 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / October 2006160 meg line scan camera $36,000
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06093007seitzd3.asp > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06093007seitzd3.asp Old news.  SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson > > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06093007seitzd3.asp > > Old news. It does prove that the line scan camera is capable of being used like a conventional DSLR for some things and it's a cheap way to gain resolution, versus what a real 160 meg CCD would cost. $36,000 is peanuts compared to that. > > > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06093007seitzd3.asp > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > what a real 160 meg > CCD would cost. $36,000 is peanuts compared to that. Looks like a pretty worthless camera (or at least not worth close to $36K), just what would you use it for? Scott >>>>http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06093007seitzd3.asp >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Looks like a pretty worthless camera (or at least not worth close to > $36K), just what would you use it for? If the obvious needs to be stated to you, then so be it: Not all scenes or images have movement in them. This is a superior method, for example, than mosaicing large detailed scenes. Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. > If the obvious needs to be stated to you, then so be it: Not all scenes > or images have movement in them. This is a superior method, for > example, than mosaicing large detailed scenes. Not at all, with mosaicing you can have movement in the scene, I have lots with people walking and cars going by as well as trees swaying. I have better control if my FOW with mosaicing then this camera can give. I have a lighter camera to carry around. I have more range on what aspect ratio I want in the image. And since my lens only need to produce a small part of the image at a time I can get a sharper image. Their Roundshot D3 looks like a much better camera to me is one really wants to scan. http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/intro.cfm Scott >>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06093007seitzd3.asp >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > what a real 160 meg > CCD would cost. $36,000 is peanuts compared to that. It takes at least one second to expose a scene...which means no movement can be in that scene. -That doesn't sound like anything resembling a convention DSLR to me... SignatureImages (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at: www.pbase.com/markuson |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.