[HUG ] Re: AW: Re: Biogons and digital backs

Good point Ulrik.

I am glad you paid more attention with arithmatic lessons in school
than I did.
Thanks for figuring out the amount of pixels needed.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ulrik Neupert" <ulrik@xxxxxx> 
To: <hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 11:32 PM
Subject: [HUG ] AW: Re: Biogons and digital backs


May I intervene: The Phase One technician said that their sensor design has
no problems with the SWC (light fall-off) but that the SWC does not deliver
the resolution to fully exploit the sensor resolution. I had no SWC with me
to proof that statement(only may 50 year old P&S).

Whatsoever, a full-frame back with pixels of the quality that the CFV
delivers would for sure find lots of buyers. A full frame back with the
pixel size of the CV would deliver about 40 MP.

Ulrik

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: hasselblad-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:hasselblad-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Q.G. de Bakker
Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. September 2008 23:09
An: hasselblad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [HUG ] Re: Biogons and digital backs

flexbody wrote:


Which brings up the question do we need 50 Mp or even 60 Mp sensors?


Yes.

I think the mere suggestion that we should not want such thingies is
perverted.
When the technology has problems, we should just settle for less? What!?
I don't think so!
====================================To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there. 


=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your 
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) 
and unsubscribe from there.

Other related posts: