[Paul MaudDib]

Are we ssure we are talking about FF and not the upcoming medium format camrea from Sony and Mamiya?

http://photorumors.com/2014/10/24/more-details-on-the-rumored-sonyzeiss-and-mamiya-medium-format-digital-rangefinder-cameras/

That's a heck of a rumor. I guess the 645 has a competitor.

I don't even want to think about all the crap you could do with a MF mirrorless. The technical possibilities are absurd. How about a speed booster to 1.0x-crop/full-frame 6x4.5, or stitching together huge images...

I wonder what glass Zeiss and Mamiya would be putting out for this. The M7 glass has a solid-platinum reputation.

[Big Dave]

Depending on performance, this could prove to be quite close to their existing MF sensor.
Other than that, I'd love to have an ultra high res. FF sensor for landscape and studio shots.
Beyond that, I wouldn't want the added hassles of shooting with anything above 24mp.

There aren't any hassles shooting with 36mp. Image transfer is fast with the newer fast cards and the pixel size is the same as a 16mp asp-c camera. I don't find shooting my A7R any different from my K5 II. I think that the K3's smaller pixels might make a difference. I really think that the 4.9 micron pixel size is perfect for me.

---------- Post added 10-27-14 at 01:47 AM ----------

Samsung have now pushed APS-C to 28MP, where 24MP used to be the de-facto limit, so I guess Sony is just moving the slider up a notch now on FF, from 36MP to 50MP, just to show that that it can.

If Samsung's 28MP APS-C works OK, you can probably expect Sony to also release a APS-C camera with a 28MP or 30MP sensor in 2015 too.

This ride will not end. Before too long, we will all have 1 Gigapixel camera sensors in our mobile phones, let alone our cameras.

Samsung is using a 28mp BSI sensor (back side illumination) Sony has used BSI in their high end cyber shot cameras, since 2009. BSI helps keep noise down on smaller pixel sizes. I don't think that it would help much with FF until the density increases past 70mp for FF.

---------- Post added 10-27-14 at 01:57 AM ----------

Oh, now I see what you mean. I agree, I would like to see "better", rather than simply "more".

If you want better IQ, FF is the answer. Check out DXOmark tests to see the improvement of larger pixels, while retaining the mp count. Of course you have the size and weight penalty if you go with a dslr.

[RonHendriks1966]

I know the 645z implimentation of the flippy screen is pretty stout and weatherized, but, after reading this thread on the new D750 flippy screen already, I think I'd just assume do without on the new Pentax FF!

D750 screen cutting out: Nikon FX SLR (DF, D1-D4, D600-D800) Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Eric

The question is: Can you bend that screen?

[BrianR]

There aren't any hassles shooting with 36mp. Image transfer is fast with the newer fast cards and the pixel size is the same as a 16mp asp-c camera.

More computer power required to process images can easily translate into a hassle. My computer was pretty dated (dual core, 2gb ram from ~7 years back) but it handled 6mp raws with no issue. Moving to 'just' 16mp felt oppressive for some editing tasks (storage and transfer times were no issue). Having since upgraded some of the hardware (mostly with higher end scavenged parts from the same era), all is well again, but I'm sure it would still choke on 36mp files or larger.

Fortunately by the time a Pentax FF camera with 50mp exists in a form compatible with my wallet I predict the computer power needed to process images comfortably will also be compatible with my wallet.

---

Last edited by BrianR; 10-27-2014 at 02:11 PM.

[ElJamoquio]

Computing power and storage are improving at a rate that's at least double the increase in pixels.

On top of that, the 'pixel' is closer to the ceiling of what's possible (due to diffraction) than memory storage is...

[promacjoe]

Computing power and storage are improving at a rate that's at least double the increase in pixels.

On top of that, the 'pixel' is closer to the ceiling of what's possible (due to diffraction) than memory storage is...

Quantum computers are being used on a limited basis today. That is computers on the atomic scale, using only a few atoms as a switch. Quantum memory, that is memory that is on the atomic scale is being developed, along with sensors based on the atomic scale. In fact for computers to get any faster than they are today, They must go to a extreme multicore design or go to the quantum level. If they can achieve this kind of integration and produce better amplifiers, We can expect to see sensors in the Giga pixels or better. Although I can only see them using these sensors in a scientific application, not in your average camera.

