|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 8th, 2008, 03:11 AM
|
#1 |
|
Tourist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 3
|
Small Sensors?
Hello all,
This is my first post here, and it's mainly for a bit of inside info. I'm confused as to why the sensors in video camera's are so small, as compared to DLSR's? I understand that developing and manufacturing a sensor is a complicated process, however, DSLR producers have been able to implement APS-C sized sensors (23.5mm x 15.7mm or other slight variations) into still cameras for very little cost. The Canon 5D which uses a 'Full Frame' sensor (36mm x 24mm) is now selling for just over $2 000 US. In the video world, why are large sensors so costly? Is the video sensor design so incredibly different to a still camera design? Any personal insight or links/documents/articles which cover this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks guys, Nathan :) |
|
|
|
April 8th, 2008, 06:45 AM
|
#2 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 256
|
I think it is not just the cost of the sensor that keeps them small in video cameras, but the cost and size of the lens that would need to go with it. For example, I have a Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 lens that is huge compared to the lens on my Canon HX-A1 video camera. It cost about $1,800 and only has a zoom ratio of about 2.9x. My video camera lens has a zoom ratio of 20x! To produce a video lens to cover a larger sensor with the speed and zoom range of that would be out of the question for me to afford or carry around.
|
|
|
|
|
April 14th, 2008, 03:37 AM
|
#3 |
|
Tourist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 3
|
Anyone else have some info?
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
