Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
Thread started 29 Oct 2012 (Monday) 07:58
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

Camera Plateau

 
Tom ­ Reichner
"That's what I do."
Avatar
17,636 posts
Gallery: 213 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8384
Joined Dec 2008
Location: from Pennsylvania, USA, now in Washington state, USA, road trip back and forth a lot
     
Oct 29, 2012 15:00 |  #16

Alex_Venom wrote in post #15181758 (external link)
What do you guys see (or want) in therms of real evolution for photography? Not talking about gadgets like wifi and GPS, or faster processors allowing a gazillion Megapixels or hundreds FPS.

I'm talking about real photography driven gains.

I know a per-pixel ISO is wanted by many... :D

Here's what I would like to see in new DSLRs
(some of the info here is taken from a response I wrote to a similar post a couple years ago):


What I'd really like to see most is a whole new type of sensor technology, with each and every pixel having it's very own color filter array. If every pixel had a whole system behind it, determining exactly what color it should be (red value, green value, blue value), based on the scene being photographed, then noise and grain would be entirely eliminated.

If anything like this ever happens, it is probably 15 or 20 years away.

Autofocus reads your eye's vision thru the viewfinder - whatever you're looking at when the shutter opens is what it focuses on. No matter where it is in the frame.

I know that Canon used to have a similar AF system, but evidently it did not work well enough, for they abandoned it. I would want it to be ultra-precise. Do you know how incredibly shallow DOF is when shooting true macro, or when using extremely long focal lengths like 600mm or 800mm? Well, even at those extremes, I want an eye-detection AF that would focus exactly where my eye was looking - not 1/2 a centimeter in front or behind - exactly spot on, every time, no exceptions. Whether you wear corrective lenses or not.

Of course, the eye-detection AF would just be one of the AF settings available - if you wanted to you could choose to focus in more traditional ways.


Camera bodies that automatically send each image you take to your home computer (via satellite or other technology not yet discovered). You snap the shot, possibly thousands of miles from where you live - within milliseconds the image file is on you computer at home. Full RAW file. No need for memory cards, unless you want to use one anyway just for backup. You could also have duplicate files sent automatically to your smart phone (future versions that will be able to handle thousands of times the data that today's smart phones can handle), or to any device you like.


Camera bodies that use solar power as an alternative power source. If it's a fairly bright day, you could shoot thousands of frames without even having a battery in the camera! Internal "batteries" would be able to store energy for future use on dark days or when shooting indoors.

All bodies and lenses completely waterproof, able to be used underwater to depths of over 300', without any need for any extra housing whatsoever. Of course, it goes without saying that all bodies and lenses would also be completely dust proof.

Video mode: When shooting video, the camera would shoot at it's full fps rate using full resolution frames! This means that every single frame in a video would be the same quality as a still shot. We could shoot video all the time, then simply select the best looking frame from within the video and use that as our still image. Imagine the stills you could get from an NFL football game, or from a horse race, or a boxing match?!

Follow focus on video would be a must. In fact, it's hard to believe that they haven't already done this. I think they're intentionally holding this back just so that they can add it to later models (5Dmk4 / 1Dx2?) so that people will have to upgrade.


The sensors would be able to produce an extraordinary dynamic range (similar to today's HDR images) due to each pixel's ability to determine it's own sensitivity. This would be done automatically on a pixel-by-pixel basis, not just some system where groups of pixels worked together (that would be a form of interpolation, and interpolation always causes some degree of information loss).

I am sure that there is so much more that could be done with DSLRs - far, far more than I can even imagine at this point. But the above items would certainly help me make much better images right now . . . if only these features were currently available.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ddk632
Goldmember
Avatar
1,606 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 26
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Aventura, FL
     
Oct 29, 2012 15:16 |  #17

ScullenCrossBones wrote in post #15182790 (external link)
Increased DR. I'd like a slider for PP that I can dial in the amount of DR desired for the final output.

In the same vain, I'd like to select DOF after the shot with a slider. Pick the focus point and the DOF in post.

Focus assist on the camera that works in servo.

Face detection. It's on our phone for crying out loud, why do I need a 1Dx to get that?

Noise reduction that doesn't soften the image.

ETTL that really works.

World peace.

To the bolded point, this seems to already exist. Have you seen the Lytro (external link) camera? Choose focus after the fact, and your friends can refocus by tapping when viewing the image.

Not a DSLR, but very interesting nonetheless.


Dmitriy Khaykin (external link)
dk (external link) | f (external link) | ig (external link) | t (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jonrmoore
Senior Member
Avatar
400 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Vancouver, WA
     
Oct 29, 2012 15:26 |  #18

Hilarious review comparing the D800E and 5D mk III

http://fakechuckwestfa​ll.wordpress.com …lity-dxomark-sucks-balls/ (external link)


http://jontakesphotos.​com (external link)
Flickr (external link) - 6D, 5D, 17-40L, 85 f1.8, 50 f1.8, 135 f2.8, Helios 44-2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MikeWa
Senior Member
Avatar
879 posts
Gallery: 89 photos
Likes: 235
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Seattle Washington
     
Oct 29, 2012 16:59 |  #19

Yes the last really major development was the Kodak Instamatic. But incremental improvements have brought us a long way since then. These improvements have pushed us thru film into electronics and digital. We have better pixel count, dynamic range, and sensitivity than ever before. I can do things with my DSLR now that I never dreamed of back in the seventies.

Once digital went over about six mega pixels it equaled 90% of the snapshots most people took with film. So I really love the 18 mega pixels of my 7D. It can do much much more much faster and much better than my old A1.

So is there a plateau. Maybe but if there is, it is a plateau tilted upward. And I expect we will benefit from many more incremental improvements.


