Canon announces 50 MP prototype sensor

[mkrupp]

Andy,

Why not have the camera capture two exposures on the same sensor, one right after the other, without the mirror moving between exposures.  Perhaps the user sets two sensitivity levels, one for each exposure, for example: 100 ISO and 800 ISO and then the camera selects the best pixels from either exposure and combines them into a final saved image using a technique similar to that used by GLuijk in the "Zero Noise technique" thread.

Of course, it would double the total time needed for a single exposure but in the right situation this may not be a problem at all.

Mitch

[AndyF2]

Why not have the camera capture two exposures on the same sensor, one right after the other, without the mirror moving between exposures.  Perhaps the user sets two sensitivity levels, one for each exposure, for example: 100 ISO and 800 ISO and then the camera selects the best pixels from either exposure and combines them into a final saved image using a technique similar to that used by GLuijk in the "Zero Noise technique" thread.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=125217\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Mitch,
That could work; I haven't thought through GLuijk's process enough yet.   It's starting to seem that anything that requires two moments in time to form one image (either two exposures, or one analysis moment and one exposure moment) will result in edge artifacts.  Either the camera or subject will move between the two moments, and abnormal exposures will occur at those edges.

There might be specific types of photography where adjusting sensitivities of individual pixels could be used, but they'be be unique.  We'll just need pixel sites that inherently have 14 or 16 bit latitude!

Andy

[jani]

There might be specific types of photography where adjusting sensitivities of individual pixels could be used, but they'be be unique.  We'll just need pixel sites that inherently have 14 or 16 bit latitude!

Just having a 14 or 16 bit latitude will not be enough in itself, unless that latitude spans a wide enough dynamic range.

Having e.g. 16 bit latitude over a 4-stop dynamic range may be nice, but the practical applications are few.

Also, 16 bit latitude doesn't necessarily mean that it's noise free, does it?

[BJL]

What you get is basically the performance of a smaller-sensor camera when you crop, and wide lenses for FF format tend not to be very sharp, so you're really better off with the long lens and using the full frame.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=124895\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This idea of using abundant pixels to allow "digital zoom" might help at least with lenses that are of normal to telephoto designs. A center crop from such a lens is probably about as good as with a lens of the same focal length and aperture designed specifically for the smaller format of that crop.  (My main interest in a planned upgrading from 5MP to 10MP+ is the "built in optically perfect 1.4x TX" given by cropping back to 5MP.)

But I agree that I would not try it with wide angle lenses.