You are only limited by those who say we can't do something. Those who think it is possible should try, And like the Wright brothers may one day succeed.

[normhead]

Quantum computers are being used on a limited basis today. That is computers on the atomic scale, using only a few atoms as a switch. Quantum memory, that is memory that is on the atomic scale is being developed, along with sensors based on the atomic scale. In fact for computers to get any faster than they are today, They must go to a extreme multicore design or go to the quantum level. If they can achieve this kind of integration and produce better amplifiers, We can expect to see sensors in the Giga pixels or better. Although I can only see them using these sensors in a scientific application, not in your average camera.

You are only limited by those who say we can't do something. Those who think it is possible should try, And like the Wright brothers may one day succeed.

Or they could go take some pictures.

[luftfluss]

If you want better IQ, FF is the answer. Check out DXOmark tests to see the improvement of larger pixels, while retaining the mp count. Of course you have the size and weight penalty if you go with a dslr.

My comment was pertaining to a desire for sensor makers to improve the IQ of sensors, not simply cramming more pixels into a given size.

[patarok]

There aren't any hassles shooting with 36mp. Image transfer is fast with the newer fast cards and the pixel size is the same as a 16mp asp-c camera. I don't find shooting my A7R any different from my K5 II. I think that the K3's smaller pixels might make a difference. I really think that the 4.9 micron pixel size is perfect for me.

---------- Post added 10-27-14 at 01:47 AM ----------



Samsung is using a 28mp BSI sensor (back side illumination) Sony has used BSI in their high end cyber shot cameras, since 2009. BSI helps keep noise down on smaller pixel sizes. I don't think that it would help much with FF until the density increases past 70mp for FF.

---------- Post added 10-27-14 at 01:57 AM ----------



If you want better IQ, FF is the answer. Check out DXOmark tests to see the improvement of larger pixels, while retaining the mp count. Of course you have the size and weight penalty if you go with a dslr.

I still like the idea of 36 MP, but i would buy a 50mp ff dslr from Ricoh-PENTAX also. Weather sealings are a must. And maybe they should think about built in wifi and gps. I also really would like to see a 3G/LTE connection on one professional DSLR one day, so photographers can send their work right away onto some server so it can't get lost or stolen before they get to sit in front of a personal computer.(in cam Tagging and so on)
And go664mn!t put the lock picture function on the AE-L button when in review mode and that button should also work for locking pics when the instant review shows the recently shot picture for go6s s4k3!

[Paul MaudDib]

Quantum computers are being used on a limited basis today. That is computers on the atomic scale, using only a few atoms as a switch. Quantum memory, that is memory that is on the atomic scale is being developed, along with sensors based on the atomic scale. In fact for computers to get any faster than they are today, They must go to a extreme multicore design or go to the quantum level. If they can achieve this kind of integration and produce better amplifiers, We can expect to see sensors in the Giga pixels or better. Although I can only see them using these sensors in a scientific application, not in your average camera.

You are only limited by those who say we can't do something. Those who think it is possible should try, And like the Wright brothers may one day succeed.

Haha, you are way misinformed. I have a master's in compsci (hire me plox) and you're way off here. Right now we're probably 20 years off from a commercially viable quantum computer, assuming that every piece fell into line. And that would be the equivalent of a mainframe system - not something that would sit on your desk, let alone in a camera. The software isn't directly compatible with general-purpose computers, and it'll take at least a decade to catch up after people start getting real samples and playing with them. Don't stake your hopes on "quantum".

There are still ways to get extra speed over your basic general-purpose computer. If you cook yourself an ASIC you can make a hardwired processor that's really good at doing one specific thing, orders of magnitude more so. And you can make a processor that is "hardwired" to do one thing at a time but also can be re-configured to do different things later - that's a FPGA. And we are finally starting to see many-core designs really take off - like the Xeon Phi, AMD APUs, and GPU processing. The software isn't awful but it's not really there yet either.

