Photonic Shunkan

After months of thought, it's time to say it: Fujifilm are right to call a 4433 format camera, "Large Format". Fujifilm copped a lot of flak for using that term, but there are good reasons why they are ahead of the curve in pushing for nomenclature change. In fact, it wasn't so much Fujifilm but DPR who pushed them in this direction. I draw your attention to DPR's write up of an interview with Fujifilm at CP+ in March 2019: https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/8410636142/cp-2019-fujifilm-interview-we-want-to-show-photographers-the-future Highlights are my own. Quotation from the article, including photo, here considered "fair use" as we are critically examining the statements made in it. As you can see it's DPR that keeps leading the discussion asking about "large formats". Later DPR states: "many of our questions at CP+ were focused on the GFX 100 and on Fujifilm's large-format strategy in general...". Fujif...

Man is the measure of all things, so said the Greek philosopher, Protagoras. At least when we compare the size of animals we compare them with ourselves to get a sense of their relative scale. The size of an average adult becomes the standard size reference point. The comparative size of a human = 1. What about cameras? A commonly used standard comparative reference point is the 35mm format camera after it was popularised by the Leica I released in 1925. The odd thing about this comparison is that some people refer to a 35mm format camera as being "full frame". The reason for this is that its comparative size is set at relative size = 1. This makes it a 100% sized camera and hence "full frame". This is like saying that a human being is a full frame animal because its comparative size is set at 1, making it a 100% sized creature. Large circle: 640mm diameter of the LSST space telescope's digital sensor Civilian digital camera sensor formats shown for c...