Pixel count forecast
Alfred Molon
1. of a compact camera (we've reached 15MP)
2. APS-C DLSR (current level: 18MP)
3. "full frame" DLSR (current level: 24MP)
I wouldn't expect too much increase in the compact sector, but APS-C and
especially full frame DSLRs should still increase a lot. Maybe we'll be
at 25-30MP with APS-C and 40MP with full frame DSLRs.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
ransley
5 years isnt much time for the long run. The present trend I see is
quality and speed. The Canon G10 was 14.7mp the G11 is 10mp, a
reduction of about 5 for increased sensitivity. You see the same trend
in some Dslrs to keep mp the same and increase sensitivity, speed and
quality. I think the mp war is basicly over and sensitivity and
quality will be the overall trend with quality cameras so in only 5
years I would guess 18 for aps-c and maybe 30 for sony and 26 for
canons high mp cameras. But as new sensor designs are invented who
knows what we will see. Everyone tried to predict a limit for computer
power and there is no end in sight so technology will keep things
moving forward
Rich
> What's your forecast of the pixel count level in five years
>
> 1. of a compact camera (we've reached 15MP)
> 2. APS-C DLSR (current level: 18MP)
> 3. "full frame" DLSR (current level: 24MP)
>
> I wouldn't expect too much increase in the compact sector, but APS-C and
> especially full frame DSLRs should still increase a lot. Maybe we'll be
> at 25-30MP with APS-C and 40MP with full frame DSLRs.
> --
>
> Alfred Molon
> ------------------------------
I think not much more. Reason being that even if they develop sensor
technologies to suppress noise sufficiently to permit more megapixels,
the lens quality needed to support the sensors to get more resolution
will be too expensive for the cameras.
Ray Fischer
>What's your forecast of the pixel count level in five years
>
>1. of a compact camera (we've reached 15MP)
15MP
>2. APS-C DLSR (current level: 18MP)
20MP
>3. "full frame" DLSR (current level: 24MP)
100MP
Shrug. Five-year technology predictions are almost always wrong.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Reality
>On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:09:16 -0800 (PST), Rich <rande...@gmail.com>
>wrote this:
>Unless they are made of........plastic!!!
>.
Plastic lens elements can be easily configured for less CA, more complex
geometries, etc. Plastic lenses can easily out perform the most exotic
fluorite designs.
Ray Fischer
>Plastic lens elements can be easily configured for less CA, more complex
>geometries, etc. Plastic lenses can easily out perform the most exotic
>fluorite designs.
That must explain why people keep using those expensive flourite lenses
instead of just casting plastic ones.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Eric Stevens
I didn't know they made lenses out of fish tank bottom material!
http://www.seachem.com/Products/product_pages/FlouriteBlackSand.html
Eric Stevens
Reality
No, it's due to idiot brainless consumers like you who would belittle any
lenses made with superior optical plastics.
ransley
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:22:28 +0000, Glen <glenne...@tiscali.com> wrote:
> >On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:09:16 -0800 (PST), Rich <rander3...@gmail.com>
> >wrote this:
>
> >>On Nov 21, 4:34 am, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> What's your forecast of the pixel count level in five years
>
> >>> 1. of a compact camera (we've reached 15MP)
> >>> 2. APS-C DLSR (current level: 18MP)
> >>> 3. "full frame" DLSR (current level: 24MP)
>
> >>> I wouldn't expect too much increase in the compact sector, but APS-C and
> >>> especially full frame DSLRs should still increase a lot. Maybe we'll be
> >>> at 25-30MP with APS-C and 40MP with full frame DSLRs.
> >>> --
>
> >>> Alfred Molon
> >>> ------------------------------
>
> >>I think not much more. Reason being that even if they develop sensor
> >>technologies to suppress noise sufficiently to permit more megapixels,
> >>the lens quality needed to support the sensors to get more resolution
> >>will be too expensive for the cameras.
>
> >Unless they are made of........plastic!!!
> >.
>
> Plastic lens elements can be easily configured for less CA, more complex
> geometries, etc. Plastic lenses can easily out perform the most exotic
>
> - Show quoted text -
Then why are the most expensive-best, glass.
Ray Fischer
> rfis...@sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>Reality <rea...@anyaddress.com> wrote:
>>>Plastic lens elements can be easily configured for less CA, more complex
>>>geometries, etc. Plastic lenses can easily out perform the most exotic
>>>fluorite designs.
>>
>>That must explain why people keep using those expensive flourite lenses
>>instead of just casting plastic ones.
>
>No, it's due to idiot brainless consumers like you who would belittle any
Go away, dumbshit troll.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Bob Larter
LOL.
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Larter is Lionel Lauer - Look it up.
wrote:
Bob Larter's legal name: Lionel Lauer
Home news-group, an actual group in the "troll-tracker" hierarchy:
alt.kook.lionel-lauer (established on, or before, 2004)
Registered Description: "the 'owner of several troll domains' needs a group where he'll stay on topic."
<http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=en&num=10&as_ugroup=alt.kook.lionel-lauer>
"Results 1 - 10 of about 2,170 for group:alt.kook.lionel-lauer."