« on: June 02, 2014, 02:27:28 AM »
Being in my late teens in the 80's and witnessing how the DAC's in the CD players would go from 16 to 18 to 20 to 24 etc. every 2-3 years, then the sampling frequency even faster than that....
Apologies for the stupid question in advance:
What's the huge deal with this 14bit wall in Digital Photography? Why can't they make an 16 bit processor and give us 16 stops of DR.... ?
Beyond a certain point, it makes no sense - for example, measurements and analysis by various folks on the web put the capacity of the 5D Mark II's sensor at about 59,000 electrons (ISO 100). That's fewer than the maximum number of different positions achievable with 16 bits. If you can't record 16 bits worth of different electron values, why would you use 20?
Thanks. Again I am no expert, but perhaps they would use 16 or 20 bits for similar logic that the CD player manufacturers used, i.e. larger bit depth converters are more linear in certain bit depths... i.e. offset the data stream from the sensor by 2 bits and then encode/decode. If for nothing else, it might be less noisy maybe. I don't know... just thinking out aloud. I would feel visual acuity is more sensitive than auditory... so why doesn't this have the (marketing) traction that audio component manufacturers had. In the end it was a Sony idea of using direct stream as opposed to a ladder process that satisfied the most die hard audiophiles...
How does 59k electrons convert to 14 bit and what influences the # of electrons. Do EXMOR's do more than 59k electrons?