Plus they could have a choice of keeping the SR on and taking what they get, which might be some strong vignetting in some areas if the frame was shaking enough, or putting it on a tripod and not worrying about it.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 02/01/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>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. > > > Most 35mm lenses don't cover much more than 43mm diagonally however > given that the sensor movement in the K10D is about +/- 2.5mm I > venture that SR could be fully implemented if users were willing to > endure a 5mm crop from each dimension for the full frame. This would > result in an SR frame with a 1.16 crop, not too unusable and along the > same lines as the concept of cropping to an APS frame when reduced > frame lenses are mounted on full frame bodies. Almost everyone would > be happy then. > -- Someone handed me a picture and said, "This is a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture of you is when you were younger. "...Here's a picture of me when I'm older." Where'd you get that camera man? - Mitch Hedberg -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
