The 4/3 Sensor in Oly/Pannys is NOT barely bigger than Sony's so-called 1" Sensor in RX-10xx.
Sep 18, 2017 19:10:58 #
It is, in fact, half the size (in area) of 4/3 sensor. And, the Sony is a bridge camera, while the 4/3 cameras a mostly ILC cameras.
But then, there's no accounting for TROLLS!
But then, there's no accounting for TROLLS!
Sep 18, 2017 21:58:59 #
jcboy3 wrote:
It is, in fact, half the size (in area) of 4/3 sensor. And, the Sony is a bridge camera, while the 4/3 cameras a mostly ILC cameras.
But then, there's no accounting for TROLLS!
But then, there's no accounting for TROLLS!
editted 10:15pm EDT
This is one of those cases when a lot depends on what you look at and what your standard consists of.
Mmcveed's figures show that that
MFT sensor has area of 373.68 sqmm and a diagonal of 19.33
1" sensor has an area of 209.35 sqmm and a diagonal of 14.47
By the nature of how squares work, yes ratio of areas is 178, but ratio of diagonals is only 1.33
In other words, 1" sensor is closer to MFT than APS-C is to FF {ration of FF area to APS-C area is 2.25}
Sep 19, 2017 00:57:08 #
rehess wrote:
editted 10:15pm EDT br br br This is one of thos... (show quote)
I made an embarrassing error in how I set up the spreadsheet. It turns out that the MFT sensor actually has a diagonal of 27.7 and the 1" sensor actually has a diagonal of 20.6 - enormously incorrect numbers - but the ratio a these diagonals is now 1.34 ... very little change there so the take-away lesson remains unchanged.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.