[promacjoe]

Haha, you are way misinformed. I have a master's in compsci (hire me plox) and you're way off here. Right now we're probably 20 years off from a commercially viable quantum computer, assuming that every piece fell into line. And that would be the equivalent of a mainframe system - not something that would sit on your desk, let alone in a camera. The software isn't directly compatible with general-purpose computers, and it'll take at least a decade to catch up after people start getting real samples and playing with them. Don't stake your hopes on "quantum".

There are still ways to get extra speed over your basic general-purpose computer. If you cook yourself an ASIC you can make a hardwired processor that's really good at doing one specific thing, orders of magnitude more so. And you can make a processor that is "hardwired" to do one thing at a time but also can be re-configured to do different things later - that's a FPGA. And we are finally starting to see many-core designs really take off - like the Xeon Phi, AMD APUs, and GPU processing. The software isn't awful but it's not really there yet either.

First of all, I never said quantum computing was being used commercially. I said on a limited Basis. It is in its infancy and still being researched. My point was they are working on the technology. And if you read further I said In fact for computers to get any faster than they are today, They must go to a extreme multicore design or go to the quantum level. Yes the technology is a long way away. My point was that technology is not standing still. Sensor technology will strive to get higher pixel count with a faster ISO. Remember the engineer at Intel who said, who could ever use more than one mega memory, he was proven wrong. In the end it's the end user that sets the limits not the technology. What we need and what we accept.

And yes a single use computer would be infinitely faster and more efficient than the technology we use today. But we live in a multitasking world, and I don't want to go back to the days of DOS. Nor do I think you would want to go back to assembly language to write all of your computer programs, even though it is a more efficient language for the processor.

[jsherman999]

. Nor do I think you would want to go back to assembly language to write all of your computer programs, even though it is a more efficient language for the processor.

I learned assembly on the 6502. So, bring it on, I'm current.

---------- Post added 10-30-14 at 10:27 AM ----------

I have a master's in compsci (hire me plox)

Are you fluent in python & perl, do you know Linux, are you NAC'd, can you work from home and what's your hourly rate?

[formercanuck]

I learned assembly on the 6502. So, bring it on, I'm current.

---------- Post added 10-30-14 at 10:27 AM ----------



Are you fluent in python & perl, do you know Linux, are you NAC'd, can you work from home and what's your hourly rate?

Hahaha... with the exception of (currently) being NAC'd I have been for the past 15 years. Cut my teeth on QNX in the late 80's and early Slackware in the 90's.
Working on my clearance.

[Erictator]

Haha, you are way misinformed. I have a master's in compsci...

As a guy in the hiring seat in the real world service business, I used to see a lot of applicants touting their compsci ticket.

Many turned out to be paper tigers who learned a lot of ancient history, some current theory, and a lot of misguided info about futuristic implementation, and were fluent in a language or two (a current relevant language maybe if you were lucky), depending on the date they got their ticket punched.
A lot of the early graduates just don't have relevant information that it terribly relevant today. Of much more value was the work ethic of a potential hire, if they could interface with clients in a confidence inspiring manner, and to be honest, were much more valuable employees if they had certain manufacturer certifications and training on current product lines.

As to how any of this relates to camera CPU's leaves a lot to be desired...heck my cell phone is a quad core nowadays...but the bottlenecks are always the lowest common denominator... bus and cache memory and well as storage memory speed that has to be able to keep up & power and heat which in total has to be within reason for LSI in something as small as a camera running on a little battery that's expected to be good for at least 300 actuations with a flash thrown in ocassionally on a single 1Hr charge.

My guess is that large files will be easier to handle at about the same rate as the electronic technology progresses to handle the throughput, meaning it will be a net break even with modest gains over time in FPS as new sensors come out. The PC tech will follow the same curve, and the latest output images will be handled within reasonable limits on current generation PC's or the manufacturer wouldn't bother making a camera for the average consumer that couldn't handle it.
Eric

[normhead]

I learned assembly on the 6502. So, bring it on, I'm current.

Hey, so did I. And my step brother did the first traffic control system in Toronto using 6502s and machine code. He's moved on to Google among other places, I've moved on to retirement.