On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 2:08 AM, Anthony Farr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> .... even though "Full Frame" is generally used to mean one thing by >> the average user, it is technically not a correct use of the term. >> > > Exactly. Words and phrases can change their definition by shifts in common > usage but I don't have to agree with the change. And if enough people > disagree and refuse to fall in line then the change won't stick. In this > case it's lazy publicists who are taking a generic term and applying it in a > specific and exclusive way to cameras with a 35mm heritage. > > Medium format digital cameras are mostly based on 6cm x 4.5cm cameras, but > all have reduced size sensors. The biggest is the Leaf AFi-II with the > 56Mpixel back at 56mmx 36mm, but 48mm x 36mm seems to be a more common > sensor size in medium format. What if a 56mm x 42mm or larger sensor were > to appear? According to the JCO line of reasoning, "full frame" is a term > that exclusively refers to 36mm x 24mm, so we won't be free to call it a > "full frame" sensor. Just try to stop me! > > Regards, Anthony >
I think hell just froze over, but I have to agree with JCO here. Full Frame is technically just full frame for the basic format (As the new PhaseOne P65+ is 645 full frame) but in common usage it refers specifically to 24x36mm sensors on a 35mm platform. Common usage has already stuck as of several years ago and we'll all just need to deal with it. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
