kwalsh wrote:
No, they are a single chip still. However, during manufacture everything is done with photolithography and the optical systems for photolithography can't handle such a large area. So for every step they have to expose multiple carefully aligned sub-arrays to produce such a large sensor. That's probably what you are thinking of.
Actually FF sensors require a similar technique. APS-H is the largest sensor size that can be produced with single photolithographic exposures. Once you get past that point manufacturing cost soars. (Well, it is always higher for larger area, but the multiple photolithographic process makes it even more expensive than you'd expect based on area alone). In a white paper Canon claimed manufacturing cost for a FF sensor was as high as 20 times that of an APS-C sensor!
What I'd like to see is an OM2n with a FF sensor with a center 4/3rds section that is at a higher density for m4/3 & 4/3 that gets binned when shooting FF.
A retina display that can flip around to hide it, like Epson RD1.
Sony's 2.4MP EVF.
I'm betting it won't be OM mount any more than the PENs not having the old PEN mount. I would imagine that OM will just be the branding for Olympus' new m4/3 cameras that are in a DSLR form, like Panny's G and GH cameras.
douglasf13 wrote:
I'm betting it won't be OM mount any more than the PENs not having the old PEN mount. I would imagine that OM will just be the branding for Olympus' new m4/3 cameras that are in a DSLR form, like Panny's G and GH cameras.
is what it says, so not FF. While it might be a nice camera, it will be a far cry from being a digital OM - all the old OM lenses will work like lenses twice as long, with more depth of field. They will also probably only work with an adapter - how frustrating!
Why bother making it 'like' an OM in style, but nothing like it in function. Cheeeeesy.
Apparently they try to get back to those glorious roots.
But there has been someone posting on this forum that noone of the old OM crew is still employed by Olympus. So, how shall they manage to build an OM like camera again? Using the blueprints only? I doubt that'll work out.
We'll see.
If Canon releases a powerful 5D III soon, and Nikon the matching counterpart, who will care about a crippled sensor OM camera if you can adapt your OM glass to both Nikon and Canon bodies?!?
edwardkaraa wrote:
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't this the way MFDB sensors are produced?
Yes exactly like that. Phase One backs are actually stitched smaller sensors (which sometimes can make a bit of problems). It was recently mentioned on pebbleplace.com. Otherwise I think Canon 1D had stitched sensor too. But not sure, I just saw that one half of sensor had banding and other one did not (or much less). Might be just controller.
If one thinks about it, its not that hard. 4/3s are 17x13mm .. some (like in GH2) are bigger, so if you stitch two of those together you have most likely something around 36x28 sensor (that would allow even different crop ratios). And having 36 mpix FF.. well, even when performace of GH2 isnt somehow ground breaking, it would be still multi-aspect 36 mpix FF. Damn, that would be good..
(GH2 has 18 mpix sensor cropped to 16 mpix.. thats why I wrote 36 mpix)
LightShow wrote:
What I'd like to see is an OM2n with a FF sensor with a center 4/3rds section that is at a higher density for m4/3 & 4/3 that gets binned when shooting FF.
A retina display that can flip around to hide it, like Epson RD1.
Sony's 2.4MP EVF.
[If Canon releases a powerful 5D III soon, and Nikon the matching counterpart, who will care about a crippled sensor OM camera if you can adapt your OM glass to both Nikon and Canon bodies?!?
there's always the "I'd buy anything as long as it looks cool" crowd
it has huge buying power
Mescalamba wrote:
Yes exactly like that. Phase One backs are actually stitched smaller sensors (which sometimes can make a bit of problems). It was recently mentioned on pebbleplace.com. Otherwise I think Canon 1D had stitched sensor too. But not sure, I just saw that one half of sensor had banding and other one did not (or much less). Might be just controller.
If one thinks about it, its not that hard. 4/3s are 17x13mm .. some (like in GH2) are bigger, so if you stitch two of those together you have most likely something around 36x28 sensor (that would allow even different crop ratios). And having 36 mpix FF.. well, even when performace of GH2 isnt somehow ground breaking, it would be still multi-aspect 36 mpix FF. Damn, that would be good..
(GH2 has 18 mpix sensor cropped to 16 mpix.. thats why I wrote 36 mpix)...Show more →
JonasY wrote:
Wait! We already have a few really nice FF DSLR's. What we don't have is a small DSLR. A OM40 sized DSLR could be a winner even with a crippled 4/3 sensor.
Oly tried that with the E-4x0 bodies. They didn't sell.
