35mm Full frame.. pshaw.. I want 20cm full frame.

Now this would be an awesome camera. 120mp spread over a 20cm by 20cm sensor. The digital equivalent of large format.
http://www.canon.com …pproach/special​/cmos.html

It would be one massive body to lug around

Crap. You would need a 300mm 2.8 lens to get a equivalent of 17mm lol

Just think of the narrow DOF you could get though.

I know it's unrealistic as the cost would be astronomical, but it sure would be nice to get a large format view camera with a digital back. It would make an awesome landscape camera. We could become the digital equivalent of Ansel.

I wonder what the file size would be. Has to be about 35x a current FF sensor I would think.

Kronie wrote in post #16131722
It would be one massive body to lug around

Not too much larger than the view cameras some of us still use. Certainly too large for everyday shooting though.

gjl711 wrote in post #16131825
Just think of the narrow DOF you could get though.

Sure, you would shoot a single hair at f/32 )

would love to use one as a back for a view camera.

Talley wrote in post #16131798
Crap. You would need a 300mm 2.8 lens to get a equivalent of 17mm lol

I make it approximately 95mm focal length for similar FoV compared with 17mm on 35mm format. 300mm would be the equivalent of 54mm.

gjl711 wrote in post #16131627
Now this would be an awesome camera. 120mp spread over a 20cm by 20cm sensor. The digital equivalent of large format.
http://www.canon.com …pproach/special​/cmos.html

It looks more like a digital version of the extremely large "process cameras" that were used to generate printing plates in the pre-digital era. In turn, process cameras were among the predecessors of the Polaroid 20x24 instant cameras that were developed as promotional devices by Edwin Land, which are still in use by the most adventuresome photographers.