An Update on the 75+mp Camera in the Wild

[CarlTN]

This forum will be closed because there would be nothing to argue about.

:O never happen

 

[dgatwood]

Assuming we were still only using 14 bits per pixel when that sensor rolls around, it would mean a whopping 1.9GB file size per image.

Only if they don't bother adding any compression. You should be able to losslessly compress that data by at least a factor of 2 without even trying, and probably more than that if your compression scheme properly takes into account the insanely high probability of adjacent pixels having similar values.

 

[Eldar]

After you have achieved focus, you could either combine the halves into a single pixel, use them as separate pixels, or change the ISO on one side of each pixel pair and combine them as a 16 stop DR pixel, possibly up to 20 stops...

16-20 stop DR would make my year

what kind of lenses will you use?

Eeehhh, not sure I understand the question ...
That would depend on what I will be shooting, but basically everyone I have (L-series primes and zooms from 16-600mm). I would love better DR for any high contrast lighting conditions, whether it's landscape, wildlife or events. Wouldn't you?

 

[tiger82]

Nikon jumped the consumer grade FF from twelve to thirty six in a bid to grap more market share of that sector.

Didn't work.

Didn't Work? I've got the D800 and D800E and they work every day when I'm out in the field. For mostly price reasons I picked up the D7100 and I'm really impressed with the detailed sharpness with the lack of the AA filter and no moire. Since the D800 came out I've been buying all Nikon equipment and not Canon (sounds like the Nikon strategy worked on me).

Unfortunately for Nikon, you don't represent the majority fraction of the dSLR market...

Neuro - you are quite correct.

So what is Mr. "I love Nikon" doing on a Canon board?

 

[jrista]

Assuming we were still only using 14 bits per pixel when that sensor rolls around, it would mean a whopping 1.9GB file size per image.

Only if they don't bother adding any compression. You should be able to losslessly compress that data by at least a factor of 2 without even trying, and probably more than that if your compression scheme properly takes into account the insanely high probability of adjacent pixels having similar values.

Ah, very true. Forgot about compression. That would change filesize, which would still be a whopping 1GB. In-memory load when editing would be several gigs, however...still can't imagine a tool like lightroom handling that.

 

[jeffa4444]

A v.good wildlife photographer has tested a 45MP prototype camera would not say what model but I think that is more realistic than a 75MP camera. Knowing the cameras he already owns I would suggest its the new 1D although he does also have a 7D.