Would you buy a Digital M with 3x3 Sensor?

agianelo

agianelo

Established
Local time
11:16 AM
Joined
Mar 29, 2007
Messages
116
I love the square format of my Rollei and wondered if anybody else thought that a 3cm x 3cm sensor in a Leica digital M camera would be feasible and/or desireable?

Angelo
 
Robot

Robot

A compact large sensor camera would be welcome. I would think of such a square format camera as a digital Robot Star.:)
 
The new Olympus Pen E-P1 seems to be the one you're looking for, although its format is more like 4x3 ;-)
 
Personally, it'd be a dream come true for me. But I'm weird, and it would NEVER sell even if you could do it.

An M lens can cover 3x3??
 
Nope. The square format is somewhat clunky and the antithesis of what the 35mm RF is about IMHO. It is flexible, but not dynamic, far better suiting a slower way of working (such as a TLR/tripod mounted 120 SLR). Some kind of rectangular format approximated natural human vision far better and RF shooting is about being intuitive I think. A square M type RF would be awful, but thats just my view!
 
"square M type RF would be awful"

"square M type RF would be awful"

notturtle said:
Nope. The square format is somewhat clunky and the antithesis of what the 35mm RF is about IMHO. It is flexible, but not dynamic, far better suiting a slower way of working (such as a TLR/tripod mounted 120 SLR). Some kind of rectangular format approximated natural human vision far better and RF shooting is about being intuitive I think. A square M type RF would be awful, but thats just my view!
Click to expand...

You're right! I've just got to come back down to earth and enjoy my M8 for what it is.
 
Hmm...

Hmm...

My preferred compositional frame is the square. For years I spent thousands on SX70, printed color from a succession of twin-lens Rollies, and, later, Hassies. There's something appealing about a square image on a sheet of A4 / A3 paper.

Editorial work forced me into the rectangle, but I'm still happiest arranging things in a square. The first digital backs I used had square sensors, and I still have and like these. Most of my personal work gets cropped to a square. I regularly and fearlessly crop the guts out of M8 and DP1 files (Pixels, who needs 'em?)

I don't think I would want a square sensor in a rangefinder body, though. There are so many times when even 'old square eyes' here can't squeeze his world into a such a constricting box, and it spills out either side.

A digital Robot Star, though - that would be something, eh?
 
agianelo said:
I love the square format of my Rollei and wondered if anybody else thought that a 3cm x 3cm sensor in a Leica digital M camera would be feasible and/or desireable?

Angelo
Click to expand...


YES! It is just my Dream! And it will cover 30mm x 30mm! I'm ready to pay, Leica, PLEASE!
 
OK I can follow your reasoning. You must have done the math and figured out that a 3 x 3 sensor would fit in the same circle into which a 2.4 x 3.6 rectangle can fit. Thus any lens that can cover 24 x 36 can cover 30 x 30. It would be practical with digital, even though it would not be practical with film. There's no film size quite right for a 3cm image size (well, 127 maybe). But someone could make a sensor that size.

Well, I guess it's just a question of some company taking a risk to see if it would catch on. Anyone looking for an investment?
 
Personally I really like the square format, and would buy a digi back for the Hasselblad if it was 1. full frame, and 2. affordable. I'm not sure a rangefinder body is the best vehicle for this sensor.

There was considerable discussion of the possibilities of a square sensor dSLR on a couple of the Pentax forums a while ago. No sign of Pentax accepting the challenge yet, but I remain hopeful!

see http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/51087-rumour-k3d-22-mp-square-sensor.html

and http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&message=30983324&changemode=1
 
i hate square format, so no. But then again, this is just a personal preference for shooting, it has no bearence on how I view images, some of my favorite images were made by people using square format cameras.
 
Last edited:
ChrisN said:
Personally I really like the square format, and would buy a digi back for the Hasselblad if it was 1. full frame, and 2. affordable. I'm not sure a rangefinder body is the best vehicle for this sensor.

There was considerable discussion of the possibilities of a square sensor dSLR on a couple of the Pentax forums a while ago. No sign of Pentax accepting the challenge yet, but I remain hopeful!

see http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/51087-rumour-k3d-22-mp-square-sensor.html

and http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&message=30983324&changemode=1
Click to expand...
Mamiya 6 great rangefinder in square format
 
Hi,
If wishes were riches, I'd buy an M8. I've often wondered why no one has made a square format digital camera. Once upon a time I had a square format rangefinder (a Zeiss Super Ikonta B) and loved it.
Cheers,
JustPlainBill
 
I think the absence of square sensors has something to do with the crop factor of the waffer out of which they cut out actual sensors. Apparently, rectangular shapes yield more of these per waffer. Anyway, for me it is not so much a question od square or rectangular, as you can crop afterwards, as the question of : 1) That I do not care for colour sensors, with their Bayer thing reducing the resolution and 2) Currently, most of the computing power of the chips is geared to colour reproduction, instead of generating a decent bit depth and dynamic range in B&W. Once a true B&W chip with a dynamic range of Tri-X and a tonal scale comparable to film will appear, then maybe I will buy one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom