I just re-read the following, and my reply doesn't make sense. Read a revision after for some semblance of sanity...
Pal wrote: >>Although, I have some sympathy with those who want faster Pentax equipment >>introductions, I fail to see the sense in wanting an utterly out of date >>digital slr. Firstly, its generally assumed industrywise that the small >>size chips are a dead end. Full frame chip is the way of the future. And I responded: > >Only in that it fits in very well with existing lens configurations, >especially at the wide end. Of course it may well be that >smaller-than-24X36 imaging sensors will become the norm - for whatever >reason - and this is fine. It just means that lens makers will (and are) >rethinking their wide-angle designs to take this into consideration. >17-35s are currently good sellers, no? (Realising now that I misread the point,) I should have written: Only in that, as a compromise, the small chips are at a disadvantage at the wide-angle end. If and when 24X36 sensors become the norm, well and good, and I may move across accordingly. Contax's N1 will be the first 35mm-style SLR, sadly, with the 24X36 chip, but as someone pointed out once before, this is trying to nail a chip into existing SLR form-factors, that fit with existing SLR lenses. It doesn't have to be that way. However, for the sake of argument, I tend to agree - 24X36 is the way of the future. It doesn't preclude me from wanting smaller, faster. HTH Cotty _______________________________________________________ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads http://www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
