View Full Version : why 2/3 inch chips are'nt that big


John Jay
December 5th, 2003, 03:56 PM
Have the use of a DXC-D35P for a week and looking in the manual (page 98) its says

"imaging area 8.8 x 6.6 mm (2/3 inch)"

now 2/3 inch is approx 17mm in the real world

so how does all this tie up?

I read somewhere that Super 16 was about 35 % bigger than 2/3 chip which is obviously correct so where does the 2/3 inch figure apply ?

it seems a LOT smaller than I was led to believe

Glenn Chan
December 5th, 2003, 04:09 PM
I think they measure it diagonally (like computer monitors). It still doesn't add up... maybe they take into account all three CCDs??? (but that doesn't add up either...)

"imaging area 8.8 x 6.6 mm (2/3 inch)"
gives 11mm diagonal.

6.6mmX3 = 19.8mm

Andre De Clercq
December 5th, 2003, 04:33 PM
See here: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0210/02100402sensorsizes.asp

John Jay
December 5th, 2003, 04:45 PM
thx Dre,

so know we know :)

its crazy that a 2/3 is less than twice 1/3 DYT?