01-07-2012, 09:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2012, 09:37 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='wim' timestamp='1325954012' post='14474']
The inch denomination is based on old imaging tubes, and says something about the tube diameter itself. The actual imaging area of such tubes is approximately 2/3 of the diameter, which would make it 1 inch if 1.5 inch was really meant, and this would make it about the same size as a 4/3 sensor.
However, 1.7" and 1.8" are also interchangeably used for 1/1.7"and 1/1.8", so I would expect this to be 1/1.5" indeed. One would think this is really the same as 2/3 ", but working backwards from a 1/1.7" sensor the sensor size would be approximately 8.6 mm X 6.5 mm, IOW, a tad smaller than 2/3 ", which is 8.8 mm X 6.6 mm.
Kind regards, Wim
[/quote]
Uhmm... The inch denomination for CRT tubes is calculated with the "edges" of the tube itself, yes. Says something about the screen size when not talking about CRT. So, for LCD screens 17" means 17" screen diagonal. With CRT not so, less.
Has nothing to do with other things like sensor sizes, though. Here 1.5" would mean... 1.5".
How 1.7" is used where 1/1.7" is meant? I have never seen this used, ever. Anyway. this "rumor" has little in common with the "official" information, where there is mention of a larger sensor camera with exchangeable lenses, with "native" lenses having an emphasis on compact, and where EF lens compatibility is also wanted.
That then means that the Canon mirrorless compact system will have nothing in common with what Nikon does, instead making a bigger sensor camera for IQ and possibilities, and making a few native lenses that are compact (nikon 1 lenses are not compact), and with EF compatibility.
The inch denomination is based on old imaging tubes, and says something about the tube diameter itself. The actual imaging area of such tubes is approximately 2/3 of the diameter, which would make it 1 inch if 1.5 inch was really meant, and this would make it about the same size as a 4/3 sensor.
However, 1.7" and 1.8" are also interchangeably used for 1/1.7"and 1/1.8", so I would expect this to be 1/1.5" indeed. One would think this is really the same as 2/3 ", but working backwards from a 1/1.7" sensor the sensor size would be approximately 8.6 mm X 6.5 mm, IOW, a tad smaller than 2/3 ", which is 8.8 mm X 6.6 mm.
Kind regards, Wim
[/quote]
Uhmm... The inch denomination for CRT tubes is calculated with the "edges" of the tube itself, yes. Says something about the screen size when not talking about CRT. So, for LCD screens 17" means 17" screen diagonal. With CRT not so, less.
Has nothing to do with other things like sensor sizes, though. Here 1.5" would mean... 1.5".
How 1.7" is used where 1/1.7" is meant? I have never seen this used, ever. Anyway. this "rumor" has little in common with the "official" information, where there is mention of a larger sensor camera with exchangeable lenses, with "native" lenses having an emphasis on compact, and where EF lens compatibility is also wanted.
That then means that the Canon mirrorless compact system will have nothing in common with what Nikon does, instead making a bigger sensor camera for IQ and possibilities, and making a few native lenses that are compact (nikon 1 lenses are not compact), and with EF compatibility.