Minimum pixel size

"David Littlewood" wrote:

When do we reach this point? Well, figures I saw a couple of weeks ago
suggest we are there about now. I can't remember where I saw them, it
may have been here. However, a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation
suggests that for a lens at f/2 the theoretical limit for resolving
detail is about 750 lp/mm. Ignoring all the sophisticated aspects of
MTF, sampling theory, Nyquist limits and the like, this implies at most
1500 pixels/mm, i.e. 670nm per pixel. Taking the complex sampling
issues
into account, this is going to come out to 1 micron (1000 nm) or worse.

I would just like to jump in hear and indicate that almost nobody
reliably works at 100 l/mm and very few get over 50 l/mm reliably.

That's why I called it a theoretical limit.

But that is due to the film. I haven't calculated it for the new tiny-pixel
cameras, but the Sony F717 resolves 96 lp/mm with quite reasonable contrast
(so it's limiting resolution is somewhat higher).

I suspect that if you had a 3-micron pixel pitch APS-C size sensor, you'd
see that level of resolution. However, you'd probably only see it with the
best lenses at f/8. Also, you'd only see it with flash or when the camera's
on a much heavier tripod than any of us actually own.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"David Littlewood" wrote:

When do we reach this point? Well, figures I saw a couple of weeks ago
suggest we are there about now. I can't remember where I saw them, it
may have been here. However, a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation
suggests that for a lens at f/2 the theoretical limit for resolving
detail is about 750 lp/mm. Ignoring all the sophisticated aspects of
MTF, sampling theory, Nyquist limits and the like, this implies at most
1500 pixels/mm, i.e. 670nm per pixel. Taking the complex sampling
issues
into account, this is going to come out to 1 micron (1000 nm) or worse.

I would just like to jump in hear and indicate that almost nobody
reliably works at 100 l/mm and very few get over 50 l/mm reliably.

That's why I called it a theoretical limit.

But that is due to the film. I haven't calculated it for the new tiny-pixel
cameras, but the Sony F717 resolves 96 lp/mm with quite reasonable contrast
(so it's limiting resolution is somewhat higher).

I suspect that if you had a 3-micron pixel pitch APS-C size sensor, you'd
see that level of resolution. However, you'd probably only see it with the
best lenses at f/8. Also, you'd only see it with flash or when the camera's
on a much heavier tripod than any of us actually own.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"David Littlewood" wrote:

When do we reach this point? Well, figures I saw a couple of weeks ago
suggest we are there about now. I can't remember where I saw them, it
may have been here. However, a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation
suggests that for a lens at f/2 the theoretical limit for resolving
detail is about 750 lp/mm. Ignoring all the sophisticated aspects of
MTF, sampling theory, Nyquist limits and the like, this implies at most
1500 pixels/mm, i.e. 670nm per pixel. Taking the complex sampling
issues
into account, this is going to come out to 1 micron (1000 nm) or worse.

I would just like to jump in hear and indicate that almost nobody
reliably works at 100 l/mm and very few get over 50 l/mm reliably.

That's why I called it a theoretical limit.

But that is due to the film. I haven't calculated it for the new tiny-pixel
cameras, but the Sony F717 resolves 96 lp/mm with quite reasonable contrast
(so it's limiting resolution is somewhat higher).

I suspect that if you had a 3-micron pixel pitch APS-C size sensor, you'd
see that level of resolution. However, you'd probably only see it with the
best lenses at f/8. Also, you'd only see it with flash or when the camera's
on a much heavier tripod than any of us actually own.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

In article , David J. Littleboy
writes

"David Littlewood" wrote:

When do we reach this point? Well, figures I saw a couple of weeks ago
suggest we are there about now. I can't remember where I saw them, it
may have been here. However, a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation
suggests that for a lens at f/2 the theoretical limit for resolving
detail is about 750 lp/mm. Ignoring all the sophisticated aspects of
MTF, sampling theory, Nyquist limits and the like, this implies at most
1500 pixels/mm, i.e. 670nm per pixel. Taking the complex sampling
issues
into account, this is going to come out to 1 micron (1000 nm) or worse.

I would just like to jump in hear and indicate that almost nobody
reliably works at 100 l/mm and very few get over 50 l/mm reliably.

That's why I called it a theoretical limit.

But that is due to the film. I haven't calculated it for the new tiny-pixel
cameras, but the Sony F717 resolves 96 lp/mm with quite reasonable contrast
(so it's limiting resolution is somewhat higher).

I suspect that if you had a 3-micron pixel pitch APS-C size sensor, you'd
see that level of resolution. However, you'd probably only see it with the
best lenses at f/8. Also, you'd only see it with flash or when the camera's
on a much heavier tripod than any of us actually own.

I doubt any lens at f/8 would do better than 4 microns resolution
(diffraction limit). You might see it at f/5.6 though (at which really
good lenses would be at their best).
--
David Littlewood

In article , David J. Littleboy
writes

"David Littlewood" wrote:

When do we reach this point? Well, figures I saw a couple of weeks ago
suggest we are there about now. I can't remember where I saw them, it
may have been here. However, a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation
suggests that for a lens at f/2 the theoretical limit for resolving
detail is about 750 lp/mm. Ignoring all the sophisticated aspects of
MTF, sampling theory, Nyquist limits and the like, this implies at most
1500 pixels/mm, i.e. 670nm per pixel. Taking the complex sampling
issues
into account, this is going to come out to 1 micron (1000 nm) or worse.

I would just like to jump in hear and indicate that almost nobody
reliably works at 100 l/mm and very few get over 50 l/mm reliably.

That's why I called it a theoretical limit.

But that is due to the film. I haven't calculated it for the new tiny-pixel
cameras, but the Sony F717 resolves 96 lp/mm with quite reasonable contrast
(so it's limiting resolution is somewhat higher).

I suspect that if you had a 3-micron pixel pitch APS-C size sensor, you'd
see that level of resolution. However, you'd probably only see it with the
best lenses at f/8. Also, you'd only see it with flash or when the camera's
on a much heavier tripod than any of us actually own.

I doubt any lens at f/8 would do better than 4 microns resolution
(diffraction limit). You might see it at f/5.6 though (at which really
good lenses would be at their best).
--
David Littlewood

In article , David J. Littleboy
writes

"David Littlewood" wrote:

When do we reach this point? Well, figures I saw a couple of weeks ago
suggest we are there about now. I can't remember where I saw them, it
may have been here. However, a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation
suggests that for a lens at f/2 the theoretical limit for resolving
detail is about 750 lp/mm. Ignoring all the sophisticated aspects of
MTF, sampling theory, Nyquist limits and the like, this implies at most
1500 pixels/mm, i.e. 670nm per pixel. Taking the complex sampling
issues
into account, this is going to come out to 1 micron (1000 nm) or worse.

I would just like to jump in hear and indicate that almost nobody
reliably works at 100 l/mm and very few get over 50 l/mm reliably.

That's why I called it a theoretical limit.

But that is due to the film. I haven't calculated it for the new tiny-pixel
cameras, but the Sony F717 resolves 96 lp/mm with quite reasonable contrast
(so it's limiting resolution is somewhat higher).

I suspect that if you had a 3-micron pixel pitch APS-C size sensor, you'd
see that level of resolution. However, you'd probably only see it with the
best lenses at f/8. Also, you'd only see it with flash or when the camera's
on a much heavier tripod than any of us actually own.

I doubt any lens at f/8 would do better than 4 microns resolution
(diffraction limit). You might see it at f/5.6 though (at which really
good lenses would be at their best).
--
David Littlewood