C-Mount Lenses for mirror-less micro 4/3 and

APS-C
C-mount lenses were used on many movie film cameras and are still commonly used on video, security,

and industrial digital cameras. Designed for a short flange distance and to cover a small image format,

C-mount lenses often are physically tiny, let lots of light in, and can be found at very attractive prices.

Are C-mount lenses a viable alternative for use on relatively large-sensor compact mirror-less camera

bodies using Olympus/Panasonic micro 4/3 , Samsung NX , and Sony NEX E-mount ? There has

been quite a run on C-mount lenses, especially fast ones around 25mm focal length, because many

people expect them to be the micro 4/3 equivalent of a "fast fifty" normal lens -- but there are issues.

The goal of this Instructable is to help you know what to expect from C-mount lenses before you buy

them....

The photo is an uncropped self-portrait (reflection in a mirror) of my Sony NEX-5 with a 12mm f/1.4 C-

mount lens attached.

Update: the Pentax Q was announced on June 22, 2011 -- see the new "appendix" in step 6.

You'll need an adapter

C-mount lenses have a 1-inch-diameter thread with 32 threads per inch. They are designed to have a

distance of 0.69 inches (17.5mm) between the mounting flange and the film/sensor surface. There also

is an issue with the "near thread" diameter of the lens barrel. Lenses vary, but 37.2mm of clear diameter

at the flange surface seems to be a common design goal and narrower clear spaces might prevent

some lenses from being fully screwed-in. Of course, adapted lenses will generally be manual focus

and either completely manual or aperture-priority exposure with stop-down metering.

Of the cameras discussed here, the Sony NEX E-mount has the shortest flange distance at just 18mm

(very different from the 44.5mm of Sony's A-mount DSLRs). However, that means the C-mount flange

must sit 0.5mm recessed within the throat of the E-mount bayonet to allow the full focus range.

Fortunately, the bayonet is more than wide enough, and adapters allowing infinity focus can be had for

under $20 on eBay. The photo shows the Sony NEX 18-55mm kit lens and a 12mm C-mount lens in a

C-NEX adapter... tiny, isn't it?

The micro 4/3 standard mount, used by both Olympus and Panasonic, has a longer 20mm flange

distance and a nearly 8mm narrower throat than the Sony mount, so things are a bit more cramped near

the back of a mounted lens. However, infinity-focus C-M4/3 adapters are more common and cost even

less than C-NEX adapters.

The Samsung NX mount flange distance is 25.5mm, so the C-mount thread would need to be deep

inside the bayonet. The bayonet is theoretically wide enough, but many C-mount lenses have controls

(i.e., aperture or focus) very near the mounting thread, and the deep recessing could make these

controls inoperable. Adapters are not easy to find.

Lens Variants That Are Problematic To Adapt

CS mount lenses use the same thread as C-mount lenses, but expect flange distance of around

12.5mm. ( D mount also is similar, but with a narrower throat and 12.3mm flange distance )Thus, CS

and D mount lenses would require a deeply recessed adapter to be able to focus to infinity... and I've

never seen such an adapter. Most modern small-sensor cameras seem to be CS mount, which can use

C-mount lenses using a 5mm extension tube, so be aware that many newer lenses are CS mount

even if some other lenses being sold for the same camera are C mount; you have to read the fine print.

You can use CS mount lenses on a C-mount body, but only for macro shots. Also, make sure there isn't

a 5mm CS adapter tube on the back of a C-mount lens when you're using it.....

The other issue that comes up frequently is auto-iris. Basically, such lenses have a little cable that

carries either a DC or Video signal to automatically control the aperture. There usually isn't a manual

aperture control on such a lens. The DC interface is not supported by any of the larger-sensor bodies

we're talking about in this Instructable. In theory, the lenses controlled by a video signal might be able to

be driven by a conventional video output from one of these cameras, but that's not something I have

tried nor would I recommend risking it. Motorized focus or motorized zoom lenses have similar issues in

needing external power. It is probably best to avoid lenses that have a cable of any kind attached....
After physical mounting, the most obvious issue in using C-mount lenses on these cameras is that the

cameras have much larger sensors than the lenses were designed for.

Micro 4/3 cameras use a 17.3 by 13mm sensor. That's an over 21mm diagonal, whereas the "Super

16mm" movie format many of the older C-mount lenses were designed for only has a 14.5mm

diagonal. Newer C-mount lenses are commonly designed for a "1/2 inch" sensor that has an 8mm

diagonal. Corners will usually be dark and image quality is often relatively poor outside the designed

diameter even if the corners aren't dark. Swirly broken are generally caused by vignetting within the

lens, so don't be surprised if you see that too.

Sony NEX cameras use a 23.4 by 15.6mm sensor -- pretty much the same size found in any other APS-

C camera, with a diagonal around 28mm. As a result, most C-mount lenses will vignette horribly,

producing a circular image in the middle of the sensor. Note that the image is not a fisheye view, it's just

vignetted to a circle.

Ok, the image captured might only be a circle, but we can still crop that to a rectangular image. The

question is how many pixels are left? The image circle for the 12 mm Pentax lens used for the intro's

self-portrait held just under 5MP out of the Sony NEX-5's 14.2MP sensor. The photo shown in this step

was taken with a Tokina zoom that gave about a 6.5MP circle.
Be it resolved?
Another little detail about using C-mount lenses is that lenses are designed to match the expected

resolution of the film/sensor. For example, nobody expects "8mm" movie film to resolve 24MP, so there

is no point in sacrificing other desirable properties to get that kind of resolution projected onto the film by

the lens.

The sad reality is that the cameras that most C-mount lenses were designed for have tiny film/sensors

that resolve fewer than a million pixels. In the industry, a common distinction is between the regular

lenses and those designed for "megapixel" sensors. Top-of-the-line C-mount lenses rarely target more

than 5MP sensor resolution. Stopping these lenses down also hits the diffraction limit quite quickly,

further compromising resolution at high f/numbers.

So, for adapted C-mount lenses, are we talking about circular vignetted images that are entirely blurry?

Absolutely not! Lens resolution is related to pixel density, and our relatively large sensors don't have

anywhere near 5MP in an area as small as these lenses were designed for. APS-C is about 12X the

area of "1/2 inch" sensors, so a 12MP APS-C has the same pixel density as a 1MP "1/2 inch" sensor.

Thus, the best C-mount lenses are designed to project significantly finer detail than our sensor's

relatively large pixels can record... at least for the central portion of the image.

