I would only be interested if it made possible a large sensor. Otherwise, its the same old stuff... just what we have now...
Lenny
I would only be interested if it made possible a large sensor. Otherwise, its the same old stuff... just what we have now...
Lenny
EigerStudios
Museum Quality Drum Scanning and Printing
If it really is a thousand times more light sensitive then a lot of ND filters will be sold.
No need. As always you can choose your ISO based on the amount of gain applied to the sensor signal. Or negative gain can be applied, which is what happens when you choose an ISO below the "native" ISO. 1000 times the sensitivity means ten stops increased s/n performance.Originally Posted by Jac@stafford.net
I share Bernice's skepticism that we'll see this much real world performance (from this or from any other technology on the horizon). But I don't agree that we are currently near a physics-imposed brick wall.
Lenny's suggestion that real improvements would require a larger sensor size is incorrect. We are in the realm of diminishing returns with resolution improvements in 35mm and smaller sensors. But there's a way to go yet. And in the world of medium format, no one has come close to the higher pixel densities that would be both possible and useful. Separately from resolution, s/n performance is important to a degree that's hard to overestimate. We are still far from what's possible there.
Thanks for that. I had not considered that with improved s/n one could reduce ISO further than I am accustomed to with my digital camera.
What bothers me more than anything else about the "digital race" is how expectations are being blown out of proportion.
I've been trying to get my teenaged daughter into photography. My digital SLRs are too bit, to complex for her, and they are "dad's cameras". So I bought here one of these coolpix cameras form Nikon, fairly inexpensive, but if i had a camera like that when I was in high school I would of thought I died and gone to heaven. 30x zoom, image stabilized lens, almost 2000 shots on a single 8 gig card, etc, etc. I did read the reviews, and ll I see is complaints that it is too nosy, the zoom only works well in bright light, etc, etc. Compared to my old Nikon EM, sure i got better images, but wow, I only had 36 shots and i had to pay for every film to be developed. I think today, if they want to, the kids can learn faster in some ways than we did.
Well my daughter likes it, understand it, fits in her hand nicely, and more importantly, it is "her" camera, not dad's.
So I think I have a hit here. But by the standard of how fast things are changing in this "digital race", it is already out date. That to me is sad. I will have my 30 year old Nikon EM, and it still works, although all film I shoot today is 4x5 or 8x10. I felt proud about my camera, looked after it, and other people would say "goog for you, that camera will last you a lifetime". Well not quite, but a long time. But I think having a sense of pride in the tools you own and use, and having that sense of pride re-inforced by the community at large helps make you a batter - well, anything. A carpenter, chief, photographer, anything skill or profession - when you feel a sense of pride in your tools, when you feel you have to look after your gear and take care of it so it will take care of you, I think you become better at whatever it is you do.
but with this "digital race", IMO, you do not see that. And that to me is sad. Don't know the solution, I just think we are, as a society as a whole, not individuals here, but as a whole, becoming a bunch of spoiled, self entitled jerks because we don't have the latest and greatest.
soapbox mode = off
eta gosha maaba, aaniish gaa zhiwebiziyin ?
Just FYI, somewhere I read that this "1000x more sensitivity" claim was misquoted. It's actually 1000x greater than the older graphene technology, which was apparently abysmal. So it's not "1000x better" than current cameras.
Well, by that standard, the boxes of tech pan I have in my freezer might have "1000x more sensitivity" than the large format tin type revival prints the guy down the street from me is currently doing.
eta gosha maaba, aaniish gaa zhiwebiziyin ?
A real innovation would be to put into mass production 5-10 micron CMOS image sensor technology on a 5" x 7" size sensor that results in multi GB file sizes and no less than 20 bits of contrast range.
If this 5" x 7" digital sensor is to be used for color, three will be required to achieve individual RGB image files in a color separation camera.
Until then...
Bernice
Indeed, there are already a good number of problem limiting current image sensor technology today that are not limited by current knowledge of Physics.
These trade-offs are cost-marketing driven. In the product development process, there are always compromises made to result in a sale-able product at a cost the market will accept.
What is good enough, what will it cost the end users, What profits can be made -vs- investment -vs- production cost, how can the product be made market acceptable....enough.
Bernice
Ahhh, good catch. Any sense how this translates to a comparison with CMOS?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks