October 21, 2014, 01:31:50 PM

Author Topic: Moving sensor: an attractive option?  (Read 775 times)

scottburgess

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Canonical Canon
    • View Profile
Moving sensor: an attractive option?
« on: February 15, 2014, 04:35:11 PM »
Suppose Canon executes a technology exchange with Hasselblad for this technology:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20066021-264.html

Would you be interesting in having this as an option on your camera body, despite the long exposure times?  What cost limit would you put for adding in this feature?


canon rumors FORUM

Moving sensor: an attractive option?
« on: February 15, 2014, 04:35:11 PM »

noisejammer

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
Re: Moving sensor: an attractive option?
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2014, 05:19:38 PM »
Interesting application but dithering has been used to suppress digitisation artefacts in astrophotography for years.

The pixels on this sensor are 6.0 microns on a side. Implicit in this is the requirement that the lenses can resolve acceptably to pixel level.... something like a 8 micron spot. Since this translates to MTF50 of ~125 lp/mm, I am sceptical about the technique being of much value. Of course, it's possible to apply sharpening algorithms and there is information to work on.

Secondly, if anything is to be achieved, critical focus will be essential. Some sort of f/8 tilt shift lens might work here.

Third, it does require the tripod to be astonishingly stiff. Assuming an 80mm lens, the pixels subtend .006/80 radians = 15.6 arcsec. Achieving acceptable results probably needs the camera to be static at the scale of ~5 arcsec. This is achievable but considerable care is needed.

On the whole, 16 Mp is enough for me...

photonius

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
Re: Moving sensor: an attractive option?
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2014, 05:26:39 PM »
Suppose Canon executes a technology exchange with Hasselblad for this technology:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20066021-264.html

Would you be interesting in having this as an option on your camera body, despite the long exposure times?  What cost limit would you put for adding in this feature?

it's not new, has been available in some scientific cameras for >10 years.

Mt Spokane Photography

  • EF 50mm F 0.7 IS
  • *********
  • Posts: 8862
    • View Profile
Re: Moving sensor: an attractive option?
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2014, 07:34:01 PM »
Suppose Canon executes a technology exchange with Hasselblad for this technology:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20066021-264.html


it's not new, has been available in some scientific cameras for >10 years.

True, the article he quoted is from 2011.  Old News.

scottburgess

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Canonical Canon
    • View Profile
Re: Moving sensor: an attractive option?
« Reply #4 on: February 16, 2014, 12:02:53 AM »
Interesting application but dithering has been used to suppress digitisation artefacts in astrophotography for years.

The pixels on this sensor are 6.0 microns on a side. Implicit in this is the requirement that the lenses can resolve acceptably to pixel level.... something like a 8 micron spot. Since this translates to MTF50 of ~125 lp/mm, I am sceptical about the technique being of much value. Of course, it's possible to apply sharpening algorithms and there is information to work on.

Secondly, if anything is to be achieved, critical focus will be essential. Some sort of f/8 tilt shift lens might work here.

Third, it does require the tripod to be astonishingly stiff. Assuming an 80mm lens, the pixels subtend .006/80 radians = 15.6 arcsec. Achieving acceptable results probably needs the camera to be static at the scale of ~5 arcsec. This is achievable but considerable care is needed.

On the whole, 16 Mp is enough for me...

Thanks for the figures.  It sounds significantly harder to implement this on a 35mm sensor than on the larger MF systems.

True, the article he quoted is from 2011.  Old News.

Yes, but what I was more interested in was whether having tight restrictions on the process (tripod mounted, everything still for 20 seconds) was of potential interest to folks.  I could see using it in some product, landscape, and architectural work, but it sounds very limiting.

Mt Spokane Photography

  • EF 50mm F 0.7 IS
  • *********
  • Posts: 8862
    • View Profile
Re: Moving sensor: an attractive option?
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2014, 12:56:33 PM »

Yes, but what I was more interested in was whether having tight restrictions on the process (tripod mounted, everything still for 20 seconds) was of potential interest to folks.  I could see using it in some product, landscape, and architectural work, but it sounds very limiting.

The first digital still  camera software I used was called Snappy Video and was  bundled with a capture card that captured analog video frames from a camcorder, and merged them together to produce a still frame.  You could get 640 X 480 or 1024 X 768 this way from otherwise very low resolution video.  This was about 1995, consumer level digital still cameras came shortly after, and then in a few years, the card was obsolete.  There was and still is quite a bit of interest in it, and the price was not out of sight.
 
I think it used the same basic technique, each frame registered slightly differently due to movement and vibration of the analog video camcorder
 
http://www.saao.ac.za/~wpk/snappy/

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Moving sensor: an attractive option?
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2014, 12:56:33 PM »