• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

new 28 & 33 Mega pixel camera

I rememember DALSA. They have designed some chips that have absolutely insane bandwidth requirements, and have been doing 35mm chips for some time now. In the past, I think once, I brought up this page (URL changed) - http://www.dalsa.com/dc/origin/dc_sensor.asp

They basically already have an 8 megapixel chip that can deliver some 36 FPS through a 16-bit ADC, which is nearly 600MB/sec of substained bandwidth. At 24FPS (standard) you'd need some 23GB of storage per minute of video.

So I'm not suprised they are doing medium format backs. The only concern is cost - currently backs of this size are ~$15,000-$25,000 or so...and DALSA's current video-camera cannot be purchased. Instead it is rented for about $3,000 per day - and the enduser must supply their own storage (which is usually a gigantic RAID array of HDDs to simply handle 400MB/sec of average bandwidth)... This camera back won't be cheap at all, but DALSA brings quite a bit to the table.
 
You think the backs will be that cheap? I know the digital back for the Hasselblad was like 15K or, so. Either way it is a nice development. And I have always heard by most of the camera sites the 24MP was about maximum usable. It is nice to see them proven wrong.
Remember the scanner cameras. Was alot like taking old pinhole photos but, the resolution was outstanding, if nothing moved.
 
Really thou these huge sensors are designed as full frame meduim format sensors if they were FF 35mm sensors they would be to noisy on the other hand in a few generations that issue should be solved and we will see 30MP+ DSLRs.
 
 
Do you think the 500 Mega-pixel camera would produce good 6x9's :eek:
 
Think of the file size thou a 6.3 megapixel 16 bit tiff file is 36 megs, Ive hear the processed 1DS Mark II files are around 50 megs. Now not to mention a 39 megapixel Phase one back picture will eat a quater of a gig. a 500 Megepixel image no thanks i dont need to have a rack mounted fiber storage setupin my house drawing several KW an hour.
 
[V]ad[H]atte(r) said:
Do you think the 500 Mega-pixel camera would produce good 6x9's :eek:
Click to expand...
I don't know... Might be kind of pixilated at that size. You'd probably want to stick with 4x6s.
 
VictorEM83 said:
Think of the file size thou a 6.3 megapixel 16 bit tiff file is 36 megs, Ive hear the processed 1DS Mark II files are around 50 megs. Now not to mention a 39 megapixel Phase one back picture will eat a quater of a gig. a 500 Megepixel image no thanks i dont need to have a rack mounted fiber storage setupin my house drawing several KW an hour.
Click to expand...

actually, not quite. I have been looking for a scan from any magazine of a ocean view w/ blue sky, and generate it in a 6 feet by 4 ft. photo. The print shop that has a fancy hp plotter tell me a scan like that w/ his 8000 dpi scanner (it's a 400 lb. heavy duty sucker) will need a 500 - 600 MB file in order to print out a nice 6 ft. by 4 ft. photo.

He then said to have a digital camera to do that, again, the camera needs to generate a 500 - 600 MB snap shot. So there is need, for me anyway, to create one of those photo. For now, the alternative way is to get an analog camera and creates a "stock photo" and use that to pipe the output to the HP.
 
Im not question the need, and most likely they have a drum scanner and they are quite insane but very nice. But my main point was at say 500-600 megs per picture you are gonna be teathered to a PC of a laptop for some time to come I mean how many photographers are gonna buy a 8GB card to store 16 pictures so you can print 6'x4' pictures. These wil be mostly limited to medium and large format backs that ad agencies use. Also say if canon or nikon took a Foveon X3 approch and took the colors and layered them a 20-24mp 16 bit per color channel layered sensor(80-92mp total) could produce a 6'x4' print easy with better dynamic range as a side effect.
 
Storing the files will only be half the problem. Getting those things from the camera to the PC in a timley manner will be a big pain. My parents HP photosmart with its SD memory card... Honestly, it must be slower than using floppy disks.