For example, the Tokina lens used on my NEX-5 to capture the photo in the previous step barely

resolves well enough for 640x480 full-frame images on a "1/4 inch" native C-mount firewire camera

(Unibrain Fire-i 400 industrial camera ). However, the unprocessed and off-center 640x480 crop shown

here looks at least as good -- the NEX-5 has a much better sensor with slightly lower pixel density. As

long as the image circle is big enough, resolution of most C-mount lenses is probably ok.

Another little detail about using C-mount lenses is that lenses are designed to match the expected

resolution of the film/sensor. For example, nobody expects "8mm" movie film to resolve 24MP, so there

is no point in sacrificing other desirable properties to get that kind of resolution projected onto the film by

the lens.

The sad reality is that the cameras that most C-mount lenses were designed for have tiny film/sensors

that resolve fewer than a million pixels. In the industry, a common distinction is between the regular

lenses and those designed for "megapixel" sensors. Top-of-the-line C-mount lenses rarely target more

than 5MP sensor resolution. Stopping these lenses down also hits the diffraction limit quite quickly,

further compromising resolution at high f/numbers.

So, for adapted C-mount lenses, are we talking about circular vignetted images that are entirely blurry?
Absolutely not! Lens resolution is related to pixel density, and our relatively large sensors don't have

anywhere near 5MP in an area as small as these lenses were designed for. APS-C is about 12X the

area of "1/2 inch" sensors, so a 12MP APS-C has the same pixel density as a 1MP "1/2 inch" sensor.

Thus, the best C-mount lenses are designed to project significantly finer detail than our sensor's

relatively large pixels can record... at least for the central portion of the image.

For example, the Tokina lens used on my NEX-5 to capture the photo in the previous step barely

resolves well enough for 640x480 full-frame images on a "1/4 inch" native C-mount firewire camera

(Unibrain Fire-i 400 industrial camera ). However, the unprocessed and off-center 640x480 crop shown

here looks at least as good -- the NEX-5 has a much better sensor with slightly lower pixel density. As

long as the image circle is big enough, resolution of most C-mount lenses is probably ok.

A little list of C-mount lenses

You can find information about many C-mount lenses on the WWW. There are quite a few different

sensor sizes targeted by C-mount lenses; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format lists

dimensions of many of the more common sensor sizes. However, most lenses will cover (with some

image quality issues) an image circle diameter significantly larger than the diagonal of the targeted

sensor size... and that diameter is rarely listed anywhere. One exception

is https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=p9kkgjwEQQQ-HJwvNDobeEw , which is a pretty good

list.

I've also started a (very) little list here, and contributions are welcome. Each entry is: lens description;

approximate image circle diameter(s) measured in mm at infinity focus (where possible); comments.

Keep in mind that your copy of any of these lenses could have significantly different properties from

mine.

Tokina 6--15mm f/1.4 http://www.tokina-usa.com/pdf/tvr0614.pdf ; 8.5mm--15mm; zoom changes

image circle diameter so much that view angle after cropping is barely affected
Pentax/Cosmicar 8.5mm f/1.5 ; 12mm; good quality, fairly wide view angle even after cropping

Pentax/Cosmicar 12mm f/1.4 ; 11mm; a nice and impressively tiny lens

Toyo Optics 12.5--75mm f/1.8 ; ? --15mm; not a small lens and unusably soft at wide setting

Melles Griot microscope objective, 160/0.17 4/0.12 ; 26mm; fixed macro (no focusing) that nearly

covers APS-C

The photo with this step shows these lenses in left-to-right order, with the Sony NEX 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

kit lens on the left edge as a size comparison. Although all the C-mount lenses have much larger

apertures than the kit lens, only the 12.5-75mm zoom is of comparable volume to the kit lens.

Step 5

Conclusions
So, are C-mount lenses worth dealing with for micro 4/3 and Sony NEX E-mount?

You can get a very fast, tiny, used lens and C-mount adapter for well under $100, and possibly under

$40. The images you capture probably will not use the full resolution of your camera. However, you will

be able to take advantage of the low-light performance of your camera's large pixels, and many of these

C-mount lenses have very large apertures (f/numbers commonly between 1.2 and 1.8). There is also

more depth-of-field thanks to the shorter focal lengths, so focus is less critical. In summary, they'll let

you discretely take photos even when it's really dark , and that's pretty cool. A well-exposed and

sharp 3MP photo (such as the one here, shot with the 12mm at f/1.4) easily beats a dark and blurry
14MP one.

For longer focal lengths, the physical size difference is less, and it is harder to justify use of C-mount

lenses. A wide selection of used lenses are cheaply available in a variety of easily adapted full-frame

35mm SLR mounts (M42, Canon FL/FD, Minolta SR/MC/MD, etc.). These SLR lenses generally

outperform C-mount lenses with similar cropped viewing angles. This is especially true of f/1.4-f/2.0

~50mm lenses. Fast shorter focal length SLR lenses are harder to find and usually more expensive, but

I have a nice 24mm f/2.0 that cost me only $40. Incidentally, fast rangefinder lenses also typically are

better than C-mounts, but are rarely competitive on price.

The only other reason to use a C-mount lens is that you artistically want the defects it introduces .

Vignetting is trivially simulated in post-processing, but it can be very difficult to simulate the swirly bokeh

and other artifacts caused by using portions of the image circle that are not well corrected. This is why

people get into "Lomography."

Step 6

Appendix: The Pentax Q

The Pentax Q interchangeable-lens digital camera has been announced as using a tiny sensor (1/2.3").

It really isn't the kind of large-sensor camera this Instructable is about, but logically it is a digital camera

well-suited to C-mount lenses. Here are a few quick comments about that, with the caveat that I have

not yet been able to test a Q body myself.

The sensor diagonal is only about 7.7mm and the flange distance a mere 9.2mm. Thus, with an adapter,

it should be able to use just about any C-mount or CS-mount lens... and Pentax has made a lot of

those. Except for a few lenses designed for 1/3" sensors (6mm diagonal), vignetting should not be an

issue. The tiny sensor's ~5.6X crop factor also makes some C-mount lenses become tiny, yet super-

fast, telephotos -- a 25mm f/1.4 has the field of view of ~135mm, while still f/1.4. For that matter, my old

Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 would act somewhat like a 300mm f/1.2! Also, sensor-shift shake reduction

should help steady photos with these "long" lenses.

The question is really how much resolution re-purposed lenses can deliver over such a small

sensor area. My guess is that many will look pretty good for 1080p video, which is only ~2MP. Very

few old lenses will be able to match the 12.4MP still resolution of this camera's sensor, but will people

really care? Image quality, including resolution, could be better with many of these lenses than what

people accepted from professional DSLRs a decade ago.... Note that Pentax's WWW store classes Q

as a "Digital SLR Camera" rather than a "Digital Compact Camera."

