I'm no mathematician either but afterall 4/3 is just year 8 maths. It's simply what it reads. 4 times one third. Therefore 4/3 is the mathematically correct result even though you could put it simpler by writing "1 1/3".

But either way I'm not quite sure if that is what Wayne meant. He definitly wasn't speaking of aspect ratios (Then 4:3 would have made perfect sense). He was talking of dimensions. There he was saying "... it's better than 2/3". But that statement applies to 3/4 as well as to 4/3.

Well 3/3 is better than 2/3 also. So on that note... where's our damned 1" chips? :D

Bill

I think they killed it together with the electric car...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Wno1KotxT7k

It is an telecentric mountable lens system specially for digital camera sensors. It is meant to be an alternative standard to DSLR. 4/3rds actually refers to ratio. Would be great to have standard options of 4/3rds, or bigger, for still cameras with HD video.

4/3rds should allow an sufficient depth of field.

http://www.four-thirds.org/

Here it shows that size is also double:
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/contact/faq.html#q2
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/sensor-size.html

Wayne, thanks for the explanation & the links.

Now it's more clear to me that it's ratio oriented rather than size.

Bill

Yep, more footage....
 

Even though I'm no longer in the running to get an Xacti HD2, I'm still keeping an eye out for future models, I do love there design and form factor. Anyways, here's a few more sites that have samples you can download:

http://c-kom.homeip.net/review/blog/...hd2_vs_hd.html


http://xacticlips.cocolog-nifty.com/...xhd2_ef28.html

Enjoy!!

John

Holly noise Batman!

hopefully there is an issue with the ISO in those shots...otherwise is going to be bad.

Here is a sample I have. I love this camera even though I am very particular about the quality of cameras I buy.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=N54OQ8AE