Nicholas A. Sinnott-Armstrong wrote:
--- You wrote:
I was browsing around and found a sensor for us to consider (there are
others on the same site):
http://www.aptina.com/products/image_sensors/mt9p401i12stc/
This has 2.2 micron pixels which a little too small.
I also realized we have a problem -- how are we going to use 35mm
lenses? Unless we put some refractive optics in, either the sensors
will cost a LOT of money (for APS-C or 35mm sensors) or only long
focal length equivalents are possible. I would almost prefer going the
fast prime 35-40mm equivalent on a cheap, high quality, rugged,
FOSH camera. Of course, another option is to make it a Super16
camcorder...
I think that the range of 16mm (1 inch video 12.8 x 9.6mm through half
frame 35mm (Super 35mm movie 24 x 18mm) is the best range of sensor
sizes for a serious camera with interchangeable lenses. This could use
16mm or 35mm movie lenses. (APS-C would use the same [35mm movie]
lenses; 16mm is the normal lens for 1 inch video and 30mm is normal for
Super 35mm movie). Note that wide angle movie lenses are always
retrofocus (partially telecentric in the image space) -- something that
is not true of 35mm rangefinder camera (e.g. Leica) lenses. It should
also be possible to use 35mm Leica & SLR lenses of 45mm and longer focal
lengths. A focal reducer is an interesting idea to use 35mm SLR normal
to wide angle lenses -- probably an expensive option but it has certain
advantages.
--
JRT
_______________________________________________
Open-hardware mailing list
Open-hardware@duskglow.com
http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-hardware
