The Kodak is not using a CCD, but a CMOS. I guess the only reason Canon and Kodak can pull it off (full frame CMOS) is the large customer base and perhaps by controling the sensor (CMOS) development and production. I know Canon invested heavily in CMOS-manufacturing - even their entry level DSLR's use CMOS. I don't know where Kodak gets their sensors?
I also believe, that if we'll ever see a sesor larger than APS in a Pentax camera - it will be in a camera made for the Medium Format lenses - probably for 645 lenses. But perhaps Pentax already did loose the digital-MF war to Hasselblad, Mamiya and Rollei (are there others?) I think most (if not all) MF digital backs are CCD's. Hasselblad (Imacon), Rollei and Mamiya are using Imacon Ixpress, Phase One, Eyelike/Jenoptika, Sinar, MegaVision, Leaf etc. sensors - all CCD's, I believe. Pentax can perhaps be expected to make a MF camera, dedicated to a digital back, probably an existing CCD. Not many camera companies cover both MF and 35mm/APS photography. I wonder why Pentax didn't go into digtal MF a long time ago - for instance by investing in large format CCD/CMOS production. (I guess it's more likely that some current small format CCD/CMOS maker might buy into an existing MF camera business. Kodak or Canon could probably do this...?) I guess at the moment it's dificult to know of MF will last at all. Perhaps the MF digital back business is just the death- struggle of MF - or perhaps it's the future for Hasselblad, Mamiya, Rollei - and perhaps Pentax ? Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Peter J. Alling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 12. marts 2005 08:48 Til: [email protected] Emne: Re: Full Frame DSLR Tell that to Kodak, with their 13mp sensor using a Nikon lens mount, which is about the same size as a K mount. The camera gets very good reviews within it's limitations. Mostly due to a small buffer for the amount of data produced by the huge sensor. It probably sells well enough as well, after all it sells for about $4000 or a bit less while the Canon 11mp FF digital SLR sells for about twice that. I'm pretty good with wave physics and I don't see you point. Pentax Nikon and Olympus are going with smaller sensor because that's what's available for affordable cameras. John Celio wrote: >> I told him I was waiting for Pentax to come out with a full frame. At >> this, the NotNikonIt guy next to him almost fell to the floor >> laughing. "Pentax will have a full frame DSLR when pigs fly!", he >> said. I said, "I think they're trying to train them now." > > > Dude, he's telling the truth. And anyway, a 35mm-sized sensor on a > dSLR requires a much larger lens mount to work as well as on film of > the same size; it's just a matter of physics. This is why Pentax, > Nikon, Olympus, and KonicaMinolta are going with smaller sensors. If > you look at all the facts, it just makes sense. > > If you must wait for something, I'd suggest only waiting for high-ISO > noise to come down, because you're going to be waiting a *very* long > time for a 35mm-sized sensor in a Pentax body. The current APS-C > system is not as horrible as you think, and it's only getting better. > > John Celio > > -- > http://www.neovenator.com > http://www.newpixel.net > > AIM: Neopifex > > "Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making > a statement." > > -- I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during peacetime. --P.J. O'Rourke