Image sensor format

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Comparative dimensions of sensor sizes

In digital photography, the image sensor format is the shape and size of the image
sensor.

The image sensor format of a digital camera determines the angle of view of a particular
lens when used with a particular camera. In particular, image sensors in digital SLR
cameras tend to be smaller than the 24 mm 36 mm image area of full-frame 35 mm
cameras, and therefore lead to a narrower angle of view.

Lenses produced for 35 mm film cameras may mount well on the digital bodies, but the
larger image circle of the 35 mm system lens allows unwanted light into the camera body,
and the smaller size of the image sensor compared to 35 mm format results in cropping of
the image compared to the results produced on the film camera. This latter effect is known
as field-of-view crop; the format size ratio is known as the field of view crop factor, crop
factor for short, or focal-length multiplier.

Contents
[hide]
1 Sensor size and depth of field
 2 Sensor size, noise and dynamic range
o 2.1 Exposure and photon flux
o 2.2 Shot noise
o 2.3 Read noise
o 2.4 Dark noise
o 2.5 Dynamic range
3 Sensor size and diffraction
4 Sensor format and lens size
5 Sensor size and shading effects
6 Common image sensor formats
o 6.1 Medium-format digital sensors
o 6.2 Sensors equipping most DSLRs and mirrorless interchangeable-lens
cameras
o 6.3 Sensors equipping compact digital cameras, mega-zoom (bridge)
cameras and camera-phones
o 6.4 Table of sensor formats and sizes
7 Bridging the gap in sensor sizes
8 See also
9 Notes and references

10 External links
[edit] Sensor size and depth of field

Three possible depth of field comparisons between formats are discussed, applying the
formulae derived in the article on depth of field. The depths of field of the three cameras
may be the same, or different in either order, depending on what is held constant in the
comparison.

Considering a picture with the same subject distance and angle of view for two different
formats:

so the DOFs are in inverse proportion to the absolute aperture diameters and .

Using the same absolute aperture diameter for both formats with the same picture
criterion (equal angle of view, magnified to same final size) yields the same depth of field.
It is equivalent to adjusting the f-number inversely in proportion to crop factor a
smaller f-number for smaller sensors. (This also means that, when holding the shutter
speed fixed, the exposure is changed by the adjustment of the f-number required to
equalise depth of field. But the aperture area is held constant, so sensors of all sizes
receive the same total amount of light energy from the subject. The smaller sensor is then
operating at a lower ISO setting, by the square of the crop factor.)

And, we might compare the depth of field of sensors receiving the same photometric
exposure the f-number is fixed instead of the aperture diameter the sensors are
operating at the same ISO setting in that case, but the smaller sensor is receiving less total
light, by the area ratio. The ratio of depths of field is then

where and are the characteristic dimensions of the format, and thus is the

relative crop factor between the sensors. It is this result that gives rise to the common
opinion that small sensors yield greater depth of field than large ones.

An alternative is to consider the depth of field given by the same lens in conjunction with
different sized sensors (changing the angle of view). The change in depth of field is
brought about by the requirement for a different degree of enlargement to achieve the same
final image size. In this case the ratio of depths of field becomes

[edit] Sensor size, noise and dynamic range

Discounting pixel response non-uniformity (PRNU), which is not intrinsically sensor-size

dependent, the noises in an image sensor are photon shot noise, read noise, and dark noise.
The overall signal to noise ratio of a sensor (SNR), observed at the scale of a single pixel,
is
where is the incident photon flux (photons per second in the area of a pixel), is the
quantum efficiency, is the exposure time, is the pixel dark current in electrons per
second and is the pixel read noise in electrons.[1]

Each of these noises has a different dependency on sensor size.

[edit] Exposure and photon flux

Image sensor noise can be compared across formats for a given fixed photon flux per pixel
area (the P in the formulas); this analysis is useful for a fixed number of pixels with pixel
area proportional to sensor area, and fixed absolute aperture diameter for a fixed imaging
situation in terms of depth of field, diffraction limit at the subject, etc. Or it can be
compared for a fixed focal-plane illuminance, corresponding to a fixed f-number, in which
case P is proportional to pixel area, independent of sensor area. The formulas above and
below can be evaluated for either case.

[edit] Shot noise

In the above equation, the shot noise SNR is given by

Apart from the quantum efficiency it depends on the incident photon flux and the exposure
time,which is equivalent to the exposure and the sensor area; since the exposure is the
integration time multiplied with the image plane illuminance, and illuminance is the
luminous flux per unit area. Thus for equal exposures, the signal to noise ratios of two
different size sensors of equal quantum efficiency and pixel count will (for a given final
image size) be in proportion to the square root of the sensor area (or the linear scale factor
of the sensor). If the exposure is constrained by the need to achieve some required depth of
field (with the same shutter speed) then the exposures will be in inverse relation to the
sensor area, producing the interesting result that if depth of field is a constraint, image shot
noise is not dependent on sensor area.
[edit] Read noise

The read noise is the total of all the electronic noises in the conversion chain for the pixels
in the sensor array. To compare it with photon noise, it must be referred back to its
equivalent in photoelectrons, which requires the division of the noise measured in volts by
the conversion gain of the pixel. This is given, for an active pixel sensor, by the voltage at
the input (gate) of the read transistor divided by the charge which generates that voltage,

. This is the inverse of the capacitance of the read transistor gate (and

the attached floating diffusion) since capacitance .[2] Thus .

In general for a planar structure such as a pixel, capacitance is proportional to area,

therefore the read noise scales down with sensor area, as long as pixel area scales with
sensor area, and that scaling is performed by uniformly scaling the pixel.

Considering the signal to noise ratio due to read noise at a given exposure, the signal will
scale as the sensor area along with the read noise and therefore read noise SNR will be
unaffected by sensor area. In a depth of field constrained situation, the exposure of the
larger sensor will be reduced in proportion to the sensor area, and therefore the read noise
SNR will reduce likewise.

