Alan Chan wrote:
--- Cornelius Nuzzlemuff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why is it seemingly so difficult to produce a camera with a full frame (35mm)
sensor, if Pentax and many others have/will have MF digitals surely one of these
sensors could be used, even if it has to be masked?
I imagine current full frame lenses designed for film might not do well with
full
frame digital, especially the corners of wide angles?
This issue has been discussed *a lot* on this list an other places,
hasn't it?
And yes, as far as I understand, the corners/border areas is a problem;
electronic sensors (or the ones currently used, anyway) are more
sensitive to the "angle of incident" of the light, than traditional film is.
But, they still probably *could* use the "MF" sensors. The real issue is
the price, I think. Again, this has been discussed a lot. Some argue
that its always going to be prohibitively expensive - for the price
range of "35mm" SLRs - to produce 35mm sensors, and that digital chips
have become more affordable over the years mainly because they have
become smaller, so we really want components like the CMOS/CCD sensor to
be as small as possible - or something like that. I don't quite agree
with that reasoning; I think we have also seen that "large" components
have become less expensive over the years, and that the improvements in
production techniques that allow smaller units/higher integration, have
actually also made it easier to produce larger ones. However, I think
it's fair to say that the price of (for instance) the sensor is always
going to go up as its size increases.
- Toralf
