On 20 Aug 2002 at 14:24, Ryan K. Brooks wrote: > I don't think you can fairly say that there will be a D120, D200, and so on. For > one, if the chip doesn't get much bigger than now then that's getting to be a > pretty small well size- which means more noise. This contradicts the wonderful > low-noise characteristic of the CMOS D60 sensor. Even if the chip goes up to > full frame (if possible), this makes for a large die size and therefore much > more expense. Not to mention that there's an ultimate physical limit to the > smallest well size; unlike a non-optical chip. > > Also, there's not an infinite amount of information to be had thru a 35mm > lens system- at some point the noise from these smaller wells will exceed > the benefit of capturing more data.
> Electronics nightmare? Solid state electronics don't wear out. period. > An MTBF on a DSLR is naturally longer than the same SLR with film transport. I'm right in there with ya Ryan. :-) 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 .
