Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Canon's reasoning only 1/2 right

Reply
Thread Tools

Canon's reasoning only 1/2 right

 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-08-2012
The sensor isn't just smaller than APS, it's better dimensioned for
lens coverage. 4:3 means not having the wide, wasteful sensor format
of APS where a lens has to be larger in order to cover two wide
"sides" of the sensor. In fact, you can make a 4:3 sensor with much
greater overall area than a 3:2 sensor that spans the lens coverage
area because you aren't lacking sensor "height."

http://www.43rumors.com/canon-explai...er-than-aps-c/

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-09-2012
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 10:10:46 -0800 (PST), RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: The sensor isn't just smaller than APS, it's better dimensioned for
: lens coverage. 4:3 means not having the wide, wasteful sensor format
: of APS where a lens has to be larger in order to cover two wide
: "sides" of the sensor. In fact, you can make a 4:3 sensor with much
: greater overall area than a 3:2 sensor that spans the lens coverage
: area because you aren't lacking sensor "height."
:
: http://www.43rumors.com/canon-explai...er-than-aps-c/

It's not a technical issue or even a philosophical issue; it's an issue of
fashion. And the current fashion is for a relatively wider (i.e., 3:2) format.
(There are various reasons for this, all of them outside the scope of this
discussion.) In fact, the format that wastes the most space nowadays (and for
as long as I can remember, actually) is the square format popularized by TLRs
and medium-format SLRs. That's because most people crop a picture to a square
only if nothing else seems to work.

Historically, the only reason for the square format is that waist-level reflex
cameras have only one sensible orientation. I used to have a TLR (a "Minolta
Autocord", if you must know), and its viewfinder had ruled lines for
horizontal and vertical 3:2 format.

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-09-2012
Rich <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Problem is, it is wasteful. A lens produces a round field. the wider the
>rectangular format of the camera, the more useful area the lens covers is
>lost. We try to maximize frame-fill when we take pictures, so why do we
>waste lens coverage?



To get the aspect ratio we want. That should be self-evident.

If we followed your mantra of not wasting lens coverage, we would all
be shooting circular images.

Still, things could be worse. Imagine if instead of real cameras, we
only had Lytro's plastic toys to shoot with.

 
Reply With Quote
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-09-2012
On Mar 9, 4:18*am, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Rich <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >Problem is, it is wasteful. A lens produces a round field. *the wider the
> >rectangular format of the camera, the more useful area the lens covers is
> >lost. *We try to maximize frame-fill when we take pictures, so why do we
> >waste lens coverage?

>
> To get the aspect ratio we want. *That should be self-evident.
>
> If we followed your mantra of not wasting lens coverage, we would all
> be shooting circular images.
>


I vote for a sensor that is square, makes the most use of the lens
illumination circle and the camera should have framelines to allow
people who want to shoot rectangular to shoot rectangular.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-09-2012
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Mar 9, 4:18*am, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Rich <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >Problem is, it is wasteful. A lens produces a round field. *the wider the
>> >rectangular format of the camera, the more useful area the lens covers is
>> >lost. *We try to maximize frame-fill when we take pictures, so why do we
>> >waste lens coverage?

>>
>> To get the aspect ratio we want. *That should be self-evident.
>>
>> If we followed your mantra of not wasting lens coverage, we would all
>> be shooting circular images.
>>

>
>I vote for a sensor that is square, makes the most use of the lens
>illumination circle and the camera should have framelines to allow
>people who want to shoot rectangular to shoot rectangular.



I voted for 3:2 with 36 MP.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-09-2012
In article
<(E-Mail Removed)>,
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > If we followed your mantra of not wasting lens coverage, we would all
> > be shooting circular images.

>
> I vote for a sensor that is square, makes the most use of the lens
> illumination circle and the camera should have framelines to allow
> people who want to shoot rectangular to shoot rectangular.


historically, people do not like square pictures. how many paintings,
where the artist could make it any shape they wanted, chose square?
people want rectangular aspect ratios, not square.
 
Reply With Quote
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-09-2012
On Mar 9, 12:51*pm, nospam <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In article
> <(E-Mail Removed)>,
>
> RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > > If we followed your mantra of not wasting lens coverage, we would all
> > > be shooting circular images.

>
> > I vote for a sensor that is square, makes the most use of the lens
> > illumination circle and the camera should have framelines to allow
> > people who want to shoot rectangular to shoot rectangular.

>
> historically, people do not like square pictures. how many paintings,
> where the artist could make it any shape they wanted, chose square?
> people want rectangular aspect ratios, not square.


4:3 is rectangular. No one thinks (outside of a few adherents) that
3:2 is some kind of "golden ratio" they could have REALLY gone nuts
and made it 2.35:1 like widescreen movies...
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2012
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> The sensor isn't just smaller than APS, it's better dimensioned for
> lens coverage. 4:3 means not having the wide, wasteful sensor format
> of APS where a lens has to be larger in order to cover two wide
> "sides" of the sensor. In fact, you can make a 4:3 sensor with much
> greater overall area than a 3:2 sensor that spans the lens coverage
> area because you aren't lacking sensor "height."


In fact, the best sensor format for a round lens is a round sensor.
That should be obvious --- even to you.

If you need a rectangular sensor, you want a 1:1 sensor: that has
a much greater overall area than a 4:3 sensor that spans the lens
coverage area because you aren't lacking sensor "height."


> http://www.43rumors.com/canon-explai...er-than-aps-c/


Ah, some quotes outside their context and the 4/3rds suckers
think 4:3 is king. Even though Canon uses a larger sensor.
Nincompoops.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2012
Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Still, things could be worse. Imagine if instead of real cameras, we
> only had Lytro's plastic toys to shoot with.


In that case you'd be selling Lytro cameras and dissing any real
camera for not being able to handle DOF and plane of focus after
shooting and needing a slow autofocus and so on and wondering
what usage cases real cameras could ever have.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
Wolfgang Weisselberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-15-2012
George Kerby <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "nospam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>>>> If we followed your mantra of not wasting lens coverage, we would all
>>>> be shooting circular images.


>>> I vote for a sensor that is square, makes the most use of the lens
>>> illumination circle and the camera should have framelines to allow
>>> people who want to shoot rectangular to shoot rectangular.


>> historically, people do not like square pictures. how many paintings,
>> where the artist could make it any shape they wanted, chose square?
>> people want rectangular aspect ratios, not square.


> Nobody told Victor H.


Nobody knew "Victor H.", so nobody could tell him. As a result,
nobody knows "Victor H."'s square works.

-Wolfgang
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Michael Reichmann reasoning for AA filters? W Digital Photography 29 10-22-2007 09:10 AM
what's wrong with my popen reasoning? Rick Spencer Python 1 02-05-2006 10:56 PM
What is the reasoning behind Windows "installing" programs and the way Mac does? Marc Computer Support 8 05-06-2005 09:00 PM
Reasoning behind nested scope Andy Baker Python 6 08-05-2004 07:17 AM
Reasoning for load-external-dtd Xerces default setting? blu4899 XML 4 10-31-2003 08:53 PM



Advertisments