Closer to perfection (current camera sensors)

In article , Doug McDonald
wrote:

Which is to say, I don't get the folks complaining about the Bayer array +
AA filter technology. It produces amazing images, and trying to do better is
a fool's errand,

on a single ship: three chip cameras with dichroic filters are much better.

only if you don't mind the effect of the beamsplitters on lenses, the
extra weight and the extra cost for 3 chips rather than 1 and the
precision to keep everything in perfect alignment.

other than that.

In article , nospam says...
and not likely to ever be, plus if you oversample with bayer, full
colour sensors are not needed.

Nonsense. Besides oversampling with Bayer is a very poor idea. If you
want to oversample you better use full-colour pixels.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

and not likely to ever be, plus if you oversample with bayer, full
colour sensors are not needed.

Nonsense. Besides oversampling with Bayer is a very poor idea. If you
want to oversample you better use full-colour pixels.

actually it's a very good idea.

nospam wrote:
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

and not likely to ever be, plus if you oversample with bayer, full
colour sensors are not needed.

Nonsense. Besides oversampling with Bayer is a very poor idea. If you
want to oversample you better use full-colour pixels.

actually it's a very good idea.

Foveon religious zealots are as irrational as any other religious
zealot.

--
Ray Fischer | None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.
| Goethe

In article , Ray Fischer
wrote:

Foveon religious zealots are as irrational as any other religious
zealot.

but far more entertaining.

"Ray Fischer" wrote in message
...
nospam wrote:
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

and not likely to ever be, plus if you oversample with bayer, full
colour sensors are not needed.

Nonsense. Besides oversampling with Bayer is a very poor idea. If you
want to oversample you better use full-colour pixels.

actually it's a very good idea.

Foveon religious zealots are as irrational as any other religious
zealot.

Exactly. But to get back to my now clipped point: if you actually look at
the images cameras like the D700, 5D, and 5D2 produce, they are superb.
Worlds better than we ever got with 35mm film. Medium format quality with
35mm convenience. For anyone who actually takes photos and actually cares
about print quality, life is really really good.

Folks who don't take photos play counting angels on heads of pins games.

--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

Alan Browne wrote:
On 2012-03-10 10:59 , Doug McDonald wrote:
On 3/10/2012 7:49 AM, David J. Littleboy wrote:


Which is to say, I don't get the folks complaining about the Bayer
array +
AA filter technology. It produces amazing images, and trying to do
better is
a fool's errand,

on a single ship: three chip cameras with dichroic filters are much
better.

With weight, volume, cost.

It amazes me that ENG cameras still use the 3 CCD system. With larger
bayer sensors the S/N will be much better. I would venture that it is
the lens base that is a barrier to moving to a larger sensor.

It requires a very long lens flange to sensor distance so yeah, larger
format lenses would get ridiculous quickly.


Cinema cameras have gone to digital with single sensor (bayer).

"David J. Littleboy" wrote in
:


"Ray Fischer" wrote in message
...
nospam wrote:
In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

and not likely to ever be, plus if you oversample with bayer,
full colour sensors are not needed.

Nonsense. Besides oversampling with Bayer is a very poor idea. If
you want to oversample you better use full-colour pixels.

actually it's a very good idea.

Foveon religious zealots are as irrational as any other religious
zealot.

Exactly. But to get back to my now clipped point: if you actually look
at the images cameras like the D700, 5D, and 5D2 produce, they are
superb. Worlds better than we ever got with 35mm film. Medium format
quality with 35mm convenience.

Could be even better. Get rid of the mirrors and the huge bodies and you
have medium format quality with P&S convenience.

"David J. Littleboy" wrote in
:


"Me" wrote in message
...
On 10/03/2012 10:48 p.m., Alfred Molon wrote:
In , Me says...
Ideal DX would be defined by a Bayer type sensor with 100% quantum
efficiency and no read noise.

No, an ideal sensor would be a full-colour sensor, not a Bayer one.
But at the moment full-colour sensor technology is not good enough
yet.

I think I mentioned that. Yes, an "ideal" foveon outperforms an
"ideal" bayer sensor.

I suppose. But a real Bayer gets quite close to an ideal Bayer,
whereas Foveon needs 100% transparency to the bands not detected in
the top two layers, and that's never going to happen, not even close.
Also, getting high QE out of Foveon in the detection layers is going
to be way harder.

Meanwhile, as I keep saying over and over again, Bayer is flipping
amazing. 12MP FF Bayer makes 35mm film look sick at 12x18. There's
just no comparison. And 36MP FF Bayer is going to match 6x9 film at
16x24. This is friggin' amazing: a measly 24x36mm of silicon competing
with 56x92 mm of film.

Which is to say, I don't get the folks complaining about the Bayer
array + AA filter technology. It produces amazing images, and trying
to do better is a fool's errand, since all you get is worse
color/noise performance (real life Foveon) and horrific artifacts
(from leaving out the mathematically required AA filter).


Is...the sky...really falling on Nikon?

Doug McDonald wrote in
:

On 3/10/2012 7:49 AM, David J. Littleboy wrote:


Which is to say, I don't get the folks complaining about the Bayer
array + AA filter technology. It produces amazing images, and trying
to do better is a fool's errand,

on a single ship: three chip cameras with dichroic filters are much
better.

Doug McDonald

That's what they use in scientific experiments, astronomy. You can't use
Bayer because it can't acccurately reproduce colour. Except for consumer
quality images. Good thing about some images, particularly in astronomy
is that they hold still long enough to take 3 exposures.