|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 12th, 2007, 02:36 PM | #31 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 613
|
this may not get us any closer, but the brochure for the ex-1 does mention that at 5.8mm, the ex1 lens is equivalent to a 31.4mm lens on a 35mm camera. assuming we are talking about 35mm still cameras (and we'd probably have to be given the number ranges) if they did this based on horizontal field of view, the magnification factor for the ex1 would be 5.4x over 35mm still film. and dividing this into 36mm (width of still film) would give us a sensor width of 6.65mm. but then again who knows how they are equating the FOV between these image plane sizes when 35mm film has an aspect ratio of 3:2 and the ex is 16:9. horizontal fov would be my first guess though.
|
December 12th, 2007, 02:43 PM | #32 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 613
|
other thing is perhaps someone can check out the dof calculator built into the camera and figure out the sensor size based on the dof readout. otherwise, anyone have an ex1 they want to take apart and a micrometer caliper? j/k
|
December 12th, 2007, 06:44 PM | #33 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Heeney colorado
Posts: 103
|
http://www.users.qwest.net/~chemman/fov.JPG
According to a little spread sheet I use to calculate fov, 1/2 inch sensor should be 6.4mmX4.8mm. That will probably be inaccurate for 16X9(6.46mmX3.63mm). Using the 35mm equivalent in the brochure you end up with 6.46mm or 6.47mm (given 35mm is actually 35mm and not 25.273mm for film, if so then it is 4.67mm) Another way would be to read off the focus ring and measure the distance from a known sized object, like a 100 foot long building. A little simple math and wallah sensor H and V I am guessing to get the true active area of the sensor is to have a data sheet for the sensor as it is used in the EX1. Or as stated above, a hammer and a set of calipers. |
August 20th, 2008, 12:02 AM | #34 | |
DV Rebel
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 19
|
Quote:
Sorry to dredge up this old thread but there's some discussion of this topic on my blog: ProLost: Sensor Size Cheat Sheet I'd love to add the EX1 to the cheat sheet if I can get some authoritative measurements. -Stu |
|
August 20th, 2008, 01:09 AM | #35 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 613
|
Stu, I just received my EX1 today, and doing some really quick tests for sensor dimension measurement it seems to come out as 6.56mm wide (which would mean 3.69mm tall). I'll do it again and try to be more accurate tomorrow after I've gotten sleep. This is still just based on the focal length markings on the lens and the image FOV displayed on the LCD screen, didnt get to check for overscan yet so it could be off a bit.
Panavision NZ Film,Video and Photography Frames & Formats, aspect Ratios and dimensions. lists 1/2" 16x9 as 6.97x3.92mm, 35mm equivalent comparison from the manual implies 6.65x3.74mm, and this quick test says 6.56x3.69mm. Who knows if Sony stuck with the same dimension standards panavision was referencing. I'd say if you made a box representing 6.65x3.74mm or 6.56x3.69mm on your chart (id lean toward 6.65x3.74mm since my measurements have more likelihood of error than Sony's) I dont think anyone would really notice the <0.1mm difference. I dont have enough faith in my tapemeasure to guarantee much less than +-0.1mm room for error anyway... BTW just finished your DV Rebel book this past weekend and really enjoyed it even though I am not accustomed to reading materials that are not displayed on an LCD. |
August 20th, 2008, 03:42 AM | #36 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Utrecht, NL | Europe 3rd Rock from the Sun
Posts: 612
|
As far as I know 1/2" means 8.0mm diagonally. For 16x9 that means 6.97mm x 3.92mm.
This "inch fraction" business is notably inexact. I suppose you could calculate from measured VOF and distance, but I'd say even a few hundredths of a millimeter won't really make a difference. For reference you may want to just use "the norm". George/ P.S. I couldn't resist checking Wikipedia |
August 20th, 2008, 06:33 PM | #37 |
DV Rebel
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 19
|
|
August 20th, 2008, 07:49 PM | #38 |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: York, UK.
Posts: 224
|
Thanks Stu.
Thanks for the update, Stu. A neat resource.
Jus. |
| ||||||
|
|