Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Are 22 megapixel APS-C sensors realistic?

Reply
Thread Tools

Are 22 megapixel APS-C sensors realistic?

 
 
mexican_equivalent@yahoo.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006
Question for those who are more technically inclined than I am...

What is the likelihood that Canon will eventually mass produce APS-C
(ie 1.6x crop) sensors that can handle 16 megapixels? 22 megapixels?

Or will there come a point where it's no longer realistic to cram so
much on a cropped sensor, and a full-frame camera would be needed to
keep up the megapixel wars?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Daniel Silevitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006
On 31 Aug 2006 09:16:19 -0700, http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Question for those who are more technically inclined than I am...
>
> What is the likelihood that Canon will eventually mass produce APS-C
> (ie 1.6x crop) sensors that can handle 16 megapixels? 22 megapixels?
>
> Or will there come a point where it's no longer realistic to cram so
> much on a cropped sensor, and a full-frame camera would be needed to
> keep up the megapixel wars?


Well, in theory you could produce an APS-sized sensor with the sort of
pixel pitch seen on 10-megapixel point&shoots. You'd probably be talking
about 100 megapixels or thereabouts, and of course you'd have the same
sort of pixel-level noise limitations as a small-sensor camera.

I have a bad feeling that in a decade or so, such a camera will be
produced, to appease the Marketing Gods, if nothing else.

-dms
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Scott W
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006

(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> Question for those who are more technically inclined than I am...
>
> What is the likelihood that Canon will eventually mass produce APS-C
> (ie 1.6x crop) sensors that can handle 16 megapixels? 22 megapixels?
>
> Or will there come a point where it's no longer realistic to cram so
> much on a cropped sensor, and a full-frame camera would be needed to
> keep up the megapixel wars?

It would not surprise me at all in canon at some time upped the pixel
count to 16mp for a 1.6 crop sensor. There are many who will cry about
the added noise but in theory the noise going from 8 MP to 16 MP would
go up by the ssqrt(2) if you down sized you 16MP image to 8 MP you
would be right back to the same noise level as an 8 MP camera, assume
good low readout noise.

People have repeatedly predicted the end of pixel wars. When the
first 6MP DSLR cameras came out a number of people thought that would
be enough for anyone.

But there are two reasons why some people are going to want more
pixels, some people are going to want to make larger and larger print
and want those print to be as sharp as possible. The other reason is
for some people even more important, going from 8MP to 16MP on the same
size sensor will pretty much eliminate aliasing.

Scott

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kinon O'Cann
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006
Yes they are, and I wouldn't mind seeing that as an option. For people
shooting things like landscapes who don't need ultra-low noise at high ISOs,
the ability to capture enourmous amounts of detail would be nice.

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> Question for those who are more technically inclined than I am...
>
> What is the likelihood that Canon will eventually mass produce APS-C
> (ie 1.6x crop) sensors that can handle 16 megapixels? 22 megapixels?
>
> Or will there come a point where it's no longer realistic to cram so
> much on a cropped sensor, and a full-frame camera would be needed to
> keep up the megapixel wars?
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Alfred Molon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed). com>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Question for those who are more technically inclined than I am...
>
> What is the likelihood that Canon will eventually mass produce APS-C
> (ie 1.6x crop) sensors that can handle 16 megapixels? 22 megapixels?
>
> Or will there come a point where it's no longer realistic to cram so
> much on a cropped sensor, and a full-frame camera would be needed to
> keep up the megapixel wars?


22MP on an APS-C sensor would mean 4 micrometer pixels, which in turn
would mean that you'd have to shoot at max. ISO 100 to have low enough
noise levels.

This means that if you need a lot of DOF and have to stop down the lens,
you will need a tripod quite frequently, considering the low light
sensitivity and the very high resolution. Such a camera would be a
"tripod camera".

However with 4 micrometer pixels the smallest aperture would be around
F12-13 or so (just guessing, don't nail me down on this), because of the
diffraction limit. You could stop down further the lens but would then
lose resolution due to diffraction. F12-13 however should give you
sufficient DOF on an APS-sized sensor.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E300, E330 and E500 forum at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
Olympus E330 resource - http://myolympus.org/E330/
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jones
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006
Mmm. But why can't noise levels also be reduced with the latest
technological enhancements?


"Alfred Molon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ...
>
> 22MP on an APS-C sensor would mean 4 micrometer pixels, which in turn
> would mean that you'd have to shoot at max. ISO 100 to have low enough
> noise levels.
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Scott W
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006

Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed). com>,
> (E-Mail Removed) says...
> > Question for those who are more technically inclined than I am...
> >
> > What is the likelihood that Canon will eventually mass produce APS-C
> > (ie 1.6x crop) sensors that can handle 16 megapixels? 22 megapixels?
> >
> > Or will there come a point where it's no longer realistic to cram so
> > much on a cropped sensor, and a full-frame camera would be needed to
> > keep up the megapixel wars?

