Reminder Secure

36mp - Why bother ?

diipii is off-line
17 February 2016 15:04

United Kingdom

Quote from RedChecker
I think you'll find that would be too big for the image circle created by 35mm lenses.

To fit within the image circle a square sensor would have to be ~30.6 x 30.6mm (basic GCSE maths will give this answer).

The reason they don't is (I believe) primarily due to efficiency in populating the silicon wafers that sensors are produced on.  Square sensors are much more inefficient and thus will end up much more costly.  It has been mulled over the years though with many people saying they too would buy one but as yet nothing has come of it.

Thanks for the info. I am to maths what Cyril Smith was to hang gliding. Blad makes a square sensor I think and maybe your theory is what makes them an arm and a leg.
It only happens all the time.

Steven Jardine is off-linePlatinum Member
17 February 2016 15:14
United Kingdom
Stoke Mandeville

Quote from diipii
Blad makes a square sensor I think and maybe your theory is what makes them an arm and a leg.

Nobody (for general / consumer photography) makes a square sensor.  Even Hasselblad's ones aren't even the full 6x4.5, and it's unlikely they'll ever be (again, it's likely due to sensor yield quantities on the silicon wafer).

There may be a few specialist applications (eg. military, satellite photography) but they'll be on equipment costing hundreds of £thousands at the very least (I''ve got a sneaky feeling the aerial cameras that I get images from in my job are done using 80x80mm sensor but they also have lenses costing the best part of £1/2 million)
When you are dead, you do not know that you are dead. All of your pain is felt by others. The same thing happens when you are stupid.

raw and the cooked is off-line
26 February 2016 14:13

United Kingdom

Because I can Andy.....

6 Users currently online   Blue=Models Orange=Photographers Red=Agencies Purple=MUA/Stylists Grey=Studios Green=Moderators
Franchella Xdeanamox
colinpierce kaosrox PDCPhotos snapdragon