Hi,
my name is Gregor and I'm the creator of Digital Camera Database (www.digicamdb.com (http://www.digicamdb.com)). This is a brand new site that is focused primarily on sensor info and provides often hard to find information (sensor dimensions, pixel pitch, pixel density, etc.) for more than 3200 digital cameras. It also allows you to visually compare actual sensor sizes and other sensor characteristics.
Hi Gregor,
Thanks for that initiative, it can be quite useful if the data can be depended upon. It must have been a lot of work collecting all that data from various sources, you've made a good start.
I would greatly appreciate if you would give it a test drive and perhaps provide some feedback, especially if you spot any errors. I hope you will find it useful.
Okay, here's a critical note (intended as an encouragement and for improvement of the usefulness).
I'll use one of my cameras (a Canon EOS 1DS Mark III) as a specific example. I have not tested the database for other cameras, but I'll assume similar results when the same method was used.
One of the many parameters that interests me (because it is the basis of many other relevant calculations), is the sensel pitch. You use an indirect method of calculating it from the total Megapixel amount (which is a rounded number anyway) that in this particular (1Ds3) case results in an approx. 2% error in the sensel pitch from what we are told be several other sources. It may not seem like much, but it is significant enough for some uses to get me to write this (and who knows how much it deviates for other cameras).
To be more specific, here are some other sources of information:
DCRaw: 5640 x 3752 px (incl. cropped/rounded to multiples of 16 edge pixels)
RawDigger: 5640 x 3752 px (incl. cropped/rounded edge pixels)
RawDigger: 5712 x 3774 px (incl. non-imaging technical sensels)
DigiCamDB: 5732 x 3821 px (due to reverse engineered quantities from "Total megapixels = 21.90")
DigiCamDB: 6.28 µm
EXIFtool FocalplaneXresolution: 6.4178 µm (3957.716702 PPI)
EXIFtool FocalplaneYresolution: 6.4111 µm (3961.904762 PPI)
Due to the indirect calculation, you arrive at an overstated number of sensels, which in turn leads to an understated sensel pitch in this case. It's a 2% difference for the sensel pitch, which is unfortunately too much of a difference to allow to use it for other calculations.
Cheers,
Bart