[edit] Dark noise

The dark current contributes two kinds of noise: dark offset, which is only partly
correlated between pixels, and the shot noise associated with dark offset, which is
uncorrelated between pixels. Only the shot-noise component Dt is included in the formula
above, since the uncorrelated part of the dark offset is hard to predict, and the correlated or
mean part is relatively easy to subtract off. The mean dark current contains contributions
proportional both to the area and the linear dimension of the photodiode, with the relative
proportions and scale factors depending on the design of the photodiode.[3] Thus in general
the dark noise of a sensor may be expected to rise as the size of the sensor increases.
However, in most sensors the mean pixel dark current at normal temperatures is small,
lower than 50 e- per second,[4] thus for typical photographic exposure times dark current
and its associated noises may be discounted. At very long exposure times, however, it may
be a limiting factor. And even at short or medium exposure times, a few outliers in the
dark-current distribution may show up as "hot pixels".

[edit] Dynamic range

Dynamic range is the ratio of the largest and smallest recordable signal, the smallest being
typically defined by the 'noise floor'. In the image sensor literature, the noise floor is taken

as the readout noise, so [5]

(note, the read noise is the

same quantity as referred to in[1])

The measurement here is made at the level of a pixel (which strictly means that the DR of
sensors with different pixel counts is measured over a different spatial bandwidth, and
cannot be compared without normalisation). If we assume sensors with the same pixel
count but different sizes, then the pixel area will be in proportion to the sensor area. If the
maximum exposure (amount of light per unit area) is the same then both the maximum
signal and the read noise reduce in proportion to the pixel (and therefore the sensor) area,
so the DR does not change. If the comparison is made according to DOF limited
conditions, so that the exposure of the larger sensor is reduced in proportion to the area of
the sensor (and pixel, for sensors with equal pixel count) then is constant, and the
read noise ( ) falls with the sensor area, leading to a higher dynamic range for the
smaller sensor. Summarising the above discussion, considering separately the parts of the
image signal to noise ratio due to photon shot noise and read noise and their relation to the
linear sensor size ratio or 'crop factor' (remembering that conventionally crop factor
increases as the sensor gets smaller) then:

Shot noise SNR Read noise SNR Dynamic range

Fixed Inversely proportional
No change No change
exposure to crop factor
DOF Proportional to square Proportional to square
No change
constrained of crop factor of crop factor

It should be noted that this discussion isolates the effects of sensor scale on SNR and DR,
in reality there are many other factors which affect both these quantities.
[edit] Sensor size and diffraction

The resolution of all optical systems is limited by diffraction. One way of considering the
effect that diffraction has on cameras using different sized sensors is to consider the
modulation transfer function (MTF) due to diffraction, which will contribute a factor to the
overall system MTF along with the other factors, typically the MTFs of the lens, anti-
aliasing filter and sensor sampling window.[6] The spatial cut-off frequency due to
diffraction through a lens aperture is

where is the wavelength of the light passing through the system and N is the f-number
of the lens. If that aperture is circular, as are (approximately) most photographic apertures,
then the MTF is given by

for and for [7]

The diffraction based factor of the system MTF

will therefore scale according to and in turn according to (for the same light

wavelength).

In considering the effect of sensor size, and its effect on the final image, the different
magnification required to obtain the same size image for viewing must be accounted for,

resulting in an additional scale factor of where is the relative crop factor, making

the overall scale factor . Considering the three cases above:

For the 'same picture' conditions, same angle of view, subject distance and depth of field,

then the F-numbers are in the ratio , so the scale factor for the diffraction MTF is 1,

leading to the conclusion that the diffraction MTF at a given depth of field is independent
of sensor size.

In both the 'same photometric exposure' and 'same lens' conditions, the F-number is not
changed, and thus the spatial cutoff and resultant MTF on the sensor is unchanged, leaving
the MTF in the viewed image to be scaled as the magnification, or inversely as the crop
factor.

[edit] Sensor format and lens size

It might be expected that lenses appropriate for a range of sensor sizes could be produced
by simply scaling the same designs in proportion to the crop factor.[8] Such an exercise
would in theory produce a lens with the same F-number and angle of view, with a size
proportional to the sensor crop factor. In practice, simple scaling of lens designs is not
always achievable, due to factors such as the non-scalability of manufacturing tolerance,
structural integrity of glass lenses of different sizes and available manufacturing techniques
and costs. Moreover, to maintain the same absolute amount of information in an image
(which can be measured as the space bandwidth product[9]) the lens for a smaller sensor
requires a greater resolving power. The development of the 'Tessar' lens is discussed by
Nasse,[10] and shows its transformation from an f/6.3 lens for plate cameras using the
original three-group configuration through to an f/2.8 5.2 mm four-element optic with
eight extremely aspheric surfaces, economically manufacturable because of its small size.
Its performance is 'better than the best 35 mm lenses but only for a very small image'.

In summary, as sensor size reduces, the accompanying lens designs will change, often
quite radically, to take advantage of manufacturing techniques made available due to the
reduced size. The functionality of such lenses can also take advantage of these, with
extreme zoom ranges becoming possible. These lenses are often very large in relation to
sensor size, but with a small sensor can be fitted into a compact package.

[edit] Sensor size and shading effects

Semiconductor image sensors can suffer from shading effects at large apertures and at the
periphery of the image field, due to the geometry of the light cone projected from the exit
pupil of the lens to a point, or pixel, on the sensor surface. The effects are discussed in
detail by Catrysse and Wandell .[11] In the context of this discussion the most important
result from the above is that to ensure a full transfer of light energy between two coupled
optical systems such as the lens' exit pupil to a pixel's photoreceptor the geometrical extent
(also known as etendue or light throughput) of the objective lens / pixel system must be
smaller than or equal to the geometrical extent of the microlens / photoreceptor system.
The geometrical extent of the objective lens / pixel system is given by
 ,

where wpixel is the width of the pixel and (f/#)objective is the f-number of the objective lens.
The geometrical extent of the microlens / photoreceptor system is given by

where wphotoreceptor is the width of the photoreceptor and (f/#)microlens is the f-number of
the microlens.

So to avoid shading,

, therefore

If wphotoreceptor / wpixel = ff, the linear fill factor of the lens, then the condition becomes

Thus if shading is to be avoided the f-number of the microlens must be smaller than the f-
number of the taking lens by at least a factor equal to the linear fill factor of the pixel. The
f-number of the microlens is determined ultimately by the width of the pixel and its height
above the silicon, which determines its focal length. In turn, this is determined by the
height of the metallisation layers, also known as the 'stack height'. For a given stack
height, the f-number of the microlenses will increase as pixel size reduces, and thus the
objective lens f-number at which shading occurs will tend to increase. This effect has been
observed in practice, as recorded in the DxOmark article 'F-stop blues'[12]

In order to maintain pixel counts smaller sensors will tend to have smaller pixels, while at
the same time smaller objective lens f-numbers are required to maximise the amount of
light projected on the sensor. To combat the effect discussed above, smaller format pixels
include engineering design features to allow the reduction in f-number of their
microlenses. These may include simplified pixel designs which require less metallisation,
'light pipes' built within the pixel to bring its apparent surface closer to the microlens and
'back side illumination' in which the wafer is thinned to expose the rear of the
photodetectors and the microlens layer is placed directly on that surface, rather than the
front side with its wiring layers. The relative effectiveness of these stratagems is discussed
by Aptina in some detail.[13]

[edit] Common image sensor formats

Sizes of the sensors used in most current digital cameras relative to a standard 35mm
frame.

