New Camera Sensor Eliminates Need for Flash

[Chosenbydestiny]

I can see this as a big advantage for night sports, night street, astro, or even night nature photography actually if the AF can keep up... But everything else... not so much. Might make f/4 lenses more appealing to save money if the amount of background blur isn't that important. I actually wish they made more powerful speedlites to battle off unwanted ambient light like at this one venue I shoot at with harsh yellow spotlights Or how about new sensors that improve lower ISO performance?

[Mt Spokane Photography]

the numbers are nonsense, the whole article misleading.
no word about read noise, A/D performance etc.

ISO/Noise is affected by more then how many photons you can catch.

and the sensor captures photons that don´t belong to visible light too (that is part of how they get such high sensitivity).

no word about how this will work for us photographer and "photography" when you capture IR and UV light.

Its a article written for the general public.  PR people are trained to write to a third grade level.

[Canon-F1]

the numbers are nonsense, the whole article misleading.
no word about read noise, A/D performance etc.

ISO/Noise is affected by more then how many photons you can catch.

and the sensor captures photons that don´t belong to visible light too (that is part of how they get such high sensitivity).

no word about how this will work for us photographer and "photography" when you capture IR and UV light.

Its a article written for the general public.  PR people are trained to write to a third grade level.

there must be a graphene lobby somewhere.

all problems will be solved thanks to graphene... some day.
for 10 years i read articles about graphene and how great it is.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

there must be a graphene lobby somewhere.

all problems will be solved thanks to graphene... some day.
for 10 years i read articles about graphene and how great it is.

There are a ton of researchers out there looking for a magical use that will win them the Nobel Prize.
 
 Meanwhile, they hire PR guys to make exaggerated claims so that they can get more grants to pay for their research.  Unfortunately, those who get the money are the ones with the best PR, not necessarily the best research.

[dgatwood]

Sounds fishy to me. The current sensors have about 50% QE. This means that one can only increase it twice, not 1,000 times.

In principle, "sensitivity" is not a well defined term when it comes to digital sensors. They are photon counting machines, missing every other photon, roughly speaking.

We discussed this on Slashdot the other day.  The reporter who wrote this story misunderstood the original Nature article.  The performance boost was actually relative to previous graphene sensors, not relative to traditional tech.  Apparently, even these new graphene sensors still stink on ice in terms of visible light performance when compared with CMOS.  They're great for non-visible light, though. 

[bycostello]

shame.. looked great...

[Pi]

There are a ton of researchers out there looking for a magical use that will win them the Nobel Prize.
 
 Meanwhile, they hire PR guys to make exaggerated claims so that they can get more grants to pay for their research.  Unfortunately, those who get the money are the ones with the best PR, not necessarily the best research.

Being a researcher myself, I can tell you that we are too poor to hire PR guys.

[poias]

When other companies are releasing cameras with these sensor technologies, perhaps Canon will finally have a sensor capturing 24 mpx and 14 DR at the base ISO.

[RLPhoto]

A sensor may improve on getting light but it's the quality of light that counts.