Mike...G9; 7D; 7D Mark II; EF-S 10-22mm; EF-S 18-135mm IS STM; EF 28-300mm F3.5-5.6L; EF 70-300mm IS USM; EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS-II; EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS; EXT 1.4-II & 2.0-III; The more I learn the less I know.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ScullenCrossBones
Senior Member
Avatar
842 posts
Joined May 2009
Location: Keller, TX
     
Oct 29, 2012 18:02 |  #20

The development of the digital sensor seems like a pretty big milestone to me. It changed the way we make photographs and added a new exposure variable (ISO) to the equation. It killed film eventually.


:p Gear
Mama done took my Kodachrome away...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
maverick75
Cream of the Crop
5,718 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 621
Joined May 2012
Location: Riverside,California
     
Oct 29, 2012 18:27 |  #21

When a digital camera can have the same dynamic range as the human eye I think that will be the pinnacle.


- Alex Corona Sony A7, Canon 7DM2/EOS M, Mamiya 645/67
Flickr (external link) - 500px (external link) - Website (external link)- Feedback -Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MikeWa
Senior Member
Avatar
879 posts
Gallery: 89 photos
Likes: 235
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Seattle Washington
     
Oct 29, 2012 18:59 |  #22

ScullenCrossBones wrote in post #15183928 (external link)
The development of the digital sensor seems like a pretty big milestone to me. It changed the way we make photographs and added a new exposure variable (ISO) to the equation. It killed film eventually.

That turned out to be true. However the early digital cameras were pretty dismal affairs with a 320 x 240 pixel resolution. They also had poor noise control and low ISO sensitivity. In the early days digital camaras were not an improvement over film cameras. But step by step, little by little they got to where they are today.

Mike


Mike...G9; 7D; 7D Mark II; EF-S 10-22mm; EF-S 18-135mm IS STM; EF 28-300mm F3.5-5.6L; EF 70-300mm IS USM; EF 70-200mm F2.8L IS-II; EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS; EXT 1.4-II & 2.0-III; The more I learn the less I know.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CallumRD1
Senior Member
Avatar
443 posts
Gallery: 22 photos
Likes: 465
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Boulder, Colorado
     
Oct 29, 2012 19:08 |  #23

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15183367 (external link)
...Video mode: When shooting video, the camera would shoot at it's full fps rate using full resolution frames! This means that every single frame in a video would be the same quality as a still shot. We could shoot video all the time, then simply select the best looking frame from within the video and use that as our still image. Imagine the stills you could get from an NFL football game, or from a horse race, or a boxing match?!...

I think that we are closer to this than people realize. Take the 1DX, for example. It can take 12 fps raw files. Now imagine if the processing power of the camera was doubled, probably by putting in a very powerful mobile processor or a low power multithreaded computer processor. We could theoretically get 24 fps, not too bad for video. If you take another small jump and assume that the processing power required to get to 30 fps could be fit inside a 1D body, then we would be looking at 30MB raw files at 30 fps, or about 900MB/Second of data to transfer to the storage device. No memory card can come close to this, but mSATA SSD's can reach around 500MB/Second writes. So if two of those were put into the camera in RAID 0, a logical volume of approximately 1,000MB/Second write speeds could be created in capacities up to 1024GB as of now. This means that you could have 18MP video at 30fps with full raw files containing just as much information as a still would hold, just limited to 1/30 sec or faster shutter speeds. Or the camera could shoot in JPEG an not break 200MB/Second, allowing a set of 2 CF cards in RAID 0 or a single mSATA SSD to handle the information. This could literally be just around the corner, as the hardware required to do this is around now, it just needs packaged in a very small space, probably a 1D body, and some very good code written to execute it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark0159
I say stupid things all the time
Avatar
12,935 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 286
Joined Mar 2003
Location: Hamilton, New Zealand
     
Oct 29, 2012 19:34 |  #24

the camera having the mind of Chase Jarvis built in so all I have to do is point the camera and it will know when to take a photo.

That way I don't have to do any work.


Mark
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/52782633@N04 (external link)
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 17-40mm f/4L USM, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM | Tamron SP 35mm F1.8 Di VC USD | Canon Speedlite 550EX -|- Film | Canon EOS 3 | Olympus OM2 | Zuiko 35mm f2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
Oct 29, 2012 20:16 as a reply to  @ Mark0159's post |  #25

16-bit 36MP files would be huge.. much huger :lol: than they are.

They would have to develop a new type of shutter, for this video that you guys are talking about. 30 fps, the shutter would wear out in months(it obviously wouldn't be a rolling shutter, or it would be no different than video is now).

I'd like to see cleaner low ISO performance as well... no need to ETTR(can underexpose if i want). ;)


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,672 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6634
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 29, 2012 20:28 |  #26

1Tanker wrote in post #15184416 (external link)
16-bit 36MP files would be huge.. much huger :lol: than they are.

They would have to develop a new type of shutter, for this video that you guys are talking about. 30 fps, the shutter would wear out in months(it obviously wouldn't be a rolling shutter, or it would be no different than video is now).

I'd like to see cleaner low ISO performance as well... no need to ETTR(can underexpose if i want). ;)

you'de probably ETTR anyhow to get max performance :)


Sony A7siii/A7iv/ZV-1 - FE 24/1.4 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 - 28-200 RXD
Panasonic GH6 - Laowa 7.5/2 - PL 15/1.7 - P 42.5/1.8 - OM 75/1.8 - PL 10-25/1.7 - P 12-32 - P 14-140

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

3,661 views & 0 likes for this thread, 20 members have posted to it.
Camera Plateau
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ANebinger
1054 guests, 162 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.