> fra: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On 14 Oct 2005 at 10:18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > fra: Sylwester Pietrzyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > Rob Studdert wrote on 14.10.05 3:28: > > > > > > > However just because they are successful producers of VLSIs such as RAM > > > > doesn't mean that they can produce a decent optical sensor. > > > Yes, it doesn't. But it seems that they want to be good in that matter > > > and who > > > knows if they soon release high quality APS-C sized CMOS sensor? So far > > > they > > > claim their new sensors have 50% better sensitivity: > > > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0506/05062703samsung_5mpcmos.asp > > > > Even better: > > http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Samsung-announces-7-megapixel-CMOS-Sens > > or.htm > > Samsung's 7.2M-pixel CIS has a 1/2-inch lens aperture and a 2.25um pixel size. > > http://www.samsung.com/PressCenter/PressRelease/PressRelease.asp?seq=20050912_00 > 00192005 > > IOW noisy but better than the previous noise impaired sensors.
Sure, I didn't say that they could use it directly but they are working on some interesting solutions in the CMOS field. If they have lab results proving that it can be used for larger sensors it would be a very good reason for Pentax to cooperate with them. On the other hand Samsung would probably not develop it any further if they didn't know that they had a costumer. They are trading intellectual property and technology, and that may be a good thing for both. It does not mean that all of their technology goes into the pool, so it does not mean that they will be selling identical cameras. DagT
