23x15mm or full frame 36x24 ?

[Michael Fanelli]

FWIW, Rumor, rumor, rumor, say it again, the following is an unsubstantiated rumor...

Sony is getting ready to produce a reasonably priced full-frame sensor some time next year. Nikon is very interested and gets most of it's sensors from Sony already. Such a chip could reverse the APS-only stand they have taken up until now.

[JeffHall]

I hope you're right. Nikon needs a decent full-frame camera, former claims nonwithstanding, and the Kodak back doesn't quite do what they need.

[another view]

I'm guessing that Nikon's new F6 35mm film camera is a step towards a full frame DSLR...

I've been using a 1.5 factor DSLR for a little over a year and that format change hasn't really been a big deal in practice to me with the Fuji S2. I lose my wide lenses (my 20mm is now a 30mm - of course this is just in reference to angle of coverage!) but my long lenses are longer without losing a stop or two like you would with a teleconverter. It's the same idea as working with medium format - a 50mm lens on a 35mm SLR becomes an 80mm on a 6x6, etc.

I now have a 300 f2.8 with my 80-200, but I'd have to spend a fair amount of money to get the wide angle part back again (12-24 DX). That's where the advantage/disadvantage is IMO. When I use this camera for paying gigs, I never need more than the 20mm lens anyway (30mm coverage) so I haven't gotten that lens yet.

The thing about the Olympus 4/3 is that it's closer to standard print dimensions like 8x10, etc. A 3:2 format prints full frame at 8x12 and you have to crop a total of two inches off the long side. Explain it all you want to people, they want 8x10's... You can shoot that way - leaving extra room on the sides, but sometimes there are shots that still work best at full frame...