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?
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. See: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0210/02...ensorsizes.asp David |
#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?
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
"Dave Sill" wrote in message ... 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. Yep. Compact digicam sensors really are tiny compared to DSLR sensors. The 1/1.8 type is about 5.32 x 7.18 mm, and the 1/2.5 type is 4.29 x 5.76 mm. You can find the *approximate* size of any sensor if you know the actual focal length of the camera's lens and its 35mm equivalence, both best taken at the long end of the zoom for the sake of better accuracy. Dividing the latter by the former will give you the digicam's lens factor. Dividing the diagonal of a full 35mm frame (about 43.2 mm) by the lens factor should give you the diagonal of the digicam's sensor. However, this is a rough method (because the camera lens's stated focal length may not be precise) and may not give you exactly the figures above. More sensor sizes are given he http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...r_sizes_01.htm Thanks for the informative article. You're very welcome. Neil |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
"Neil Harrington" wrote in message . .. The 1/1.8 type is about 5.32 x 7.18 mm, and the 1/2.5 type is 4.29 x 5.76 mm. You can find the *approximate* size of any sensor if you know the actual focal length of the camera's lens and its 35mm equivalence, both best taken at the long end of the zoom for the sake of better accuracy. Dividing the latter by the former will give you the digicam's lens factor. Dividing the diagonal of a full 35mm frame (about 43.2 mm) by the lens factor should give you the diagonal of the digicam's sensor. However, this is a rough method (because the camera lens's stated focal length may not be precise) and may not give you exactly the figures above. Expanding on this a little: Most (but not all) compact digicams have sensors in the 4 : 3 aspect ratio. This should be convenient for finding the diagonal of the sensor, since it's the 3-4-5 right triangle familiar if you remember your geometry, i.e. if one side is 3 units and the adjacent side is 4, the hypotenuse must be 5. So in the case of the 2/3 type sensor used in my Coolpix 8800 for example, the 6.6 x 8.8 mm sensor has a diagonal of just 11 mm. A full 35mm frame (24 x 36 mm) has a diagonal of about 43.2 mm, so the lens factor is 43.2 / 11 = 3.927. . . , and multiplying this by the lens's marked focal length (at the long end) of 89mm, the 35mm equivalence works out to about 349.5mm. This is close enough to the stated f.l. of 350mm at the long end. This is really just doing the same math suggested in my previous post, only backwards. The aspect ratios are different of course, the full-frame 35 being 3 : 2 while the digicam's is 4 : 3. But this doesn't really matter; it's always the format diagonal that's used in calculations of 35mm equivalence. Neil |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Making sense of the sensor size?
Neil Harrington wrote:
"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 Wouldn't the whole thing make more sense if manufacturers would just agree to always state the sensor size in sq. millimeters!!!? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Making sense of the sensor size? | RPS | Digital Photography | 21 | September 6th 07 09:55 AM |
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 04:37 PM |
sensor size | John | Digital Photography | 11 | January 9th 06 08:03 PM |
Framed and Exposed: Making Sense of Camera Sensors | Frank ess | Digital Photography | 0 | July 7th 04 05:18 AM |