OK lets be pedantic: I dont comment on your calculations, but we were not talking about a 2/3" CCD. we were discussing a 2/3 size CCD. I took this to mean 2/3 of the area rather than the individual dimensions. Wouldnt your definition give a focal multplier of 6.3 - we were discussing focal multipliers of 1.5 to 1.6.
BTW I will comment on your calculations - isnt 2/3" = 16mm? > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob Studdert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 07 December 2001 00:24 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Bit of a correction... > > > On 6 Dec 2001 at 17:54, Rob Brigham wrote: > > > Which is why I said: > > > > 'a full frame CCD which had the same density as a smaller > one (therefore > > higher pixel count cos its bigger)' > > > > Full frame with same density as 5.25 2/3 size CCD would > give 7.875MP. > > Not trying to be pedantic but a 2/3" CCD has a sensor > dimensions of about > 13.53mm x 10.17mm so ratiometricaly a CCD of 24mm x 36mm at > the same pixel > density (2/3" 5.25MP) would be 32.97MP > > Cheers, > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