[edit] Medium-format digital sensors

The most common sensor size for medium-format digital cameras is approximately 48 mm
36 mm (1.9 in 1.4 in)[citation needed], due to the widespread use of Kodak's 22-megapixel
KAF-22000 and 39-megapixel KAF-39000[14] CCDs in that format. Phase one offers the
P65+ digital back with Dalsa's 53.9 mm 40.4 mm (2.12 in 1.59 in) sensor containing
60.5 megapixels[15] and Leica offers an "S-System" DSLR with a 45 mm 30 mm (1.8 in
1.2 in) sensor containing 37-megapixels.[16] In 2010, Pentax released the 40MP 645D
medium format DSLR with a 44 mm 33 mm (1.7 in 1.3 in) sensor.[17]
[edit] Sensors equipping most DSLRs and

mirrorless interchangeable-lens cameras

Some professional DSLRs use full-frame sensors, equal to the size of a frame of 35 mm
film.

Most consumer-level DSLRs and MILCs/EVILs use relatively large sensors, either around
the size of a frame of APS-C film, with a crop factor of 1.5-1.6; or 30% smaller than that,
with a crop factor of 2.0 (this is the Four Thirds System, adopted by Olympus and
Panasonic).

On September 2011, Nikon announced their new format CX, whose size is 1" (2.7 crop
factor).[18] It has been adopted for the Nikon 1 camera system (Nikon J1 and V1 models).
As of September 2011 there is only one MILC model equipped with a very small sensor,
typical of compact cameras: it is the Pentax Q, equipped with a 1/2.3" sensor (5.62 crop
factor). See Sensors equipping Compact digital cameras and camera-phones section below.

Many different terms are used in marketing to describe DSRL/MILC sensor formats,
including the following:

Full-frame digital SLR format, with sensor dimensions nearly equal to those of
35 mm film (36 24 mm)
Canon's APS-H format for high-speed pro-level DSLRs (crop factor 1.3)
Leica's M8 and M8.2 sensor (crop factor 1.33).
APS-C refers to a range of similarly-sized formats, including
o Nikon, Pentax, Samsung, Konica Minolta/Sony, Fujifilm, Epson,
Sigma (crop factor 1.5)
o Canon entry-level DSLR formats (crop factor 1.6)
Foveon X3 format used in Sigma SD-series DSLRs and DP-series mirrorless
(crop factor 1.7) (latest models include SD1, DP2 Merrill use crop factor 1.5
foveon sensor)
Four Thirds System and Micro Four Thirds System format (crop factor 2.0)
Nikon CX format used in Nikon 1 series (crop factor 2.7)
When full-frame sensors were first introduced, production costs could exceed twenty times
the cost of an APS-C sensor. Only about thirty full-frame sensors can be produced on an 8
inches (20 cm) silicon wafer that would fit 112 APS-C sensors, and there is a significant
reduction in yield due to the large area for contaminants per component. Additionally, the
full frame sensor originally required three separate exposures during the photolithography
stage, which requires separate masks and quality control steps. The APS-H size was
selected since it was then the largest that could be imaged with a single mask to help
control production costs and manage yields.[19] Newer photolithography equipment now
allows single-pass exposures for full-frame sensors, although other size-related production
constraints remain much the same.

Due to the ever-changing constraints of semiconductor fabrication and processing, and

because camera manufacturers often source sensors from third-parties foundries, it is
common for sensor dimensions to vary slightly within the same nominal format. For
example, the Nikon D3 and D700 cameras' nominally full-frame sensors actually measure
36 23.9 mm, slightly smaller than a 36 24 mm frame of 35 mm film. As another
example, the Pentax K200D's sensor (made by Sony) measures 23.5 15.7 mm, while the
contemporaneous K20D's sensor (made by Samsung) measures 23.4 15.6 mm.

Most DSLR image sensor formats approximate the 3:2 aspect ratio of 35 mm film. Again,
the Four Thirds System is a notable exception, with an aspect ratio of 4:3 as seen in most
compact digital cameras (see below).

[edit] Sensors equipping compact digital

cameras, mega-zoom (bridge) cameras and

camera-phones

Most image sensors equipping compact cameras have an aspect ratio of 4:3. This matches
the aspect ratio of the popular SVGA, XGA, and SXGA display resolutions at the time of
the first digital cameras, allowing images to be displayed on usual monitors without
cropping.

As of December 2010 most compact digital cameras used small 1/2.3" sensors(or even
smaller: 1/2.33"). Such cameras include Canon Powershot SX230 IS, Fuji Finepix Z90 and
Nikon Coolpix S9100. Some older digital cameras (mostly from 20052010) used a tiny
1/2.5" sensor: these include Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS62, Canon Powershot SX120 IS,
Sony CyberShot DSC-S700, and Casio Exilim EX-Z80.

High-end compact cameras using sensors of nearly twice the area than sensors equipping
common compacts include Canon PowerShot G12 (1/1.7") and Powershot S90/S95
(1/1.7"), Ricoh GR Digital IV (1/1.7"), Nikon Coolpix P7100 (1/1.7"), Samsung EX1
(1/1.7"), Panasonic DMC-LX5 (1/1.63") and Olympus XZ-1(1/1.63"). Fujifilm FinePix X-
10 has a 2/3" sensor, the largest sensor on camera small enough to be labelled as compact
(despite weighing 353 grams) until June 2012. That is until Sony announced DSC-RX-
100, a real compact (weight: 213 grams) equipped with a 1" sensor (i.e. one only used on
MILCs until then). Actually, Canon labels "compact camera" its PowerShot G1 X,
equipped with a huge 1.5" sensor (i.e. a sensor larger than the 4/3" sensors equipping some
compact DSLR). Nonetheless, weighing well over half a kilo (534 grams) G1 X is
arguably a bridge camera rather than a compact.

