Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 110 megapixel camera  (Read 4603 times)
CharlesRamsey
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


WWW
« on: December 14, 2009, 02:47:20 PM »
ReplyReply

You may have missed this http://www.specinst.com/1300S%20Camera%20Broch_Rev.pdf there was an advert for it in physics today.
Logged
ThierryH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2009, 02:53:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: CharlesRamsey
You may have missed this http://www.specinst.com/1300S%20Camera%20Broch_Rev.pdf there was an advert for it in physics today.
Not new, this sensor has been announced by Dalsa in June 2006.

Here

Best regards,
Thierry
Logged

LiamStrain
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 116



WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2009, 03:08:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Looks like we are almost there to my 6x7cm FF sensor, and 4x5 single shot capture back of my dreams.

But at what price.. of course.
Logged

ThierryH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 409


« Reply #3 on: December 14, 2009, 03:14:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: LiamStrain
Looks like we are almost there to my 6x7cm FF sensor, and 4x5 single shot capture back of my dreams.

But at what price.. of course.

10x10cm at a price of around US$ 20k, if I remember it right (the sensor).

Thierry
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7789



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2009, 03:25:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: LiamStrain
Looks like we are almost there to my 6x7cm FF sensor, and 4x5 single shot capture back of my dreams.

But at what price.. of course.
I'm holding out for 11x14"   
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
DanielStone
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 538


« Reply #5 on: December 14, 2009, 08:32:16 PM »
ReplyReply

that schpeel they're saying its for looking at the stars, that b.s.

they're putting those suckers in satellites to spy on us.

therefore, the Head and Shoulders people can market to the areas that show the most dandruff-headed people

-Dan
Logged
JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659



« Reply #6 on: December 14, 2009, 09:37:12 PM »
ReplyReply

You're all late on this, I believe I read of a 165 mgp sensor.  Some company thought that making a true panoramic digital would actually pay off.  

Dont ask me what company, dont remember.  Also, I should mention I have been drinking.  
Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
cunim
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 127


« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2009, 09:56:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: CharlesRamsey
You may have missed this http://www.specinst.com/1300S%20Camera%20Broch_Rev.pdf there was an advert for it in physics today.

Spectral Instruments, great company.  We used some of their cryogenic heads with thinned, back-illuminated CCDs and an f0.9 telecentric lens.  That combination could almost photon count without amplification.  Price for a base configuration (F-mount, fixed focus, monochrome) - $140K or thereabouts without associated robotics.  I think the astronomers on this board have used similar technology and would consider that price reasonable.

Not easy to create a system that takes full advantage of an exotic detector.  Thank God for the bright people out there, pushing the envelope and - yes - you are being watched.
Logged
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2009, 11:32:59 PM »
ReplyReply


Here you go, Joe.


http://www.roundshot.ch/xml_1/internet/de/...8/d925/f934.cfm
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7763



WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2009, 03:30:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: CharlesRamsey
You may have missed this http://www.specinst.com/1300S%20Camera%20Broch_Rev.pdf there was an advert for it in physics today.

Does it have live view?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2009, 03:59:20 AM »
ReplyReply

[quote name='mtomalty' date='Dec 15 2009, 05:32 AM' post='332842']
Here you go, Joe.

I was seriously considering a Seitz 617, 160Mpx rapid scan back, but what will it do that you cannot do with a 60Mpx sensor and a triple-stitch sliding back?
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7251


WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2009, 06:41:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

You haven't missed the cryogenic cooling to -100C?

Best regards
Erik

Quote from: CharlesRamsey
You may have missed this http://www.specinst.com/1300S%20Camera%20Broch_Rev.pdf there was an advert for it in physics today.
Logged

JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659



« Reply #12 on: December 15, 2009, 09:30:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: mtomalty
Thanks, looks interesting and I do like fooling around with true panoramic, but I wonder what the price is on a camera like that?  Also, AA filter?  I see that the pixels are 8 microns, so it must moire often.
Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
LiamStrain
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 116



WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 15, 2009, 09:44:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: JoeKitchen
I see that the pixels are 8 microns, so it must moire often.

I think that scanning backs like the seitz do not exhibit moire (certainly not the same kinda single shot does). But I do not know that for sure.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2009, 09:48:11 AM by LiamStrain » Logged

Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #14 on: December 15, 2009, 10:07:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: JoeKitchen
Thanks, looks interesting and I do like fooling around with true panoramic, but I wonder what the price is on a camera like that?  Also, AA filter?  I see that the pixels are 8 microns, so it must moire often.
I think they are about the same price as a 50Mpx sensor... but you can use the linear sensor out of the 617 on their rotating panoramic camera... żand were they developing a 6*7 back for the Alpha DSLR?

