Varying Camera Sensors
May 2, 2014 02:19:25 #
May 2, 2014 05:24:40 #
faster performance, better image quality in a small camera than a point and shoot, cheaper to make, etc. Basically, who knows? We certainly don't need yet another small format system
May 2, 2014 06:25:46 #
lukan
Loc: Chicago, IL
Gene51 wrote:
faster performance, better image quality in a small camera than a point and shoot, cheaper to make, etc. Basically, who knows? We certainly don't need yet another small format system
^^^ I agree! Micro 4/3 or the 1" Sony point and shoot is about as small as I'd ever want to go, and those are mature as they already are. I'd like to see better full-format low noise performance, if a company's going to spend R&D $$$ on something. Just my $0.02! :-D ;)
May 2, 2014 23:34:30 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
busted_shutter wrote:
So with Nikon's introduction of the new CX sensor, might someone tell me why?
This is the Nikon 1 sensor for the J1...J4, V1..V3, etc. It is basically the Sony 1" sensor (13.2 x 8.8mm). Nikon just gave it a more useful name than 1", especially to fit with DX and FX. It was introduced in 2011.
May 3, 2014 06:15:44 #
lukan wrote:
^^^ I agree! Micro 4/3 or the 1" Sony point and shoot is about as small as I'd ever want to go, and those are mature as they already are. I'd like to see better full-format low noise performance, if a company's going to spend R&D $$$ on something. Just my $0.02! :-D ;)
Humm, part of the reason sensors are redesigned is to give better S/N ratio. I see your 2 cents and raise you another 3.
Just consider the histroy of sensors, of CPUs etc... it is a slow evolution as is much of the R&D work. Sometimes the less obvious rout is taken to improve toward an ultimate goal ... vs ... a change that would have given short term benefits.
You speak of P&S, or 24/7 always in your pocket, as tho they do not take photos that are wortwhile and good quality. Eventually our DSLR that are so heavy will be replaced by them. OR The DSLR will grow smaller... oh it already has!! Hay where is my mirror... as Alice said about her camera "it is shrinkingggggg".
OK, shrunk... now the CX is smaller than big and bigger than small. See:
http://www.cameradebate.com/2011/nikon-cx-sensor-size-comparison/
May 3, 2014 06:50:45 #
May 3, 2014 07:58:54 #
What's the problem with cthahn, jockey shorts to tight? Relax you will live longer, you come across like a real snot. A question was asked and so be it. Don't know if that is how you want to appear or not? If not, I recommend you read how you posted your reply to busted shutter. Not very nice at all.
May 3, 2014 09:20:13 #
Brooklyn-Camera wrote:
What's the problem with cthahn, jockey shorts to tight? Relax you will live longer, you come across like a real snot. A question was asked and so be it. Don't know if that is how you want to appear or not? If not, I recommend you read how you posted your reply to busted shutter. Not very nice at all.
B-C, I've learned to ignore cthahn's response's. No matter what the topic is, he/she/it brings absolutely nothing to the conversation.
May 3, 2014 09:24:24 #
busted_shutter wrote:
So with Nikon's introduction of the new CX sensor, might someone tell me why?
I can sum it up in 1 word. Marketing!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.