As of 2012 most bridge cameras, including the Sony CyberShot DSC-HX100V and the
Canon PowerShot SX40 HS, use a small 1/2.3" sensor (i.e. same size as those used in
common compact cameras). The high-end bridge camera Fuji XS-1, though, is equipped
with a much larger sensor (2/3" twice the area of a 1/2.3" sensor: see table further on).

The sensors of camera phones are typically much smaller than those of typical compact
cameras, allowing greater miniaturization of the electrical and optical components. Sensor
sizes of around 1/6" are common in camera phones, webcams and digital camcorders. The
Nokia N8's 1/1.83" sensor was the largest in a phone in late 2011. The upcoming Nokia
808 surpasses compact cameras with its 41 million pixels, 1/1.2" sensor. [20]

[edit] Table of sensor formats and sizes

Sensor formats of digital cameras are mostly expressed in the non-standardized "inch"
system as approximately 1.5 times the length of the diagonal of the sensor. This goes back
to the way image sizes of video cameras used until the late 1980s were expressed,
referring to the outside diameter of the glass envelope of the video camera tube. David
Pogue of The New York Times states that "the actual sensor size is much smaller than
what the camera companies publish about one-third smaller." For example, a camera
advertising a 1/2.7" sensor does not have a sensor with a diagonal of 0.37"; instead, the
diagonal is closer to 0.26".[21][22] Instead of "formats", these sensor sizes are often called
types, as in "1/2-inch-type CCD."

Due to inch-based sensor formats being not standardized, their exact dimensions may vary,
but those listed are typical.[22] The listed sensor areas span more than a factor of 1000 and
are proportional to the maximum possible collection of light and image resolution (same
lens speed, i.e., maximum aperture), but in practice are not directly proportional to image
noise or resolution due to other limitations. See comparisons.[23][24]

Diagonal Width Height Area Stops Crop

Type
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm ) (Area) factor[25]
2

1/10" 1.60 1.28 0.96 1.23 -9.51 27.04

1/8" 2.00 1.60 1.20 1.92 -8.81 21.65
1/6" 3.00 2.40 1.80 4.32 -7.64 14.14
1/4" 4.00 3.20 2.40 7.68 -6.81 10.81
1/3.6" 5.00 4.00 3.00 12.0 -6.16 8.65
1/3.2" 5.68 4.54 3.42 15.50 -5.80 7.61
1/3" 6.00 4.80 3.60 17.30 -5.64 7.21
1/2.7" 6.72 5.37 4.04 21.70 -5.31 6.44
1/2.5" 7.18 5.76 4.29 24.70 -5.12 6.02
1/2.3" (Pentax Q) 7.66 6.17 4.55 28.50 -4.92 5.64
1/2" 8.00 6.40 4.80 30.70 -4.81 5.41
1/1.8" 8.93 7.18 5.32 38.20 -4.50 4.84
1/1.7" 9.50 7.60 5.70 43.30 -4.32 4.55
1/1.6" 10.07 8.08 6.01 48.56 -4.15 4.30
2/3" (Fujifilm X10) 11.00 8.80 6.60 58.10 -3.89 3.93
1/1.2" (Nokia 808
13.33 10.67 8.00 85.33 -3.34 3.24
PureView)
Super 16mm 14.54 12.52 7.41 92.80 -3.22 2.97
 Diagonal Width Height Area Stops Crop
Type
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm2) (Area) factor[25]
Nikon CX and Sony
15.86 13.20 8.80 116 -2.90 2.72
RX100
1" 16.00 12.80 9.60 123 -2.81 2.70
m4/3 4/3" (Four
21.60 17.30 13 225 -1.94 2.00
Thirds)
1.5" 23.36 18.70 14.00 262 -1.78 1.85
Sigma Foveon X3,
24.90 20.70 13.80 286 -1.60 1.74
original
Canon APS-C 26.70 22.20 14.80 329 -1.39 1.62
General APS-C (Nikon
DX, Pentax K,
Samsung NX, Sony 28.2-28.4 23.6-23.7 15.60 368-370 -1.23 1.52-1.54
DT & NEX, current
Sigma Foveon X3)
Canon APS-H 33.50 27.90 18.60 519 -0.73 1.29
35mm Full-frame,
(Nikon FX, Sony &
43.2-43.3 36 23.9-24.3 860-864 0 1.0
Handycam NEX,
Canon)
Leica S 54 45 30 1350 +0.64 0.80
Pentax 645D 55 44 33 1452 +0.75 0.78
Kodak KAF 39000
61.30 49 36.80 1803 +1.06 0.71
CCD[26]
Leaf AFi 10 66.57 56 36 2016 +1.22 0.65
Phase One P 65+,
67.40 53.90 40.40 2178 +1.33 0.64
IQ160, IQ180
[edit] Bridging the gap in sensor sizes

This section does not cite any references or sources. (December 2011)
This semi-logarithmic graph shows the large gap which for a long time and until
Sep. 2011 existed between compact digital and DSLR camera sensor sizes. The x
axis is a discrete set of sensor format sizes used in digital cameras, not a linear
measurement axis.

From 2005 there was an increasing interest in producing medium-sized cameras with large
sensors but without the moving mirror systems, and consequently the bulk, typical of
DSLR camera bodies.

Manufacturers gradually responded to this interest, which led to a new type: the mirrorless
interchangeable-lens camera. Epson, an early entrant, introduced the R-D1, a digital
rangefinder using the Leica M mount. Other companies followed suit, by introducing
similar cameras that focus electronically rather than manually (such as Olympus, with its
PEN series; Panasonic, with its G and GF series; Sony, with its Nex series; Samsung, with
its NX series). MILC cameras might overall look like compact digital ones, with at least
two notable differences: a sensor in most cases of the size found in digital SLRs, and
interchangeable lenses. The latter feature, though, was incorporated in at least one small-
sensor camera as well (Pentax Q, announced in June 2011).

Nonetheless, until 2011 there still remained a large gap in sensor sizes between digital
compact cameras on the one hand and DSLRs/MILCs on the other. Compact cameras were
all equipped with sensors smaller than 1/1.6" (48.5 mm2), whereas 4/3" (225 mm2) was the
smallest sensor to be found on DSLRs/MILCs. Noticeable exceptions for a few years
 had been Olympus E-10 and E-20 (large, semi-professional hybrid cameras announced
in the early 2000s and equipped with a 2/3" sensor). The main reason for such size-gap
was portability: large sensors require bulky lenses (that's why MILC cameras with large
sensors often show a marked disproportion between their tiny bodies and their large lens
systems, zoom objectives especially).

