At 06:53 AM 1/4/2009, William wrote:
>...
>"I myself would rather see less pixels and better noise performance."
>
>The 5D mk II apparently offers both. Noise is not determined solely by pixel
>area. I'm wondering when sensor design will eventually bump into the laws of
>physics, and no further meaningful improvement will be possible.
The article I pointed to has some numbers on the limits achievable
with silicon. Basically it is the read noise, loss due to filters and Bayer
pattern, the sensor quantum efficiency, and read electronics performance.
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/
The best sensors are 3-4 electrons of read noise and QE of around 45%.
So maybe a factor of 2 better is possible with silicon?
My prediction is that around 25-30mp for a FF sensor is probably close,
mostly due to lens and diffraction limits. The 4/3rds sensor is probably
not much more than 10-12mp. Probably one of the reasons 4/3rds lenses
are so expensive as they need the higher resolution for the smaller
sensor. I just don't understand P&S cameras with 12mp sensors.
However, I cannot predict marketing departments.
I'm having a hard time knowing what I would due with more than 12mp
on a 35mm sensor. Perhaps Nikon will mate a MF sensor to the Mamiya 7
body. http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/09/nikon-readying.html
But I have not purchased my poster size printer yet. No wonder
we don't see DOF markings anymore.
I guess we will just have to start focusing on artistic endeavors instead
of megapixels.
WayneS
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|