On 3/31/2013 7:22 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
> Is anybody else but me recognizing the smoke and mirrors aspect to
> this development.
Yes, but you wouldn't want to know who. :-)
> Changing the method of color separation will achieve
> some benefit, but filter, prism, defraction grating or tuned receptors
> still only see the amount of light of the given color hitting that
> particular sensel.
Not sure I agree. The red filter throws away all non-red light. The blue and
the two green sensors throw away all the
red light. Direct all the red light to one sensor, and you have a theoretical
gain of 4x, two stops. Same for blue; 2x
for green. Clearly, there are other losses, or the gain would be more than half
a stop.
> A half-stop gain is pretty much nothing these days.
Agreed.
> Improving fill-factor is the biggest gain.
But what about resolution? The Foveon sensors and Leica MM have shown that
Bayer arrays with demosaicing, while not
realizing the full luminance resolution the number of sensor sites implies, do
a pretty fair job.
As I understand the report, spacial distinction between each group of four
sensor sites is sacrificed for light
efficiency. Each of the four gets the collective one color for all of them.
That would make a 12 MP sensor into a 3 MP
sensor, halving the linear resolution, would it not?
I wonder how the efficiency and other aspects, like DR, would compare to a 3 MP
sensor of the same size/format made with
the latest technology.
I assume, of course, that they will make higher pixel count sensors, to
compensate, and make the new sensors marketable.
I wonder whence DR and noise, then?
Interesting, anyway.
Reflective Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|