That sensor-size gap was bridged by camera models announced in September 2011: on the
compact side of the gap, a very large (for a compact) 2/3" (58.1 mm2) sensor equipped the
high-end Fuji X10 compact. Almost at the same time, on the DSLR/MILC side of the
divide, Nikon announced the Nikon 1 system, built around a new sensor format they
named 'CX' (13.2mm 8.8mm, roughly 1" in the inch system). Finally, a sensor of the
same size (1") has been adopted, in 2012, by Sony, for its RX-100 compact camera
(weight: gr. 213).

With such format additions the 1" sensors especially and their adoption to equip
compact-cameras, the crop-factor difference previously existing between the largest
compact camera sensors and the smallest MILC sensors has been eliminated.

[edit] See also

Full-frame digital SLR
Sensor size and angle of view
35 mm equivalent focal length
Film format
Digital versus film photography
List of large sensor interchangeable-lens video cameras
List of large sensor

interchangeable-lens video

cameras

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

List of digital video cameras with an image sensor larger than 2/3 inch and producing
video in a horizontal resolution equal or higher than 1920 pixels.

Maxim
Mode um Maxim
Sensor Lens Frame
Brand Camera l video Codec um
size Mount rate(s-1)
form resoluti bitrate
on
23.76
x 2880 x ARRIRAW,
ARRI ALEXA[1] Video Arri PL 0,75 - 120 ?
13.37 1620 ProRes
mm
27.9 x 23.976, 25,
1D Mark Canon 1920 x
Canon Photo 18.6 m 29.97 (50, H.264 ?
IV[2] EF 1080
m 59.94)
36 x Canon 1920 x 24, 25, 30
Canon 1D X[2] Photo MPEG4 ?
24 mm EF 1080 (50, 60)
36 x Canon 1920 x
Canon 5D Mark II[2] Photo 24, 25, 30 H.264 ?
24 mm EF 1080
36 x Canon 1920 x 90
Canon 5D Mark III[3] Photo 24, 25, 30 H.264
24 mm EF 1080 Mbit/s
Canon 7D[2] Photo 22.3 x Canon 1920 x 24, 25, 30 H.264 ?
 Maxim
Mode um Maxim
Sensor Lens Frame
Brand Camera l video Codec um
size Mount rate(s-1)
form resoluti bitrate
on
14.9 m EF/EF-
1080
m S
22.3 x Canon
[2]
1920 x
Canon 60D Photo 14.9 m EF/EF- 24, 25, 30 H.264 ?
1080
m S
22.3 x Canon
[2]
1920 x
Canon 550D Photo 14.9 m EF/EF- 24, 25, 30 H.264 ?
1080
m S
22.3 x Canon
[2]
1920 x
Canon 600D Photo 14.9 m EF/EF- 24, 25, 30 H.264 ?
1080
m S
22.3 x Canon
[2]
1920 x
Canon 650D Photo 14.9 m EF/EF- 24, 25, 30 H.264 ?
1080
m S
24.6 x Canon
C300, C300 1920 x 50
Canon [4]
Video 13.8 m EF, Arri 1-30 (1-60) MPEG2
PL 1080 Mbit/s
m PL
34 x
1920 x
Dalsa Origin II[4] Video 17.2 m Arri PL 30 ? ?
1080
m
23.1 x
1920 x 24 (24, 25,
Nikon D3100[2][5] Photo 15.4 m Nikon F MPEG4 ?
1080 30)
m
23.2 x
[2][6]
1920 x
Nikon D3200 Photo 15.4 m Nikon F 24, 25, 30 MPEG4 ?
1080
m
36.0 x
[7]
1920 x 24, 25, 30 H.264/MPE 24
Nikon D4 Photo 23.9 m Nikon F
1080 (50, 60) G4 Mbit/s
m
23.6 x
[2]
1920 x
Nikon D5100 Photo 15.7 m Nikon F 24, 25, 30 MPEG4 ?
1080
m
 Maxim
Mode um Maxim
Sensor Lens Frame
Brand Camera l video Codec um
size Mount rate(s-1)
form resoluti bitrate
on
23.6 x
[2]
1920 x 24 (24, 25,
Nikon D7000 Photo 15.7 m Nikon F MPEG4 ?
1080 30)
m
35.9 x 1920 x 24, 25, 30 H.264/MPE 24
Nikon D800[8] Photo Nikon F
24 mm 1080 (50, 60) G4 Mbit/s
Micro
Panaso AF-100, AF- 17.8 x 1920 x 21
[9]
Video Four 12-60 AVCHD
nic 101 10 mm 1080 Mbit/s
Thirds
Micro
Panaso 17.3 x 1920 x
DMC-G3[2] Photo Four 60 (60, 30) AVCHD ?
nic 13 mm 1080
Thirds
Micro
Panaso [2]
17.3 x 1920 x
DMC-GF2 Photo Four 60 (60, 30) AVCHD ?
nic 13 mm 1080
Thirds
Micro
Panaso 17.3 x 1920 x
DMC-GF3[2] Photo Four 60 (60, 30) AVCHD ?
nic 13 mm 1080
Thirds
18.89
Micro
Panaso x 1920 x
DMC-GH1[2] Photo Four 30 AVCHD ?
nic 14.48 1080
Thirds
mm
18.89
Micro
Panaso x 1920 x 22
DMC-GH2[2] Photo Four 24, 60 (30) AVCHD
nic 14.48 1080 Mbit/s
Thirds
mm
2/3 inch
2/3" H.264,
Panaso AJ- bayonet 1920 x
Video CCD x 24, 1-60 AVC-Intra ?
nic HPX3700[10] mount[11 1080
3 ]
100