>
> 22MP on an APS-C sensor would mean 4 micrometer pixels, which in turn
> would mean that you'd have to shoot at max. ISO 100 to have low enough
> noise levels.


The F30 has just about 4 um pixels, it seem tos do pretty good at ISO
800
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf30/page10.asp

Scott

 
Reply With Quote
 
Pete D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006

"Daniel Silevitch" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 31 Aug 2006 09:16:19 -0700, (E-Mail Removed)
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Question for those who are more technically inclined than I am...
>>
>> What is the likelihood that Canon will eventually mass produce APS-C
>> (ie 1.6x crop) sensors that can handle 16 megapixels? 22 megapixels?
>>
>> Or will there come a point where it's no longer realistic to cram so
>> much on a cropped sensor, and a full-frame camera would be needed to
>> keep up the megapixel wars?

>
> Well, in theory you could produce an APS-sized sensor with the sort of
> pixel pitch seen on 10-megapixel point&shoots. You'd probably be talking
> about 100 megapixels or thereabouts, and of course you'd have the same
> sort of pixel-level noise limitations as a small-sensor camera.
>
> I have a bad feeling that in a decade or so, such a camera will be
> produced, to appease the Marketing Gods, if nothing else.
>
> -dms


So you don't think technology can improve enough to also improve the quality
at higher ISO's, why the hell not?


 
Reply With Quote
 
Pete D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006
No reason what so ever! CPU's are a good example, Moores Law was in trouble
for a while there but just recently there has been some large leaps in
technology or at least the way it is applied. Some can apply to camera
technology, why not dual sensors to gather twice as many photos, four
perhaps, how about LMOS or LCCD?



"Jones" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Mmm. But why can't noise levels also be reduced with the latest
> technological enhancements?
>
>
> "Alfred Molon" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) ...
>>
>> 22MP on an APS-C sensor would mean 4 micrometer pixels, which in turn
>> would mean that you'd have to shoot at max. ISO 100 to have low enough
>> noise levels.
>>

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Daniel Silevitch
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-31-2006
On Fri, 1 Sep 2006 06:44:43 +1000, Pete D <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> "Daniel Silevitch" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> On 31 Aug 2006 09:16:19 -0700, (E-Mail Removed)
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> Question for those who are more technically inclined than I am...
>>>
>>> What is the likelihood that Canon will eventually mass produce APS-C
>>> (ie 1.6x crop) sensors that can handle 16 megapixels? 22 megapixels?
>>>
>>> Or will there come a point where it's no longer realistic to cram so
>>> much on a cropped sensor, and a full-frame camera would be needed to
>>> keep up the megapixel wars?

>>
>> Well, in theory you could produce an APS-sized sensor with the sort of
>> pixel pitch seen on 10-megapixel point&shoots. You'd probably be talking
>> about 100 megapixels or thereabouts, and of course you'd have the same
>> sort of pixel-level noise limitations as a small-sensor camera.
>>
>> I have a bad feeling that in a decade or so, such a camera will be
>> produced, to appease the Marketing Gods, if nothing else.
>>
>> -dms

>
> So you don't think technology can improve enough to also improve the quality
> at higher ISO's, why the hell not?


There's a limit to those sorts of games. Once you get to the point where
the electronics are capable of counting individual photons (and we're
not all that that far away from that point), then the limiting factor
becomes number of photons/pixel and the uncertainties (i.e. noise)
inherent in a Poisson-statistics system. Bigger pixels means more
photons per pixel (assuming the same lens etc), and a better
signal/noise ratio.

What could work is a small-pixel sensor that handles high-ISO tasks by
binning pixels together. Call it the digital equivalent of large-grain
high-ISO film.

-dms
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
URL for 4 megapixel vs. 7 megapixel Comparison Shots? Vik Rubenfeld Digital Photography 2 09-26-2005 08:51 AM
Sigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLRSigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLR sigmaphotojapan@yahoo.com Digital Photography 6 04-01-2005 05:26 PM
Sigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLRSigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLR sigmaphotojapan@yahoo.com Digital Photography 5 04-01-2005 02:08 PM
5 Megapixel VS. 4 Megapixel camera Mark Digital Photography 13 03-09-2005 04:06 PM
The Human Eye: 120 Megapixel Monochrome, 6 Megapixel Color Brian C. Baird Digital Photography 44 06-17-2004 06:12 PM



Advertisments