Camera size over five decades plus

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
D Cox Forum Pro • Posts: 29,579
Re: Camera size over five decades plus

cba_melbourne wrote:

a_c_skinner wrote:

Never used one, but have handled them. Olympus supplied them with their gastroscopes, so most hospitals had one lying around. Same size as I recall as the Fuji X-E series or a bit smaller. They never achieved the IQ most people aspired to I suspect.

Half frame was 18x24, so exactly half the film resolution of 24x36 (or in other words twice as large grain). It was popular after WW2 in cash strapped Japan and Europe, one standard 36 exposure film roll yielded 72 pictures. Half the cost per picture for film and it's processing.

I used, and still have, an Olympus Pen D3, which is a half-frame with a fixed prime lens. Good results from slower films such as Kodachrome or Panatomic-X, but difficult with Tri-X. Among digital cameras, the Sigma DP2M was comparable -- fixed prime lens, best used at ASA/ISO 200 or slower. Same image size, but an APS-C digital sensor gives much better quality than the same size film.

From Pen D£:

Remember that a digital camera has an automatic advance while a film camera needs a motor drive to do the same thing. Motor drives add considerably to size and weight, and bulk 35mm film holders even more. Sports photographers have benefitted greatly from digital.

 D Cox's gear list:D Cox's gear list
Sigma fp
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Smaug01
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow