Canon to dump dslrs - shows prototype for future!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

"krishnananda" wrote in message
...
In article , Me
wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

That is one huge-ass butt-ugly camera...

From
http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/06/c...cept-promises-
single-lens-perfection-vid/

"Finally, the whole lurid dream is topped off with video-only capture.
Canon argues you won't need to shoot stills when its video is capable of
keeping everything in focus all the time -- you'll just pick out your
favorite scene from the movie reel."

Yes, I've recently tossed my Leicas in favor of shooting with an
Panavision 35mm movie camera. Just pick a frame and enlarge it...

You're being facetious aren't you. Technology moves on no matter how stupid
it seems.

On 10-07-12 3:41 , Me wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

I think the outcome will be "big end" DSLR's incorporating the
communications, stabilization (+), etc. features. Video is already in
there.

High end still photography will demand more than what pleases consumer
crowds.

As to the "resolution we can't imagine", I fail to see how optics will
go much beyond current high density sensors without a major advance in
glass physics. With 35mm FF cameras at 20 - 25 Mpix, there is little
point in going to higher densities. You already need the best glass
available to resolve fine detail.

--
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

Alan Browne wrote:
On 10-07-12 3:41 , Me wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

I think the outcome will be "big end" DSLR's incorporating the
communications, stabilization (+), etc. features. Video is already in
there.

High end still photography will demand more than what pleases consumer
crowds.

As to the "resolution we can't imagine", I fail to see how optics will
go much beyond current high density sensors without a major advance in
glass physics. With 35mm FF cameras at 20 - 25 Mpix, there is little
point in going to higher densities. You already need the best glass
available to resolve fine detail.

Cameras of the future will not use glass at all.

--
john mcwilliams

On 2010-07-12 00:41:03 -0700, Me said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

Nice concept camera. Probably needs work before it goes into
production. That backpack, for example, has got to go.

And I genuinely doubt that its performance is as good as advertised.
You cannot change the laws of physics.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 2010-07-12 00:41:03 -0700, Me said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

Hmm. Well, I am always up for a new camera, IF this one ever becomes
anything more than vaporware and IF the image quality is decent and IF
they get rid of the backpack and IF storage is not a problem and IF....

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Me wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

Each of those screens is about 8MP. Nice! Although, they only need to be
about 24 inches tall for personal desktop use g.

The camera has an awfully big lens, so is probably 35mm format. If there
is an advance in sensor technology, as I'm sure there will be, that
could be a very inexpensive xxxMP camera... if some lens technology is
also invented... in which case, the lens probably wouldn't need to be so
big... or maybe it would...

On 10-07-12 14:32 , John A. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:31:25 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:
On 10-07-12 3:41 , Me wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

I think the outcome will be "big end" DSLR's incorporating the
communications, stabilization (+), etc. features. Video is already in
there.

High end still photography will demand more than what pleases consumer
crowds.

As to the "resolution we can't imagine", I fail to see how optics will
go much beyond current high density sensors without a major advance in
glass physics. With 35mm FF cameras at 20 - 25 Mpix, there is little
point in going to higher densities. You already need the best glass
available to resolve fine detail.

Cameras of the future will not use glass at all.

That's what I'm thinking. A sensor that holographically records the
whole wave front hitting it rather than the (more or less)
omnidirectional sensors we have now.

For every pixel you would need phase information in 2 dimensions (as
well as the mere light intensity).

IOW: Don't hold your breath.

--
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

On 14/07/2010 21:37, Alan Browne wrote:
On 10-07-12 14:32 , John A. wrote:
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:31:25 -0700, John McWilliams
wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:
On 10-07-12 3:41 , Me wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

I think the outcome will be "big end" DSLR's incorporating the
communications, stabilization (+), etc. features. Video is already in
there.

High end still photography will demand more than what pleases consumer
crowds.

As to the "resolution we can't imagine", I fail to see how optics will
go much beyond current high density sensors without a major advance in
glass physics. With 35mm FF cameras at 20 - 25 Mpix, there is little
point in going to higher densities. You already need the best glass
available to resolve fine detail.

Cameras of the future will not use glass at all.

That's what I'm thinking. A sensor that holographically records the
whole wave front hitting it rather than the (more or less)
omnidirectional sensors we have now.

For every pixel you would need phase information in 2 dimensions (as
well as the mere light intensity).

IOW: Don't hold your breath.

Double the Bayer matrix and add a polarizing filter to the photosites.
Small Matter Of Engineering. :-)

--
Bertrand

Alan Browne wrote:
On 10-07-12 3:41 , Me wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfsGb...layer_embedded

I think the outcome will be "big end" DSLR's incorporating the
communications, stabilization (+), etc. features. Video is already in
there.

High end still photography will demand more than what pleases consumer
crowds.

As to the "resolution we can't imagine", I fail to see how optics will
go much beyond current high density sensors without a major advance in
glass physics. With 35mm FF cameras at 20 - 25 Mpix, there is little
point in going to higher densities. You already need the best glass
available to resolve fine detail.

Surely the best glass available is simply the best that it was
necessary to produce to take advantage of the then quality of sensors?

--
Chris Malcolm
Warning: none of the above is indisputable fact.