Actually, max movement is around 2.5mm on the DX format sensors. That's a lot more than a couple pixels. More like 300 pixels on the 6MP sensors (25.5mm wide sensor is 3008 pixels across).
-Adam Bob Sullivan wrote: > Tom, > Similar to my thinking in another thread. I think Max Excursion in SR > is 2-3 pixels on a 3000+ pixel sensor. No big deal... > Regards, Bob S. > > On 12/21/06, Tom Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Well, they wouldn't have to go quite full-frame to get major >> improvements in IQ and still have enough leeway for SR excursion for the >> sensor, right? >> >> How about, say, a 9/10-size sensor with x1.1 crop factor? Just what is >> max X/Y excursion of the sensor with SR engaged, anyway? >> >> Tom >> in SC >> >> >> Mark Roberts wrote: >>> David Savage wrote: >>> >>> >>>> The main argument at the moment is SR, as it is in the K100/10D, >>>> wouldn't work. Supposedly current full frame Pentax lenses projected >>>> image circle wouldn't be large enough to cover the moving sensor. >>>> >>>> As some people think that SR is more useful than a FF sensor, that's >>>> their reason for thinking Pentax FF is a pipe dream. >>>> >>>> Time will tell. >>>> >>> Pretty accurate summation. >>> My feeling is that Pentax simply won't have any choice in the matter: >>> The demand for higher pixel counts and low noise will continue and it >>> will force sensor size increases. The marketplace will make the >>> decision for them. >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
