On 13/09/06, AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > sensor. None of them have a Kodak sensor. There are surprises
> > in there. I hope they make the right choice; the one I have
> > in mind because that sensor will produce absolutely stunning
> > natural colours.
>
> Ok, the "stunning natural colours" would be a characteristic of
> a Kodak or Dalsa sensor, but it seems apparant that the Kodak
> connection is DEAD DEAD DEAD!
Yes and that's not Olympus' fault, believe me.
So, who else has "stunning
> natural colours"? Fuji. Hmmm. That'd be nice. I could live
> with that. Give me another three-stops of dynamic range too? :)
Has someone turned off the air-conditioning? It's getting awfully hot
here....
But I'm going to speculate for a second and get my own almonds
> in a vice and say that it could be a Canon CMOS sensor. Why do
> I say that? I'm making a guess that there was a "technology
> trade agreement" with the dust-shaker.
I'm having tears of hysteria now....can't stop laughing..... :D
It seems unlikely,
> though, as Canon generally "goes it alone" with everything
> they've done in the photographic world. A Canon CMOS sensor
> would take care of any arguments against 4/3 as being "noisy".
That is true at this point in time. The operative term here is "at this
point in time."
But, in the end, it wouldn't suprise me if they bought some
> oddball sensor from "Wang's House of Overruns and Sweepers".
>
> AG
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
--
Khen Lim
XIOS Network Solutions
IBM Business Partner
+60 +16 528 6010 / 016 528 6010
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|