Canon develops 250 megapixel camera sensor

Canon develops 250 megapixel camera sensor

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34173423

but unlikely for consumer use!
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

In article ,
David Taylor wrote:

Canon develops 250 megapixel camera sensor

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34173423

but unlikely for consumer use!

It definitely won't work with conventional lenses but it may be the
solution needed for high quality consumer photos using coded apertures
or micro lenses. The hold-up is processing power. My fumbling with a
calculator early in the morning says many trillions of floating point
operations per photo, or maybe more for a large encoded pattern size.

--
I will not see posts from astraweb, theremailer, dizum, or google
because they host Usenet flooders.

In article ,
"J. Clarke" wrote:

In article ,
says...

In article ,
David Taylor wrote:

Canon develops 250 megapixel camera sensor

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34173423

but unlikely for consumer use!

It definitely won't work with conventional lenses

Why not? It's roughly APS-H size, about midway between APS-C and 35mm,
so it should work fine with any full-frame lens and some crop-frames.

Now whether any of them have enough resolution to make it worthwhile is
another story, but just functioning should not be an issue unless I'm
missing something important.

This is the point. Virtually no lens would produce 250 megapixel
resolution. Even if the glass is perfect, the aperture won't be large
enough.

It occurs to me though that performance evaulation of lenses would be
one very practical use for such a sensor and since Canon is in the
business of making lenses . . .

but it may be the
solution needed for high quality consumer photos using coded apertures
or micro lenses. The hold-up is processing power. My fumbling with a
calculator early in the morning says many trillions of floating point
operations per photo, or maybe more for a large encoded pattern size.

Bear in mind that scanning backs with higher resolution are commercially
available. May take a while to process each image and makes for a
rather specialized product but that doesn't make it unusable.

Coded aperture and micro lens cameras are completely different beasts.
The Lytro is one such camera. Each output pixel is derived from a large
area of input pixels so it requires far more calculations. Adjusting
DOF or producing 3D images means repeating the calculation more times
with different filtering.

--
I will not see posts from astraweb, theremailer, dizum, or google
because they host Usenet flooders.