November 22, 2014, 04:11:21 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - neuroanatomist

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 985
31
If the sensor moved instantly from one colour to the next, you are only reading the light for a colour a third of the time. This would cancel out having the sensor pixels three times larger. What happens in the real world is that you will have time elapsed while you move from one place to another and the light is wasted while the move is going on..... you now have less usable light than before.

and where does the lens not in use go when it is not in use..... it is still physically present and blocking something else.... or if you move the sensor, same problem..... and you have reduced the amount of usable light by another factor of 3.....

You would be creating a system that was mechanically complex and would decrease the amount of usable light by at least 2 stops... a complex system that would eat batteries like popcorn...

You're not really losing light.  In a standard Bayer-masked sensor, the exposure is taken once and each pixel is covered by a dedicated color patch (R, G, or B) on the color filter array (CFA).  The demosaicing process then interpolates the color values for the neighboring pixels.  With co-site sampling (what this technology is called), each pixel is exposed three times at 1/3 the duration of what would be used in the standard implementation.  In that standard implementation, you're really throwing away 2/3 of the spectrum (ok, not exactly since the transmission curves of the three color patches aren't perfect and non-overlapping), and thus 2/3 of the light.  Co-site sampling collects effectively the same amount light, when you consider summing across multiple pixels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_co-site_sampling  (Most of the images used in that are from Zeiss.)

You're suggesting that moving a Bayer array or the sensor two times by a distance of a few microns (one pixel over then one pixel down) would 'eat batteries like popcorn??  I suspect it would use very little power. 

32

As Coldhands points out, your suggestion that moving something the size of a sensor at 16 kHz is proven false by existing technology. 


Is/are there one or more words missing from the above sentence? ???

No.  Is/are there one or more words you were expecting to see, but don't?  ???

Examples:  "As Coldhands points out, your suggestion that moving something the size of a sensor at 16 kHz [ is impossible/can't be done/etc. ] ... is proven false by existing technology."   :-\

Oh, you mean those words.  Yes, they were missing.  Thanks!

33

As Coldhands points out, your suggestion that moving something the size of a sensor at 16 kHz is proven false by existing technology. 


Is/are there one or more words missing from the above sentence? ???

No.  Is/are there one or more words you were expecting to see, but don't?  ???

34
do you know exactly how a rolls royce airplane engine works?

No, but I don't go talking about the details of how an airplane engine works, either. 


so you say that they move a physical filter at 16000 frames per seconds is more likely as an electronic filter of some kind? 

I didn't say that, the article about which you started this thread and to which you linked in the first post says that.  Try to keep up...


i have an ultrasonic cleaner at home that moves at quite some speed.
but i don´t go as far as compare it to something like a RGB filter on a sensor.

As pointed out before, the 'self-cleaning sensor' system is moved by a piezoelectric motor at a higher frequency than suggested in the information which you linked.  That system is moving a stack of filters over the sensor (the IR cut filter, one of the two low pass filters, and the 1/4-wave plate). 


it´s just the usual "it comes from sony so it must suck" denial i read here every day.

you have no clue either how the sony sensor will work.... so why are you writing about it?

I was drawing an analogy between technology that has existed for quite some time (translational motion of the sensor under the Bayer mask so each photodiode is successively exposed to all three colors in the CFA) to the technology described in the post you quoted and linked, which is referred to as 'revolutionary' (translational motion of the Bayer mask over the sensor so each photodiode is successively exposed to all three colors in the CFA).

Read the two highlighted phrases above...the only difference is the relative position of what's being moved.  This 'new' technology doesn't sound even remotely 'revolutionary' compared to the one I've been using for over 12 years.

35
Lenses / Re: The next three new lenses? 50, 100 macro, 70-300
« on: November 12, 2014, 08:56:46 AM »
If you look closely at the 24-105 STM MTF graphs and compare them with the 24-105L graphs then it is possible the STM bests the L for pure IQ and is cheaper too! That sets the stage...

Slow focusing and lack of weather sealing are differentiators, as is the variable aperture in the case of the 24-105s.

36
No, I see no need.   I turn it off when storing it (bag or hard case).

37
For me the interesting part was "12bit / 16bit".

Obviously Sony are looking to move beyond 14bit raw images.

Haven't seen any Canon patents mention 16bit raw yet.

Don't be too sure.  Keep in mind that this is a sensor patent.  16-bit output from the sensor doesn't mean 16-bit RAW file output from the camera.  Sony already promotes that they use 16-bit in-camera processing.

38
EOS Bodies / Re: Custom Dials - what do YOU do with it?
« on: November 12, 2014, 08:21:00 AM »
C3 for n00b mode has a couple of advantages vs. Green square full auto mode:
* allows RAW
* saves a full camera setup including AF and all other parameters
* easy to turn mode wheel all the way
... provided camera has a mode wheel an Custom settings on it. :)

One of many areas where Canon user interface trumps implementation in Nikon cameras (with separate storage banks).

