07-22-2012, 08:22 PM
[quote name='dave9t5' timestamp='1342974179' post='19535']
I guess the aspect ratio of the sensor is still not official. 4:3 might have some advantage over 3:2 for IQ. For the same image circle the width (long side) of a 4:3 frame would have better IQ than 3:2 because the edges are closer to the center of the circle. (The height (short side) of the 4:3 frame would be only marginally worse than 3:2.) Of course, along the diagonal there would be no difference so the MTF measurements would not improve. However on a pixel-peeper subjective basis, the 4:3 frame will be more consistent as the edges of the height vs. width would have less extreme differences so the edges at the width will be subject to less criticism. This would benefit wide-angle non-retrofocal optics where short register differences struggle to match sensor to optics.
[/quote]
looks more like just a shrunk 650D, if it's APS-C
I guess the aspect ratio of the sensor is still not official. 4:3 might have some advantage over 3:2 for IQ. For the same image circle the width (long side) of a 4:3 frame would have better IQ than 3:2 because the edges are closer to the center of the circle. (The height (short side) of the 4:3 frame would be only marginally worse than 3:2.) Of course, along the diagonal there would be no difference so the MTF measurements would not improve. However on a pixel-peeper subjective basis, the 4:3 frame will be more consistent as the edges of the height vs. width would have less extreme differences so the edges at the width will be subject to less criticism. This would benefit wide-angle non-retrofocal optics where short register differences struggle to match sensor to optics.
[/quote]
looks more like just a shrunk 650D, if it's APS-C