November 23, 2014, 09:53:29 AM

Author Topic: Big megapixel camera?  (Read 6000 times)

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2026
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2013, 02:40:36 PM »
Thing about digital MF is it's no where near the size of most film MF, it's more like FF on steroids. I think the S2's sensor is 30x45mm, Hassleblads 33x44. In medium format film the smallest was 45x60, and laterly the most common 60x70.

There is a subtle difference when the light image falling on the sensor ( or film) is larger. In some (many) styles of pictures there is no perceivable difference, but in others it is there.

The recorded image on digital MF is nothing like as large as film MFs, and with the rapid gain in digital technology the benefit to many of using MF must be diminishing. Certainly nearly all the pros I knew who used MF film all use FF now   There is one I can think of who uses Hassleblad digital.

The introduction of really good FF big megapixel cameras can only keep reducing the sales of MF - IMO.

So can't see companies like Canon or Nikon ever considering it !  :D

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2013, 02:40:36 PM »

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3460
  • Posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
    • View Profile
Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #16 on: January 30, 2013, 09:28:49 PM »
I see it as both far-fetched and far off. I myself tired of waiting for a high MP body to complement the 1DX for landscape and architecture work... and got a second hand 1Ds III instead.

You can always take multiple pictures and stitch them together to make your super-high megapixel images.... I have done several gigapixel images and some people have gone as far as TerraPixel images :)
The best camera is the one in your hands

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2026
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #17 on: January 31, 2013, 01:12:37 AM »
I see it as both far-fetched and far off. I myself tired of waiting for a high MP body to complement the 1DX for landscape and architecture work... and got a second hand 1Ds III instead.

You can always take multiple pictures and stitch them together to make your super-high megapixel images.... I have done several gigapixel images and some people have gone as far as TerraPixel images :)

By doing this you are also getting the advantage of larger format.

Rocky

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 649
    • View Profile
Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2013, 02:15:41 AM »
Agreed on no MF - it would require development of a complete system in a very niche market.
... which is already occupied by Leica.
Canon have the same technology in MF. They just abandon it when they get out of the Range-finder camera segment 40 years ago.
Thanks , I though he is refering to manual focusing.

I guess Athlon is referring to the S2; a whopping big camera for whopping big money - and that's before you  start on the lenses

pedro

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 787
    • View Profile
Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #19 on: January 31, 2013, 03:41:12 AM »

I sure hope that they price the big MP camera is priced in line with the D800.  At $8-10K, it may be worth my while to switch.

I kind of doubt that because that is the 5D MIII price range, if they did then they would have to dumb down the features in order to not have the two compete with each other which I don't see Canon doing.  I wouldn't be surprised to see it possibly fall between the 5D MIII and the 1DX with the large MP but the specs of the 5D MIII.

+1. I am not in the high MP segment. The 5D3 is far enough for me in any area. But I would consider a high MP body to slip into that gap. US $ 4.5K? Equipped with that recently posted sensor tech patent  to improve IQ as they are cramming more pixels on it. It was a 7DII related post. But it could apply to these musings as well.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 03:45:11 AM by pedro »
30D, EF-S 10-22/ 5DIII, 16-35 F/2.8 L USM II, 28 F/2.8, 50 F/1.4, 85 F/1.8, 70-200 F/2.8 classic,
join me at http://www.flickr.com/groups/insane_isos/

sharka23

  • Guest
Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2013, 03:46:26 AM »
Thing about digital MF is it's no where near the size of most film MF, it's more like FF on steroids. I think the S2's sensor is 30x45mm, Hassleblads 33x44. In medium format film the smallest was 45x60, and laterly the most common 60x70.

There is a subtle difference when the light image falling on the sensor ( or film) is larger. In some (many) styles of pictures there is no perceivable difference, but in others it is there.

The recorded image on digital MF is nothing like as large as film MFs, and with the rapid gain in digital technology the benefit to many of using MF must be diminishing. Certainly nearly all the pros I knew who used MF film all use FF now   There is one I can think of who uses Hassleblad digital.

The introduction of really good FF big megapixel cameras can only keep reducing the sales of MF - IMO.

So can't see companies like Canon or Nikon ever considering it !  :D


I need to correct your post:

(the big) hasselblad sensor size is 40x54mm
same size like the phase one backs.

yes, the MF-film was 60mm tall but only 54mm are/were used !!
so effectively the big hasselblad and phase one sensors are exactly the
same size as the good old 645 MF systems.

and the difference between MF and FF is not only the size of the sensor.
CCD, better lenses, 16bit, fast flashsyncro /leaf shutter up to /800, ...

so there will remain a gap when canon introduces their big megapixel body.

thanks

sagittariansrock

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1493
    • View Profile
Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #21 on: January 31, 2013, 03:19:00 PM »
Larger sensor is the advantage but not CCD
The advantage of MF will soon be 0 if they not start a collaboration with for example  Sony, the CCD tech is old and there are only one manufacture left , Dalsa

I don't agree with that. CCD provides more uniformity at the cost of money and time. So if you don't care about money and speed of processing, you'd go CCD- just look at all the microscopes, for example.
EOS 5DIII, EOS 5D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #21 on: January 31, 2013, 03:19:00 PM »

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2026
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #22 on: January 31, 2013, 03:39:18 PM »
@Sarka23, yes you're quite right about the 54mm height of recorded image on 120 film, it's a long time since I've used it now ! But my point really is that digital MF doesn't have the advantage of greatly increased size of recorded image that 6x7 had over 35mm. And 645 was always a little "ho-hum" against 35mm: a great loss of flexibility for a relatively marginal image gain.

Also MF lenses are not necessarily better than FF, the larger the format the more forgiving of the lens.

Your other points accepted, but you don't half have to pay for it.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Big megapixel camera?
« Reply #22 on: January 31, 2013, 03:39:18 PM »