New Camera Sensor Eliminates Need for Flash

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Yet another research paper detailing how a graphine photo sensor might work. This from a couple of years ago. Its a entirely different mechanism for sensing light, and could very well be more efficient.
http://www.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/graphene-thermoelectric-1007.html

 

[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.

 

[alexanderferdinand]

What would Joe McNally say to this statement?
Or David Hobby? Syl Arena? and so on........

 

[JohanCruyff]

"New camera sensor will eventually eliminate need for Tripod" seems more correct to me.

 

[awinphoto]

:: Shakes head:: photography is and always be about the capturing of light... Yes, you can get decent images in dim light with the 5d3, but the usage and shaping of light will always be what separates the pros from the minutia. knowing the direction of the light, flash or ambient, knowing the lighting patterns, the broad vs short light, how it sculpts the scene... Theres more to photography than shooting in pitch black...

 

[pedro]

It's a pleasant inevitability that sensor design and innovation continues at such a cracking pace. Care to remember the gritty sensor on your original Canon 1D?

Lighting will always be important to quality photography to create shape, texture, mood and balance against available light. It's not that long ago that we thought 800 iso was fast, and how incredibly useful it was. Just a few years later we can shoot at 3200 & 6400 with impunity, and 12,800 at a pinch.

These speed gains now have less to do with being able to get an image in lower and lower light, but having the ability to stop action in environments where it previously the stuff of science fiction. Will 51,200 or 102,400 iso soon be the new 800? You'd better believe it.

-PW

I hope to see that within my life time. Turning 50 next year. Maybe not the new ISO 800. But an ISO 51.200 on my current 5DIII with the IQ of my ISO 3200 in RAW would be intresting. If there is something in photography I really strive for, then it ultra low light photography. 10-12 years down the road from here, where will we be at sensorwise?

 

[TAF]

Pure Black and White (was Re: New Camera Sensor Eliminates Need for Flash)

The problem of durability could be solved by exchangeable sensors. Would be good idea just with CMOS sensors - I would like to convert my 20D to a B/W camera by removing the RGB Bayer pattern (and increase the sensitivity by a factor of two or three) but would like to have the chance to try the removal procedure on two or three sensors (not cameras).

I've wondered the same thing, so I have to ask - is that even possible? It would certainly be a fascinating thing to experiment with.

Since the Bayer filter is right on the chip, I'm guessing one would need a clean room and some very exotic micromanipulators. But even then, how does the software in the camera respond? Would the nice people at Magic Lantern need to provide some new firmware to make things work?

If possible, it would be cheaper than a Leica, even if you started with a new Canon...

 

[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.