Godfrey - www.gdgphoto.com
On Sep 25, 2008, at 11:42 PM, Toralf Lund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:54 PM, Toralf Lund wrote:
Digital cameras are not really "medium format" cameras, however,
The term "medium format" is quite arbitrary in any case, isn't it?
I believe the distinction between medium and small format has been
kept at least to a certain degree in terms of market segment as
well as the "negative" format, though - i.e. digital cameras from
traditional medium format vendors have larger sensors than the
ones that descended from 35mm bodies, and are sold to some of the
same people.
I don't know that "medium format" as a type designation is
arbitrary at all. It denotes cameras that used 120/220 sized roll
film, with a range of capture format sizings from 6x4.5 to 6x17 cm.
I said that the *term* is arbitrary. As in why is it exactly that
format range you mention that's defined as "medium"?
One might easily refer to a (possibly different) size or range of
sizes for digital cameras as "Medium Format", too, ...
Sure if you don't want anyone else to understand what you're talking
about.
In that sense, all of language is "arbitrary", jnigg de bklop NA?
usw
Godfrey
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