2/3" 2/3 inch

Panaso AJ- 1920 x 60 DVCPRO 137
[12]
Video CCD x bayonet
nic HPX2000 1080 (interlaced) HD Mbit/s
3 mount
 Maxim
Mode um Maxim
Sensor Lens Frame
Brand Camera l video Codec um
size Mount rate(s-1)
form resoluti bitrate
on
AVC-Intra
AJ- 2/3" 2/3 inch
Panaso [
1920 x 100, 68
HPX3100GJ Video CCD x bayonet 30 (60)
nic 13]
1080 DVCPRO Mbit/s
3 mount
HD/
24.89
Panavis x 1920 x
GENESIS[14] Video ? 30 (1-60) ? ?
ion 16.86 1080
mm
Panavis
Panavis 2/3" 1920 x
HD900F[15] Video ion HD 30 (24) HDCAM ?
ion CCD 1080
mount
23.4 x
Pentax 1920 x 95
Pentax K-01[16] Photo 15.6 m 30p, 25p M-JPEG
K 1080 Mbit/s
m
23.7 x
[17]
Pentax 1920 x 30p (25p,
Pentax K-30 Photo 15.7 m H264 ?
K 1080 24p)
m
23.4 x
[18]
Pentax 1920 x 95
Pentax K-5 Photo 15.6 m 30p, 25p M-JPEG
K 1080 Mbit/s
m
21.1 x
P+S PS-CAM 1920 x 60p, (24- CineForm
Video 11.9 m PS-IMS ?
Technik x35[19] 1080 450p) RAW
m
24p
10.24
(1080p12-
P+S x 2048 x CineForm
SI-2K[20] Video PS-IMS 25), 24p ?
Technik 5.76 m 1152 RAW
(1080p12-
m
85)
P+S WEISSCAM Video 15 x Arri PL, 1280 x 25p CineForm ?
Technik HS-1[21] 12 mm Panavis 1024 (1024p24- RAW
ion, 650), 25p
Nikon, (576p24-
 Maxim
Mode um Maxim
Sensor Lens Frame
Brand Camera l video Codec um
size Mount rate(s-1)
form resoluti bitrate
on
Canon
EF, 1150)
BNC-R
22.18
WEISSCAM 25p
P+S x 1980 x CineForm
HS-2 Video PS-IMS (1080p24- ?
Technik 22.18 1080 RAW
MKII[22] 2000)
mm
27.7 x PL, EF, 5120 x
[4]
1-120
RED EPIC Video 14.6 m F- 2700 REDCODE ?
(300)
m mount (2K)
24.4 x PL, EF, 4096 x
[4]
RED ONE Video 13.7 m F- 2304 1-30 (120) REDCODE ?
m mount (2K)
ONE 24.2 x PL, EF, 4480 x
RED MYSTERIU Video 12.5 m F- 2304 1-30 (120) REDCODE ?
[4]
M-X m mount (3K)
27.7 x PL, EF, 5120 x
1-12 (1- 440
RED Scarlet Video 14.6 m F- 2700 REDCODE
120) Mbit/s
m mount (1K)
23.5 x
Samsun Samsun 1920 x
NX20 Photo 15.7 m 30 H.264 ?
g g NX 1080
m
23.5 x
DSLR- Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97
Sony Photo 15.6 m MPEG4 ?
A560[2] mount 1080 (30)
m
23.5 x
DLSR- Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97
Sony Photo 15.6 m MPEG4 ?
A580[2] mount 1080 (30)
m
21.6 x
[23]
1920 x
Sony F35 Video 13.3 m Arri PL 1-60 ? ?
1080
m
Sony NEX-5[2] Photo 23.4 x E- 1920 x 60 (30) AVCHD ?
 Maxim
Mode um Maxim
Sensor Lens Frame
Brand Camera l video Codec um
size Mount rate(s-1)
form resoluti bitrate
on
15.6 m
mount 1080
m
23.4 x
[2]
E- 1920 x
Sony NEX-5N Photo 15.6 m 60 (30) AVCHD ?
mount 1080
m
23.4 x
[2]
E- 1920 x
Sony NEX-7 Photo 15.6 m 60 (30) MPEG4 ?
mount 1080
m
21.6 x
NEX- E- 1920 x 1, 2, 4, 8, MPEG4 28
Sony Video 13.3 m
FS100[24] mount 1080 15, 30, 60 AVCHD Mbit/s
m
23.4 x
NEX- E- 1920 x 24
Sony Video 15.6 m 60i, 30 AVCHD
VG10[25] mount 1080 Mbit/s
m
23.4 x
NEX- E- 1920 x 24
Sony Video 15.6 m 60, 30, 24 AVCHD 2.0
VG20[26] mount 1080 Mbit/s
m
23.4 x
E- 1920 x 24
Sony NEX-VG30 Video 15.6 m 60, 30, 24 AVCHD 2.0
mount 1080 Mbit/s
m
Sony NEX- Video 35.8 x A- 1920 x 60, 24 AVCHD 2.0 28
VG900[27] with 23.9 m mount 1080 Mbit/s
still m
capab (Full
le Frame)
with
featur
e
identi
cal as
Sony
Alpha
 Maxim
Mode um Maxim
Sensor Lens Frame
Brand Camera l video Codec um
size Mount rate(s-1)
form resoluti bitrate
on
A99
(RAW
, etc)
E-
21.6 x
PMW-F3K, mount, 1920 x 1, 2, 4, 8, 35
Sony Video 13.3 m MPEG2
PMW-F3L[28] L- 1080 15, 30, 60 Mbit/s
m
mount
23.5 x
[2]
Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97
Sony SLT-A33 Photo 15.6 m MPEG4 ?
mount 1080 (30)
m
23.5 x
[2]
Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97
Sony SLT-A35 Photo 15.6 m MPEG4 ?
mount 1080 (30)
m
23.5 x
[2]
Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97
Sony SLT-A37 Photo 15.6 m AVCHD ?
mount 1080 (30)
m
23.5 x
Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97
Sony SLT-A55[2] Photo 15.6 m MPEG4 ?
mount 1080 (30)
m
60, 29.97
(30)
23.5 x (NTSC
Sony A- 1920 x AVCHD/M
Sony SLT-A57[2] Photo 15.6 m countries) ?
mount 1080 PEG4
m 50, 25
(PAL
countries)
23.5 x
Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97
Sony SLT-A65[2] Photo 15.6 m MPEG4 ?
mount 1080 (30)
m
Sony SLT-A77[2] Photo 23.5 x Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97 AVCHD ?
15.6 m mount 1080 (30)
m (NTSC
 Maxim
Mode um Maxim
Sensor Lens Frame
Brand Camera l video Codec um
size Mount rate(s-1)
form resoluti bitrate
on
countries)
50, 25
(PAL
countries)
35.8 x
[2]
Sony A- 1920 x 60, 29.97
Sony SLT-A99 Photo 23.8 m AVCHD ?
mount 1080 (30)
m
Arri PL
(standar
d),
Vision 52.1 x Nikon F 141,
Phantom 4096 x 2341
Researc [29] Video 30.5 m / (1080p320 Cine RAW
65 2440 Mbit/s
h m Mamiya )
645
(optiona
l)
Arri PL
(standar
d),
Vision 52.1 x Nikon F 1455
Phantom 2560 x 3181
Researc Video 30.5 m / (1080p257 Cine RAW
Flex[30] 1600 Mbit/s
h m Mamiya 0)
645
(optiona
l)