http://www.canonrumors.com/canon-develop...egapixels/
APS-H though. That's only 165MP at APS-C, a density easily achievable by compact camera sensors for many years. Still would like one in a hypothetical 7Dx.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
File size? Memory medium? Writing time? Usage?
Especially the latter - I often find myself with 36 MP at slightly off-focus or with movement of camera or subject. So, what would be the point to waste disk-space for highly resolved blurr? Question is also: Lenses and lighting must be very close to perfection with HR sensors. 10× more pixels - to do what? See the single particles of air pollution?
Quote:File size? Memory medium? Writing time? Usage?
Especially the latter - I often find myself with 36 MP at slightly off-focus or with movement of camera or subject. So, what would be the point to waste disk-space for highly resolved blurr? Question is also: Lenses and lighting must be very close to perfection with HR sensors. 10× more pixels - to do what? See the single particles of air pollution?
" Video footage captured by the camera outfitted with the approximately 250-megapixel CMOS sensor achieved a level of resolution that was approximately 125 times that of Full HD (1,920 x 1,080 pixels) video and approximately 30 times that of 4K (3,840 x 2,160 pixels) video. The exceptionally high definition made possible by the sensor lets users crop and magnify video images without sacrificing image resolution and clarity.
<p style="font-family:Montserrat, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:inherit;color:rgb(0,0,0);"> Canon is considering the application of this technology in specialized surveillance and crime prevention tools, ultra-high-resolution measuring instruments and other industrial equipment, and the field of visual expression."
<p style="font-family:Montserrat, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:inherit;color:rgb(0,0,0);">
<p style="font-family:Montserrat, Arial, sans-serif;font-size:inherit;color:rgb(0,0,0);">And further: " Additionally, despite the exceptionally high pixel count, Canon applied its sensor technologies cultivated over many years to realize an architecture adapted for miniaturized pixels that delivers high-sensitivity, low-noise imaging performance."
Let's say the average RAW file from a 7D (18MP) is 25MB. Scale that, it is about 350MB for 250MP. Higher end SD or CF cards can write over 100MB/s, so we're looking at a few seconds to write each one. It would likely make sense to do parallel writes to multiple cards at this point. The sensor readout works out at 5fps so it will be card write limited. Capacity is not a problem since you could get close to a hundred shots per 32GB card and higher capacities are available.
Usage: for me, oversampling. Look up sample theory if you don't know what that is and why it might be useful. It does require a different mindset than traditionally taken. In short, a huge number of data points (even if noisier) when correctly reduced to desired output will generally look better than just sampling at the desired output resolution. There's a lot of small print I could add to say where it may be better or worse, but it is beyond the scope of a post here.
The pixel density is nothing special. Compact cameras have exceeded this level for years, and latest ones can still give half respectable pixel level output.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
A couple of people do have problems to work with only 36 MP files. Not to mention 250 MP (but since 80 MP with Phase One are already possible, those people probbaly need to upgrade their old hardware anyway).
Question really is, how often we need those details? How often the sky is clear enough to see a plane's text 18 miles away? And hwat size do we need to print those hyper-detailed stuff?
Isn't it the same with Gigapixel panoramas? Once I zoomed in to see the plant behind a window 3 miles away, I start to become bored because it wasn't an interesting plant and most of the details in those panoramas are only interesting because of the sheer performance - but not because of the emotional quality. Sharpness and details itself are great - but a super-amount of that isn't interesting me. I don't want/need to see each bug in a meadow just because it's possible.
Quote:A couple of people do have problems to work with only 36 MP files. Not to mention 250 MP (but since 80 MP with Phase One are already possible, those people probbaly need to upgrade their old hardware anyway).
Just be sure to not use it with Nikkors with VR. B)
"this isn't of use to me, so it must not be any use to anyone?" - That could be applied to many aspects of photography.
My sadness is this is unlikely to be commercialised in any useful way, but if it were, I'd snap it up. Put it another way, the raw material cost shouldn't be much different from others, but lacking the volume benefits will make it unaffordable. I guess my mindset is a bit different than most. I see data that can be manipulated in better ways, if it were available. But there is no free lunch and will be tradeoffs. I will make do with the "good enough" existing DSLR technology while I wait for mirrorless to similarly reach that level - for what I do, before that triggers a different set of arguments!
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
If you're referring to my post, popo, I didn't say it's no use to anyone. All I said was it takes quite an amount of time to look at "all those details, yeah!" And if these details are "mass production", I will simply start to close my eyes to it. Be it my pictures or the ones of others.
Seems Canon are serious about the megapixel race.
They are announcing a 120 megapixel DSLR (1Ds MK 4 ?)
http://petapixel.com/2015/09/08/canon-we...ixel-dslr/
Seems the megapixel war hasn't ended yet
|