Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-11-2015, 03:40 AM   #16
Veteran Member
RuiC's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lisboa - The Grocery
Posts: 612
Is there any square sensor available for Ricoh to pick up and use ???

02-11-2015, 04:16 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,253
I suggested a square sensor a while back HERE and it didn't get much traction.

The main problem is that it would have to be mirrorless to accommodate the required registration distance for K-mount.

Last edited by Sandy Hancock; 02-11-2015 at 04:26 AM.
02-11-2015, 05:14 AM   #18
Pentaxian
konraDarnok's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Albums
Posts: 960
I highly doubt it, but dreaming stuff up, if the new camera had an LCD overlay in the viewfinder, it could crop to any format you cared for.

Surely the new DA mode will allow for square crops that maximize the DA image circle (if no crop at all for later post processing). It would be nice if the viewfinder reflected this crop. I'd be happy to stick with DA glass and shoot squares with more area than APS-C afforded.
02-11-2015, 07:50 AM   #19
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
I highly doubt it, but dreaming stuff up, if the new camera had an LCD overlay in the viewfinder, it could crop to any format you cared for.

Surely the new DA mode will allow for square crops that maximize the DA image circle (if no crop at all for later post processing). It would be nice if the viewfinder reflected this crop. I'd be happy to stick with DA glass and shoot squares with more area than APS-C afforded.
APS-c sensors are not square.

02-11-2015, 09:20 AM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 3,018
A square sensor is unlikely in the Ricoh DSLR. There's not much demand for it and not many sensors are manufactured in square format. There are also a few technical obstacles:
  1. A square 36x36mm sensor would suffer from heavy vignetting with many lenses at the new expanded corners. Other optical imperfections would become more noticeable.
  2. The shutter has to cover 50% more distance than for a standard rectangular full frame. It's solvable but increases costs because it's non-standard. This could also slow down burst mode and flash sync speed.
  3. A larger mirror, prism, and viewfinder would be needed.
02-11-2015, 10:52 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Shanti's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 896
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by DeadJohn Quote
A square sensor is unlikely in the Ricoh DSLR. There's not much demand for it and not many sensors are manufactured in square format. There are also a few technical obstacles:
  1. A square 36x36mm sensor would suffer from heavy vignetting with many lenses at the new expanded corners. Other optical imperfections would become more noticeable.
  2. The shutter has to cover 50% more distance than for a standard rectangular full frame. It's solvable but increases costs because it's non-standard. This could also slow down burst mode and flash sync speed.
  3. A larger mirror, prism, and viewfinder would be needed.
I know John, but when the new lenses cover -'more' than a 24X36mm size ,then I wonder what they are up to? The GH4 has a larger than 4/3 sensor, but only uses 4/3 of it,except for some special formats(16:9),if I remember right
02-12-2015, 06:24 AM   #22
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Perth Western Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 130
Here is a wild suggestion. The sensor will be octagonal (closest you can reasonably get to a round sensor). Will enable post shoot selection of portrait or landscape mode. Some support for this idea is the apparent almost octagonal shape of the viewfinder in the 3D mockup image.
bb2
02-12-2015, 08:29 AM   #23
Veteran Member
rburgoss's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 972
Sensor "real estate" is very expensive. It makes no sense on having square sensors, knowing that 15 to 25% of the image will always be tossed, unless its destination is always INSTAGRAM. Of course there are some MF bodies and adaptors with square sensors, but those play in another league we are not even thinking to play with, like Hasselblad with $50,000 cameras or backs.

02-12-2015, 10:01 AM   #24
Loyal Site Supporter
narual's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana
Posts: 1,937
QuoteOriginally posted by skierd Quote
He mostly used large format cameras, 4x5 and 8x10's. Mostly for the movements, plus the size of the film.
A square format dslr wouldn't interest me unless the sensor was a full 6cmx6cm...
I was just at an exhibit of his stuff recently, and they said later in his life he preferred to use a Hasselblad 6x6. Of course that's not all he used (in 1957, he was using an 8x10, a 7x17 panorama camera, a 4x5,a a 6x6, a 35mm, and 2 polaroids), but there was some quote about him liking it for flexibility. May have been the guy talking out of his butt, though, since I can't find the quote on google now.

QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
I know John, but when the new lenses cover -'more' than a 24X36mm size ,then I wonder what they are up to?
They're probably "up to" giving decent edge/corner performance, like we've been getting using film lenses on an APS-C sensor. I suspect if you held most of the film lenses at registration distance from a wall or something and shine a light in them, they'll light up the wall in a larger than 24x36 size, especially if they were lenses that were praised for their performance on film.

Might also assist in ensuring consistently high quality when using sensor shift.

QuoteOriginally posted by rburgoss Quote
It makes no sense on having square sensors, knowing that 15 to 25% of the image will always be tossed, unless its destination is always INSTAGRAM.
Why would the image be tossed? Because square paper isn't the most common? You lose a chunk of the image any time you print on 'standard' paper sizes larger than 4x6 anyway. By that rationale, camera sensors should be 4:5 instead of 2:3, since that is would cause the least cropping among common paper sizes. And there are plenty of other places besides instagram to display photos electronically, square or otherwise. Here, for example.
02-12-2015, 10:29 AM   #25
Veteran Member
rburgoss's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 972
QuoteOriginally posted by narual Quote
Why would the image be tossed? Because square paper isn't the most common? You lose a chunk of the image any time you print on 'standard' paper sizes larger than 4x6 anyway. By that rationale, camera sensors should be 4:5 instead of 2:3, since that is would cause the least cropping among common paper sizes. And there are plenty of other places besides instagram to display photos electronically, square or otherwise. Here, for example.

Of course. That is why the actual real "commercial" formats were 4x5 inches, then 5x7, 8x10 (view cameras). In medium format, the ideal was 645 which gave the "less" cropping or "biggest usable image" for commercial purposes.

The 24 x 36 mm frame we got by accident, from "adapting" 35 mm MOVIE film to a "double frame horizontal" format for still pictures. Remember the so called "half frame" format from Olympus Pen cameras.

It was all about sucking every drop of juice from the available media (film - negative size - frames per roll) and about image quality for commercial or home printing.

With digital, we may have a bit of everything from the past, but not as limited. Frames per roll now translate to frames per memory card, then on frames per storage media (cloud, hd, blu-ray, dvd, cd, etc...) Of course, image quality plays a big roll here, but the limitation comes from the image sensor size. That is where the big cost happens. If it was only a matter of using a larger sensor (to match film frame) on older gear, how come this becomes a big issue and took Pentax 15 years to develop (at a reasonable cost). Canikons have it from 7-8 yrs ago, but they have the name and the customer loyalty (and market share) that allows them to gamble with those products.

If sensor size is not the big limitation, then why even Hasselblad or Mamiya has not produced a full size 6x6 (cms) sensor? Or even a square one, any size?. Short answer: COST!
02-12-2015, 11:36 AM   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,930
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
... I'd pay top price for square screens as well. I
Get yourself, say, a Hasselblad V series camera (has a square frame) and one of their CFV-XX digital backs which support square format shooting but at a cropped factor. Squares and circles are special cases of generic rectangles and ellipses.
02-12-2015, 12:09 PM   #27
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
Get yourself, say, a Hasselblad V series camera (has a square frame) and one of their CFV-XX digital backs which support square format shooting but at a cropped factor. Squares and circles are special cases of generic rectangles and ellipses.
Clavius googles...Ok, maybe not top price then...
02-12-2015, 12:29 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,930
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Clavius googles...Ok, maybe not top price then...
That's been my grief for years. I want a digital back for my 500C/M but I really don't want to pay that much for such limited "digital" functionality when, for less or the same, you can get a MFD camera with way more modern features. I really feel digital backs, money-wise, should be a stepping stone into a full-blown MFD cameras instead of costing the same. But apparently, that's just a weird consumer view according to Hasselblad.
02-12-2015, 12:40 PM   #29
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,098
I would love a square sensor camera but do not think there will ever be one made that I could afford, it would be a low volume model I predict. I love the square format, most of my Hasselblad images are printed uncropped and I often have my WGIII set up to shoot in the square aspect ration. Sometimes I use it as a proof for composition for the Hasselblad when walking about and then come back later with the 500 C/M.

Tuco: I had thought about looking for a good deal on a CFV16 but decided that I mostly shoot black and white and use the darkroom and for colour I can shoot Portra and I own a Nikon CS8000 so it just is not worth it for me. My wife's SWC would not be so wide on digital. We are planning a 5 week trip to Scotland for photography and still have not decided if I am taking any colour 120 with me.
02-12-2015, 12:56 PM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 6,930
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
...
Tuco: ...My wife's SWC would not be so wide on digital.
Yeah, that's another one of those limiting "digital" features. No really wide angle shooting. It improves slightly with their larger backs but still. And with these digital backs on old film cameras, you pretty much can't take a picture of anything that's moving so it becomes limited to portraitures, still life and landscapes.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
150-450mm f4.5-5.6ed dc, ff, pentax news, pentax rumors, round lens square, sensor, square, square sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
why are lenses round and not square Luuk General Photography 23 08-16-2014 08:21 AM
Why not a square sensor? Tony Belding Pentax Full Frame 32 05-10-2013 06:59 AM
Wacky Theory: Square-sensor Pentax FF? deadwolfbones Photographic Industry and Professionals 43 03-25-2012 04:14 PM
Rumour: K3D, 22 Mp, square sensor cateto Pentax News and Rumors 134 02-27-2009 11:45 AM
Pentax square format sensor -- or is it Nikon? filmamigo Pentax News and Rumors 5 02-17-2009 07:39 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:45 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top