What I was interested in was the 617 back for view cameras that they were working on, giving full movements on a Sinar 5*7, and utilising my Large format lenses.
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659



« Reply #15 on: December 15, 2009, 11:58:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dick Roadnight
I think they are about the same price as a 50Mpx sensor... but you can use the linear sensor out of the 617 on their rotating panoramic camera... żand were they developing a 6*7 back for the Alpha DSLR?

What I was interested in was the 617 back for view cameras that they were working on, giving full movements on a Sinar 5*7, and utilising my Large format lenses.
But you most likely would not be able to use your large format lenses on a back anyway.  Lets not forget that large format lenses (I believe) where made less sharp thaen their 35mm and MF counterparts relying on the size of the film to make up for it.  This does not work with sensors since the lens needs to resolve the light for the size of the pixel.  

Also, light splits as it goes through glass causing the three primaries to come into focus in slightly different planes.  Since film is made in layers, it did not matter.  With a sensor though all three primaries have to come in focus in the same plane or very close to it (because it is impossible to make this happen) so that the primary(s) out of focus does not spill into a neighboring pixel causing apo-chromatic aberrations.  Extremely difficult to engineer which is why lenses have increased in price so much, and much smaller pixel size is futile.  

This is what I have come to understand about current optics when dealing with digital sensors.  If I am wrong please correct me.

Schneider has a more detailed description on their website.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2009, 01:33:19 PM by JoeKitchen » Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5121


« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2009, 12:00:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
You haven't missed the cryogenic cooling to -100C?
Yes: scroll down the PDF for a "sample implementation" that looks like a bar fridge.
Logged
Dick Roadnight
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


« Reply #17 on: December 15, 2009, 05:54:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: JoeKitchen
But you most likely would not be able to use your large format lenses on a back anyway.  Lets not forget that large format lenses (I believe) where made less sharp than their 35mm and MF counterparts relying on the size of the film to make up for it.  This does not work with sensors since the lens needs to resolve the light for the size of the pixel.
This is why 9 or 10 micron pixels are good for film lenses... and digital specialist lenses do not have the image circle for 617.
Quote
Also, light splits as it goes through glass causing the three primaries to come into focus in slightly different planes.  Since film is made in layers, it did not matter.  With a sensor though all three primaries have to come in focus in the same plane or very close to it (because it is impossible to make this happen) so that the primary(s) out of focus does not spill into a neighboring pixel causing apo-chromatic aberrations.  Extremely difficult to engineer which is why lenses have increased in price so much, and much smaller pixel size is futile.  

This is what I have come to understand about current optics when dealing with digital sensors.  If I am wrong please correct me.

Schneider has a more detailed description on their website.
We have to differentiate between the science and the sales hype, but I have heard that theory, and read the Schneider website... and Apo-digitars are cheaper than the Hasselblad-Ziess film lenses are they not?

One of the complications of digital sensors is that they vignette if the angle of incidence of the light to the sensor is extreme, which is a complication for very wide non-retrofocus lenses (e.g Super-Angulon 47XL). Angled micro-lenses could help if all lenses had their rear element the same distance from the sensor...

I have a Leica-made Novoflex 400mm lens, and I look forward to seeing if it is sharper than the same FOV from a cropped Apo-Digitar 210mm
Logged

Hasselblad H4, Sinar P3 monorail view camera, Schneider Apo-digitar lenses
JoeKitchen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 659



« Reply #18 on: December 15, 2009, 06:07:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Dick Roadnight
This is why 9 or 10 micron pixels are good for film lenses... and digital specialist lenses do not have the image circle for 617.

We have to differentiate between the science and the sales hype, but I have heard that theory, and read the Schneider website... and Apo-digitars are cheaper than the Hasselblad-Ziess film lenses are they not?

One of the complications of digital sensors is that they vignette if the angle of incidence of the light to the sensor is extreme, which is a complication for very wide non-retrofocus lenses (e.g Super-Angulon 47XL). Angled micro-lenses could help if all lenses had their rear element the same distance from the sensor...

I have a Leica-made Novoflex 400mm lens, and I look forward to seeing if it is sharper than the same FOV from a cropped Apo-Digitar 210mm
Well it would be pretty cool if it works out.  

Also, never really paid attention to non-view camera lenses, so my comment about the prices is a little biased.  All I know is that my lenses for my 4x5 camera where all from $500 to $1300 and now with the jump to digital, the prices are $2500 to $8000.
Logged

Joe Kitchen
www.josephmkitchen.com

"Photography is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent moving furniture."  Arnold Newman
"Try not to be just better than your rivals and contemporaries, try to be better than yourself."  William Faulkner
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad