dimension, so that a sqaure with the same diagonal could be covered by an image from the same lens. a square with a diagonal measure of 43.26mm would have a side about 30.6mm long. I think <lol> Tom P. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
