Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 1, 2006, 7:52 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 268
Default

My Canon A520 has a 1/2.5-inch CCD. What the heck does that mean? It obviously can't meanit isone half and a half inches diagonally. I also highly doubt thatit means itsa single CCD that is 2.5 inches diagonally since the Pentax K100D is listed as being 28.40mm diagonally which translates toonly 1.11811024 in inches.

So what exactly does Canon mean when they say that the CCD is 1/2.5 inches?
Contriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 1, 2006, 8:28 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Sintares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 647
Default

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glos...r_sizes_01.htm

1/2.5" , 5.760mmx 4.290mm
Sintares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2006, 10:08 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 268
Default

Thanks!
Contriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2006, 10:12 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 221
Default

1/2.5 = 0.4, and the ccd is 0.4 inches diagonally.
So when canon say that the A520 has a 1/2.5 inch ccd, they mean exactly that the A520 has a 1/2.5 inch ccd. A more pertinant question might be why they are using a decimal denominator in a fraction.
jacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2006, 12:05 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

i really think they tried to make it as confusing as possible, so that Joe average wouldnt be able to figure out what is bigger than what. Probably the only thing that disuaded them from using fractions of diameters of the moon was that no-one could agree on the diameter.

Riley
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2006, 9:35 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
tmoreau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 477
Default

Rriley wrote:
Quote:
i really think they tried to make it as confusing as possible, so that Joe average wouldnt be able to figure out what is bigger than what. Probably the only thing that disuaded them from using fractions of diameters of the moon was that no-one could agree on the diameter.

Riley
Lol. I heard that it was related to the early days of television and the way they measured screen size then... perhaps something to do with broadcasting. Its american tradition to base a measurement on something obscure then adhere to it long past the time when anybody can remember what it means "just because".
tmoreau is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:07 PM.