Originally posted by thibs hexagonal would be a good deal of compromise between sensor area and manufacturing issue.
Or not. Hexagon only saves 13.4% area. From sqrt(3/4).
The savings of manufacturing would be much less due to simpler cut, packaging and relaxed yield requirements in the corners for the square, maybe 0 to 5%.
A hexagonal sensor will never be produced. ... IMHO
P.S.
What I assume in all my future technology cost estimates is a rectangular sensor of
37.7 mm x (34.6 - 36.0) mm
exactly. Because it supports 16:9 landscape to 4:3 or 3:2 portrait within the 35mm image circle. It does also have 16% less surface than a hexagon containing the 35 mm image circle would have...
A rotating sensor is feasible but not such a good idea either. Because the square format of 30.6 mm^2 is an important option (yielding a high megapixel number too) missed by a rotating sensor, not to mention the complication of mechanical rotation.