01-10-2019, 09:30 PM
(01-10-2019, 05:30 PM)Brightcolours Wrote:I actually did get that, but the question is whether a video-cam at 8K really needs 44 (or 42.3 old style) Mpix, or more specifically a 4:3 layout. It can still be a 4/3 sensor in size (diameter), and have an 8K layout. I should probably have been clearer on that.(01-10-2019, 04:33 PM)wim Wrote:Uhmm, no. You certainly do not get it.(01-10-2019, 02:26 PM)Brightcolours Wrote: 32? 36???
8k is 7680 horizontal and 4320 vertical.
7680 / 4 = 1920.
1920 * 3 = 5760.
7680 * 5760 = 44.2Mp.
8K width X "6K" width? Why?
8K width X 8K height is still 7680 (4x 1920) x 4320 (4x 1080). That's 33.2 Mpix, or if you define it old school. 31.6 Mpix (generally rounded to 32 Mpix).
Kind regards, Wim
8K width = 7680 pixels.
So, what is a 4/3rds sensor? 4x3 aspect ratio.
7680 x 4320 is 16 x 9, not 4x3. MFT is called MFT (MicroFourThirds, not MSN (MicroSixteenNineths))...
Now calculate how many MP the MFT sensor needs to have to do 8K video.
Indeed, exactly as I showed you: 44.2mp.
So far, I've only seen it announced as a 32 Mpix camera, when a number is given, so I guess we'll have to wait and see.
However, density-wise it would indeed be a 42.3 or 44 Mpix sensor, so a bit over twice as dense as current implementations from Panasonic and Olympus.
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....