"A couple" meaning two.  At least on my 5DII, setting green square as a 'handoff mode' allowed shooting in RAW if the camera was already set to shoot RAW.

39
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 7D Mark II - DXO, Tony Northrup, and You
« on: November 12, 2014, 08:06:41 AM »
Steve, you feel free to interpret those quotes or his 'testing' differently, especially if it better supports your preconceived notions.  Don't fall on your face or hurt anything of yours that already has a crack, if you take my meaning.
It's obvious that you have preconceived notions (i.e., "larval," "tripe," "infomercial," etc.), and you misstated Tony Northrup's review of the 5D3.  Perhaps you could stop falling on your face, misstating others, and misinterpreting facts, yet again.  ::)

Larval was not my word.  Tripe is an appropriate term for a 'sports test' that involves portraits of a person walking slowly...my apologies if you're an avid fan of tortoise racing.  Northrup's videos are a revenue-generating stream for him, information presented with the intent of getting people to buy his books/videos/etc.  An infomercial by any other name...

Perhaps you could stop making spurious accusations and misrepresentations that serve mainly to make you look foolish.  Actually, it's too late to prevent that.

40
he also wrote he has no clue how it works...

Oh, well that makes it all ok then.  Kind of like saying moving something physically at 16,000 times per second is unlikely, I guess some people don't mind writing things about which they have no clue. 

41
Technical Support / Re: 60d flashes no battery and won't turn on
« on: November 12, 2014, 07:49:33 AM »
Personally, my gear insurance covers full replacement value (with no deductible).

But you're well off and are probably ready to pay a higher premium. Around here and for all people I've ever met, they've either got no insurance at all or a rather high minimal personal €€€ value for to be paid for each case. Both makes people very reluctant to say "Sure, I'll cover it". But even if insurance is there, I'd wager the guess that it usually covers the current value - and afaik that's also just the value you can sue for.

It's through my homeowners insurance provider, and the only type of insurance they offer is full replacement value with no deductible.  I pay US$7.60 per year per $1000 covered gear.  $16K of gear can be covered for less than the cost of a nifty-50/1.8.  That doesn't seem expensive to me, but perspectives vary, as do insurance premiums.

42
There's also no guarantee that it's scalable – there's a good chance this will not make it into APS-C or larger sensors any time soon.  The larger the thing being moved, the more difficult it is to move it fast enough with sufficient precision.

but who says there is something mechanical moved?
could be switched electronically.

Read:

Quote
Every single pixel can take the full color info with the help of an electrified moving color filter!

Sure, it's possible to use a tunable filter (my scopes use several acousto-optical tunable filters, for example).  But if the article you link got something so basic wrong, the whole thing could be false. 

As Coldhands points out, your suggestion that moving something the size of a sensor at 16 kHz is proven false by existing technology.  But it's not trivial to move it at that speed with sufficient precision.

Like I said...not revolutionary and likely irrelevant for dSLR/MILC.

43
It's far from a new idea in the sensor world.  For many years my Zeiss microscope cameras have done something similar.  In that case they're moving the sensor under the Bayer filter instead of moving the filter over the sensor, but the end result is the same – no color interpolation needed.  Note that the resolution increase is color resolution only, not a true increase in spatial resolution. 

There's also no guarantee that it's scalable – there's a good chance this will not make it into APS-C or larger sensors any time soon.  The larger the thing being moved, the more difficult it is to move it fast enough with sufficient precision.  For most microscopy, specimens are fixed and speed isn't an issue.  For moving subjects it is, so the movement of the Bayer filter will need to be fast enough to support motion-stopping speeds for use in dSLR/MILC (since each image is really the sum of three successive images).  Note that Sony touted the advantages of  'sensor shift' in-body image stabilization (IBIS), but they don't offer it in full frame sensors, most likely because the larger sensor can't be translated rapidly/precisely enough.

So, while interesting, this technology is neither conceptually new, nor is it all that and a bag of chips.

44
Technical Support / Re: 60d flashes no battery and won't turn on
« on: November 12, 2014, 05:40:19 AM »
Yes you may borrow it but remember you break it you bought it!

Problem with this (and insurance) is that they bought it at the current valued price which means you cannot get a new one - even getting a used equivalent item is tricky.

Personally, my gear insurance covers full replacement value (with no deductible).

45
Lenses / Re: Introducing the Canon EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS II
« on: November 11, 2014, 10:42:07 PM »
I have the 2xII (not the newest) but I'm wondering how much difference there really is between the two.

There were some optical improvements with the 2xIII in addition to the AF changes that benefit the MkII supertele lenses.  The 1.4xIII brought mainly just the AF improvements.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 985