If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
Could somebody please explain the jargon used to denote the sensor size?
I mean numbers like 1/1.7. How does this translate to actual size (dimensions or area)? What is the typical size for DSLR? For ZLR? For good P&S? Thanks. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
This designation has clearly stuck (although it should have been thrown out long ago). I suspect the manufacturers are happy for the size to be obscure, since people might find the actual sizes disconcerting. There's nothing to stop manufacturers putting sensor dimensions in "normal units" in their brochures, advert or manuals, and yet they don't. BugBear |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 10:28:15 -0500, RPS wrote:
Could somebody please explain the jargon used to denote the sensor size? I mean numbers like 1/1.7. How does this translate to actual size (dimensions or area)? What is the typical size for DSLR? For ZLR? For good P&S? Thanks. I'm not familiar with ZLR and P&S's, but for DSLRs, unless the manufacturer says the sensor is "full frame", they're usually in the range of the reciprocal of 1.5 to 1.7... meaning they are smaller than the standard 35mm from film days. You'll also hear of "APS" size sensors, a size of film also smaller than 35mm. That should help you some... Jim |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
bugbear wrote:
Gisle Hannemyr wrote: This designation has clearly stuck (although it should have been thrown out long ago). I suspect the manufacturers are happy for the size to be obscure, since people might find the actual sizes disconcerting. There's nothing to stop manufacturers putting sensor dimensions in "normal units" in their brochures, advert or manuals, and yet they don't. BugBear I suspect your suspicions are accurate. Attempting juggle sensor size, zoom range, noise and mp value is something they probably prefer to do behind closed doors where they can better balance value vs hype. Dave Cohen |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
dj_nme writes:
wrote: You'll also hear of "APS" size sensors, a size of film also smaller than 35mm. A good example is the sensor used in the Canon EOS 400D, it is decribed as an APS-C and has a crop factor of 1.6x However, the old APS-C film format was 25.1 x 16.7 mm (crop factor 1.4x, while the sensor in Canon EOS 400D's sensor is 22.2 x 14.8 mm (as you say: crop factor 1.6x), so, while Canon's marketing literature use the term "APS-C" for sensors of this size, it is not really accurate. See, for example: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...&modelid=14256 Then again, the Nikon D40 also has an APS-C sensor, but has a crop factor of 1.5x AFAIK know, Nikon themselves has never described the D40 sensor as "APS-C" (even if it closer to the true APS-C size than Canon's sensor). Instead they Nikon prefer to use the term "DX" (which is new term and not a holdover from the film era) for its 1.5x crop sensors. The size of the D40 sensor, btw. is 23.6 x 15.8 mm. There really is no fixed definition of what size an APS sensor actually is, Yes there is, at least if one believes that the term "APS-C" really should refer to a sensor the same size as the APS-C film frame (ie. the "classic" form factor frame of the old APS film format). See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Photo_System It is just that Canon-droids has confused things by adopting the film-era term "APS-C" for some arbitrary smaller digital sensor format. -- - gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://hannemyr.com/photo/ ] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sigma SD10, Kodak DCS 14n, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
"RPS" wrote in message ... Could somebody please explain the jargon used to denote the sensor size? I mean numbers like 1/1.7. How does this translate to actual size (dimensions or area)? It actually doesn't translate very well at all, and is a goofy system that should have been abandoned long ago. The fraction refers to the old video tube size in inches, which is the way such sensors are traditionally sized but obviously has nothing to do with digital still cameras. What is the typical size for DSLR? Those are not described in that way; only compact cameras use the fractional inch method. Nikon and some other DSLRs mostly use a sensor of either 23.7 x 15.6 mm or 23.6 x 15.8 mm, in either case roughly the same as the full APS-C format and often referred to by that term. Most Canon DSLRs s have a slightly smaller sensor than that, some other makes are smaller still, and a very few are larger. For ZLR? For good P&S? Both of those types use sensors in the fractional inch sizes, though often the "inch" is omitted and "type" is substituted. So for example one manufacturer may call a particular sensor "2/3 inch" and another may call the same sensor "2/3 type." Whatever it's called, the 2/3 type is the largest sensor generally found in any digicam. Its actual size is about 6 x 8 mm. Other common sizes are 1/1.8 and 1/2.5 -- there are several other sizes as well, but those appear to be the ones most often used today. I have read of sensors as small as 1/3.2 but have never owned a digicam with that small a sensor myself. In high-end compact cameras of the type you call ZLRs, such as the Nikon Coolpix 8800, the 2/3 type was common. Most of today's superzoom ZLRs use much smaller sensors than that, however. For a very good but more compact camera such as the Nikon P5000, the 1/1.8 type is used and is undoubtedly the best choice. Smaller sensors than that are more likely to give problems with noise at the higher ISOs, all else being equal. But where extreme compactness is important it's usual to see sensors of 1/2.5 type or smaller. Also, many of the superzooms today use 1/2.5 type sensors. It is adequate for most ordinary use. Camcorders of course have much smaller sensors than these. Neil |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message news Whatever it's called, the 2/3 type is the largest sensor generally found in any digicam. Its actual size is about 6 x 8 mm. Correction, that should be about 6.6 x 8.8 mm. Neil |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
Neil Harrington wrote:
Those are not described in that way; only compact cameras use the fractional inch method. Nikon and some other DSLRs mostly use a sensor of either 23.7 x 15.6 mm or 23.6 x 15.8 mm, in either case roughly the same as the full APS-C format and often referred to by that term. ... Whatever it's called, the 2/3 type is the largest sensor generally found in any digicam. Its actual size is about [6.6] x [8.8] mm. Other common sizes are 1/1.8 and 1/2.5 -- there are several other sizes as well, but those appear to be the ones most often used today. What are the actual physical dimensions of 1/1.8 and 1/2.5 sensors? Do DSLR sensors really have more than six times the area of a 2/3 sensor? Wow. Thanks for the informative article. -- Dave Sill |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
sensor size? | SJ[_2_] | Digital Photography | 10 | July 4th 07 04:01 PM |
question about relationship between sensor size and print size. | ftran999 | Digital Photography | 8 | February 22nd 07 03:37 PM |
sensor size | John | Digital Photography | 11 | January 9th 06 07:03 PM |
Framed and Exposed: Making Sense of Camera Sensors | Frank ess | Digital Photography | 0 | July 7th 04 05:18 AM |