<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Sony CCD SuperHAD II sensor</title> <atom:link href="http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/</link> <description>Photography news, before it happens</description> <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 04:36:20 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <item><title>By: Anonymous</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3119</link> <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 17:15:16 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3119</guid> <description>O.k., I withdraw my assertion that it&#039;s a P&amp;S sensor.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>O.k., I withdraw my assertion that it&#8217;s a P&amp;S sensor.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: zeeGerman</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3112</link> <dc:creator>zeeGerman</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:28:41 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3112</guid> <description>I agree. This is a picture of the D40ssensor http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/images/d40-sensor.jpgIt is at least a APS-C sized sensor, and to me it could just as well be a 35mm format sensor.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree. This is a picture of the D40s</p><p>sensor <a
href="http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/images/d40-sensor.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/images/d40-sensor.jpg</a></p><p>It is at least a APS-C sized sensor, and to me it could just as well be a 35mm format sensor.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: T3</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3104</link> <dc:creator>T3</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 02:13:08 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3104</guid> <description>I don´t know if it is or not a 35mm sensor, but P&amp;S is not, it is so bigger than P&amp;S camera sensor.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don´t know if it is or not a 35mm sensor, but P&amp;S is not, it is so bigger than P&amp;S camera sensor.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Anonymous</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3103</link> <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 01:42:58 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3103</guid> <description>Yes, I have, thank you very much.The camera you linked to has roughly 800 by 500 pixels. Now count the number of pins, and note their size relative to the sensor. Try to compare either of those factors to a sensor that purportedly has 35 Megapixels; 87 times that number of pixels.The photo is not of a 35 MP sensor.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I have, thank you very much.</p><p>The camera you linked to has roughly 800 by 500 pixels. Now count the number of pins, and note their size relative to the sensor. Try to compare either of those factors to a sensor that purportedly has 35 Megapixels; 87 times that number of pixels.</p><p>The photo is not of a 35 MP sensor.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: T3</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3100</link> <dc:creator>T3</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:27:18 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3100</guid> <description>Anonymous wrote:
&quot;That picture is almost certainly not of a full-frame sensor, nor even a 1.5-ish crop sensor. The pins vs. the purported size are totally out of scale. The photo is almost certainly of a small point-and-shoot sensor.&quot;Have you seen a P&amp;S CCD camera sensor?
http://www.uocctv.com.tw/data/goods/12295994001wct20.jpg</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anonymous wrote:<br
/> &#8220;That picture is almost certainly not of a full-frame sensor, nor even a 1.5-ish crop sensor. The pins vs. the purported size are totally out of scale. The photo is almost certainly of a small point-and-shoot sensor.&#8221;</p><p>Have you seen a P&amp;S CCD camera sensor?<br
/> <a
href="http://www.uocctv.com.tw/data/goods/12295994001wct20.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.uocctv.com.tw/data/goods/12295994001wct20.jpg</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Anonymous</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3098</link> <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:07:13 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3098</guid> <description>That picture is almost certainly not of a full-frame sensor, nor even a 1.5-ish crop sensor. The pins vs. the purported size are totally out of scale. The photo is almost certainly of a small point-and-shoot sensor.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That picture is almost certainly not of a full-frame sensor, nor even a 1.5-ish crop sensor. The pins vs. the purported size are totally out of scale. The photo is almost certainly of a small point-and-shoot sensor.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Anonymous</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3083</link> <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:04:13 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3083</guid> <description>T is used to signify the actual light transmission through the aperture, not the aperture size. T in this case is most probably used because that is what is most important when it comes to sensor design - the actual transmission of light through to the individual pixel sensor, rather than the size of the aperture.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>T is used to signify the actual light transmission through the aperture, not the aperture size. T in this case is most probably used because that is what is most important when it comes to sensor design &#8211; the actual transmission of light through to the individual pixel sensor, rather than the size of the aperture.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: NikoDoby</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3080</link> <dc:creator>NikoDoby</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 07:52:08 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3080</guid> <description>So a 34mp DSLR with HD video?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So a 34mp DSLR with HD video?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: WoutK89</title><link>http://photorumors.com/2009/09/13/sony-ccd-superhad-ii-sensor/comment-page-1/#comment-3079</link> <dc:creator>WoutK89</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 06:10:47 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://photorumors.com/?p=1643#comment-3079</guid> <description>T2.7, thats used for video purposes right, kind of like the F-number for aperture on photography lenses</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>T2.7, thats used for video purposes right, kind of like the F-number for aperture on photography lenses</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using memcached
Page Caching using memcached
Object Caching 361/381 objects using memcached

Served from: photorumors.com @ 2012-02-08 23:42:43 -->
