Maybe because a 43x43 sensor has a 60mm diagonal/image circle? Kidding
aside a 30.4mm square would meet your specs for a square format for 35mm
lenses. 43mm would be interesting if possible but 30.4 doesn't sound so
exciting. The area is only about 7% larger than a 35mm frame.
However, a big interline sensor providing a real-time view sans mirror
and pentaprism might make a more affordable MF body and signficantly
rejuvenate the value of a lot of medium format glass.
Chuck Norcutt
tOM Trottier wrote:
> 1. When will the digi-crew realise that 35mm lenses are made to cover a 43mm
> circle and provide
> a camera with a 43x43 sensor? This sensor would have 114% more surface area
> and approach
> the quality possible with a 645 camera but be able to use 35mm system lenses.
>
> 2. If you have an electronic viewfinder, the flange to sensor distance can be
> arbitrarily small. Why
> hasn't someone made a body with a large sensor and a set of interchangeable
> flanges which can
> accommodate almost any 35mm system lens, from Leica/Contax to ... If smart
> enough, the
> flanges could even support auto exposure and auto focus lenses from various
> makers.
>
> tOM
>
> -- Quidquid latine dictum sit altum viditur --
> ,__@ tOM Trottier
> _-\_<, 758 Albert St., Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7V8
> (*)/'(*) N45.41235 W75.71345 +1 613 860-6633
> <a href="http://Abacurial.com";>Abacurial Information Architecture</a>
> Q, Q,
> </ </ This world, after all our science and sciences, is
> still
> (`-/---/-') a miracle; wonderful, inscrutable, magical and more,
> ~~@~~~~@~~~~~~ to whosoever will think of it. --Thomas Carlyle
>
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|