Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:54 PM, Toralf Lund wrote:
Digital cameras are not really "medium format" cameras, however,
The term "medium format" is quite arbitrary in any case, isn't it? I
believe the distinction between medium and small format has been kept
at least to a certain degree in terms of market segment as well as
the "negative" format, though - i.e. digital cameras from traditional
medium format vendors have larger sensors than the ones that
descended from 35mm bodies, and are sold to some of the same people.
I don't know that "medium format" as a type designation is arbitrary
at all. It denotes cameras that used 120/220 sized roll film, with a
range of capture format sizings from 6x4.5 to 6x17 cm.
I said that the *term* is arbitrary. As in why is it exactly that format
range you mention that's defined as "medium"?
One might easily refer to a (possibly different) size or range of sizes
for digital cameras as "Medium Format", too, as this isn't exactly a
trademarked name, or an ISO standard (I believe) or anything.
Talking about 35mm digital cameras is obviously a lot more problematic,
since 35mm is a specific size (unless the sensor actually is 35mm in one
dimension.)
- Toralf
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
