On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Anthony Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > .... I pointed out that Olympus has a >> > different platform that was intended to be the size it is, in which > context >> > it is indeed "full frame", albeit not 35mm "full frame". >> >> In fact that was me, and I was using the common usage of the term, >> which refers to 36x24mm sensors on a 35mm-based platform. Oly s stuck >> with their small sensor. >> > > > Adam, you don't learn. Oly is not "stuck" with their small sensor. They > chose it and are committed to it. It's not a dick-swinging contest you > know. > > Regards, Anthony >
Oly made a bet with 4/3rds that the cost savings of the smaller sensor and the smaller cameras theoretically permitted by the shorter register and smaller sensor would outweigh the IQ advantages of a larger sensor and the larger size required by the larger 35mm mounts with their longer registers. Unfortunately they bet wrong and they ended up at a cost disadvantage over DX format sensors due to economies of scale and with no actual size advantage (although moving to m43 will make the size advantage an actuality) while most of the rest of the market moves to sensors with performance that 4/3rds simply can't match. So Oly IS stuck with a small format sensor when the market is moving seriously towards larger sensors. m43 will be a different case, in that market the primary competition will be the small sensor 'bridge' P&S's, not DSLR's and m43 will have serious IQ advantages, particularly at high ISO's. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- 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.
