Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: [OM] Digital back (was Polariod Olympus?)

Subject: Re: Re: [OM] Digital back (was Polariod Olympus?)
From: Vaughan Bromfield <vaughan.bromfield@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 13:01:41 +1000
Folks

The assertions that digital backs can/should be made for film camers all
assume that CCDs work the same and film: that is, they record the images
when light shines on the sensitive surface. Do CCD sensors work that way?

Do digital cameras need shutters?

It may be that digitising a camera is more work than slapping a ccd cell
in the film plane. A lot more.

Ditto for the hang-up on making a CCD to match the 35mm format. Why does
the CCD need to be that big? If the answer is "to use all our existing
lenses" then that's a poor reason. Instead, imagine if we could start
a-fresh and design a digital format from scratch, to be as good as
current technology can get, optimised for whatever the market wants
(compactness, resolution, price, etc)... that's exactly what Olympus is doing.


Vaughan

--


> Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:17:17 -0700
> From: Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [OM] Polariod Olympus?
> 
> >digital back would be nice, but we've already heard the bad news on 
> >that before... :(
> 
> If some third party can build Polaroid backs, it seems like a third 
> party could build digital backs for various cameras.  It just has to 
> be profitable. Even to just match current digital camera development 
> would probably be more costly than a new high end digital camera like 
> the E-10.  Are you willing to pay for it?
> 
> Related to that is an interesting site I found this week end which is 
> probably not news to some of you, but it was to me.  It is 
> http://www.users.qwest.net/~rnclark/scandetail.htm  It is a large 
> page with lots of photo and takes a while to load if you use a modem 
> as I do.
> 
> Clarke, a pretty good photographer from the look of it, does a lot of 
> interesting work on the page comparing film formats, scans, digital 
> camera images.  The following are some of his conclusions based on 
> some evidence on the page.
> 
> "From these tests, it is my opinion that digital cameras will match 
> Fujichrome Velvi 35mm film when they reach more than about 10 
> megapixels. Somewhere in the 12-16 megapixels will produce color 
> image quality comparable to 35 mm film (this is a compromise of more 
> intensity detail and less color detail than film). Somewhat fewer 
> megapixels, approximately 7-8 Mpixels will match 35mm film intensity 
> detail but at below 35mm film color detail.
> 
> "Medium format film: about 50 digital camera megapixels are need to 
> match Fujichrome Velvia in 6 x 4.5 cm.
> 
> "Large format: more than 200 digital camera megapixels are need to 
> match 4x5 Fujichrome Velvia film. How much more needs further 
> testing. "
> 
> Take a look.  It is really an interesting site.
> 
> - -- 
> Winsor Crosby
> Long Beach, California
> mailto:wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: Re: [OM] Digital back (was Polariod Olympus?), Vaughan Bromfield <=
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz