On Mar 12, 2007, at 5:35 PM, Juan Buhler wrote: > On 3/12/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Makes a great 24x24 mm Pentax Superwide on a 35mm body ... >> >> http://homepage.mac.com/godders/DA14FF-sq.jpg >> > > Which brings to mind... There's really no specific reason for DSLRs > sensors to be rectangular, except for the size of mirror and prism, > right? > > How about a 24x24mm DSLR? > > Not that I'd care for one--I like 3:2 myself.
Square sensors cost more to manufacture, that's why you rarely see anything like that in a production camera. But I like square format and wouldn't be unhappy with a 24x24 mm format sensor. ON the other hand, a 4:3 format sensor fits my compositon and prints most of the time best and would enable me to get the most from the camera's resolution. Cropping to either square or 3:2 from 4:3 invokes less wasted area than cropping to either 4:3 or square from 3:2 capture. So if they're going to make any change at all, I'd prefer they fitted a larger sensor with a 4:3 proportion. Looking at the image circle of the DA14, I think they could do an 18x24mm sensor which, at the same density as the K10D sensor, would net almost 2.4 Mpixel more resolution for my 11x14 inch and similar format prints with no increase in noise over the current sensor. That's what I'd like to see. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
