On Feb 20, 2012, at 9:42 AM, Tim Bray wrote: > I like square photographs: > http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2012/02/17/Square-Cameras
If the lenses are the cost limiting link in the chain, a square sensor will optimize for getting the best performance for your dollar. If the sensor is the cost limiting link in the chain, then a sensor that is the shape of the majority of prints will be cost optimal. Note, however, that a square mirror that needs to be flipped out of the way would increase the registration distance. Using the K-mount you could go to a square 24x24 (up from aps 17x24), but you couldn't go to a 36x36 without going mirrorless. Going up to 24x24 would increase the size of the mirror, to nearly the cost of a "full frame" mirror, without being able to call the camera "full frame". The short form, I think you could make a point for trying it in a mirrorless, maybe even an evil, but other than that, I think the best you'll be able to easily afford is a 17x17 sensor, with a little bit of extra for cropping off on each side. > > -- > 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. -- Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est -- 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.