So what if you take big scenic pictures? Surely you wouldnt just take a few and leave. You would want to take quite a few pictures. A few pictures here, a few pictures there, you've got 4000MB of images that need to be moved...

But if you can afford 100 Megapixels, I doubt having decent storage for pictures would be a problem.
 
VictorEM83 said:
Im not question the need, and most likely they have a drum scanner and they are quite insane but very nice. But my main point was at say 500-600 megs per picture you are gonna be teathered to a PC of a laptop for some time to come I mean how many photographers are gonna buy a 8GB card to store 16 pictures so you can print 6'x4' pictures. These wil be mostly limited to medium and large format backs that ad agencies use. Also say if canon or nikon took a Foveon X3 approch and took the colors and layered them a 20-24mp 16 bit per color channel layered sensor(80-92mp total) could produce a 6'x4' print easy with better dynamic range as a side effect.
Click to expand...

I dont believe that this will be a problem for too much longer. With some of the newer storage devices out there, that are soon to be produced. I see it that soon we will have 60gig Micro-drives, CF and, SD cards. So then the file sizes will not be that relevant except for permanant storage. Then you will no doubt need an external or, two to keep your computer free.
A friend of mine just got the 50gig Ipod and, that frickin thing is small. It had 5 full movies on it and, a bunch of music. He said he still had a ton of space left. That where I think camera storge will go.
 
Joves said:
I dont believe that this will be a problem for too much longer. With some of the newer storage devices out there, that are soon to be produced. I see it that soon we will have 60gig Micro-drives, CF and, SD cards. So then the file sizes will not be that relevant except for permanant storage. Then you will no doubt need an external or, two to keep your computer free.
A friend of mine just got the 50gig Ipod and, that frickin thing is small. It had 5 full movies on it and, a bunch of music. He said he still had a ton of space left. That where I think camera storge will go.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but disagree at the same time. I think solid state storage will hit a wall at 32GB for CF/SD cards why? Well on a 90nm process 8GB card cost a consumer about $750, and a 16GB flash card isnt even around yet so for 16Gigs to be reasonable you would need to use the 65nm process that would enable you to have the same storage in 1/2 the space or 2x the storage in the same space. Now for a 32GB ard your talking 45nm process and for the 64GB flash card ~30nm process. The key problem is there is only few major players that will build fabs lower than 65nm for themselves because the cost of fabs also follows moore's law the double for each process generation so 5 billion for 65nm 10 billion for 45nm and 20 billion for 30nm plants. So basically until CMOS technology gets a major shot in the arm we will have to wait for carbon nanotubes to fix the issues since every article preaches them as the holy grail. Also this doesnt account for the increased count of transistors per GB to keep up with the higher transfer speeds required to write such huge files in a timely manner So IMHO you will see a slow down of expansion of MP and file sizes except for specialized gear or rare exotic projects that require a tether or a HDD and HDDs are hitting the wall pretty hard too for expanding their size without expanding the cost at an unreasonable ratio
 
i love stuff like this . makes me think we're gettin someplace!!! if those p4's would only get better . l o l
 
I dont agree with Moores Law. The way I see it devlopements will rise faster than double as, new things are discovered. Also while the price initially will be high at first, it will drop to affordable in a year or, two. Just look at the cameras in the past. The old Sonny's with hi-density 3.5 storage were as, much as, I paid for my D50. So the near future will work out as, the old future as, history always repeats itself.
 
Actually, fabrication isn't the issue. There are fabrication processes that allow for higher density cards to be produced.

The issue is purely cost. There is little enough demand for the 8GB cards due to cost, and it will take some time before costs drop enough that an 8GB card will become a reasonable choice. At that point, there willbe 16GB cards available.

Manufacturers have a significant amount of overhead in building high capacity high performance cards. Each time you double the capacity for example, the testing cost at least doubles (among many other costs). There has to be enough demand before a manufacturer can justify the added costs to produce something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top