right, but then they dont need much at all, we are talking about a the amount of a typical image blur which is very small amount relative to the normal image. And even if they had ZERO overcoverage, AS could still be done with a very tiny amount of auto or manual cropping slightly smaller than FF, nothing anywhere near as small as the APS cropping currently used. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William Robb Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 12:52 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: More rumors ... (and happy New Year) ----- Original Message ----- From: "J. C. O'Connell" Subject: RE: More rumors ... (and happy New Year) >I should rephrase that, the amount > of overcoverage needed for AS is small > relative to the size of the image > circle or diagonal on a FF sensor. I realize this will vary from lens to lens, but what is the median size of the projected image circle on the Pentax lenses you are familiar with? I suppose one should take the smallest value if the projection changes size with aperture. My reason for asking is that I think it would be nice if the shake reduction technology could be assimilated into a 24x36mm DSLR, but I've always been of the impression that most 35mm camera lenses don't offer much coverage beyond the 35mm frame. It's what I was taught when I was learning the nuts and bolts of photographic theory. William Robb -- 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
