DSLRUsers.com

Not really sure how this would work in high end models, looks more likely it will be aimed at the P&S market.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6263551.stm

Paul,

The technique seems to be interesting, but I wonder how well it will work where the subject of the photo is not static?.

Rapidly moving subjects would seem to me to present a challenge.

Interesting but...

What is so inefficient about this is that we acquire all these numbers - for example 10 million megapixels - only to throw away 80-90 percent

It seems he hasn't heard of RAW processing. Yes I know my D70 compresses the RAW anyway, but I don't think it is in the range of 80% redundancy.

Further he is describing a serial data transfer. Cameras use parallel for more efficient transfer. He would be throwing that away.

Serial RS232 printers were replaced by Parallel Centronics interfaces because they were faster. Yes I know that is now replaced by Serial USB, but I see that changing to Parallel in the future. For now, cost and convenience have outweighed performance.

Serial Networks are just beginning to be replaced by Parallel (802.11n is effectively a parallel version of 802.11)

As Gary says, Speed will prevent its use for moving objects, but it may have applications for static images.

Also he is replacing the complexity of the Sensor array (and no mirror) with the complexity of his mirror array (and one sensor). Are we any better off?

I can see its use in satellite cameras, and other specialised uses, but not replacing the digital camera we know.

Greg

Mr Darcy wrote:Serial RS232 printers were replaced by Parallel Centronics interfaces because they were faster. Yes I know that is now replaced by Serial USB, but I see that changing to Parallel in the future.

Right now the trend seems to be going to serial across the board:

ATA -> SATA
PCI -> PCI Express
SCSI -> SAS

Serial Networks are just beginning to be replaced by Parallel (802.11n is effectively a parallel version of 802.11)

I don't think of 802.11n as parallel (there is no parallelism in bits or frames or anything), but rather than a new kind of modulation (signal encoding) made possible by using multiple carriers. Much like better modulations were made possible by moving from one-pair to two-pair to quad-pair serial links. In fact, 802.11n with its three arials allows for speeds much higher than three 802.11g links together.

Cheers
Steffen.

I must admit I am trying to escape from the world of IT (Except as a user!)
I was a computer Tech in the days when you could crawl around inside computers, and they were less powerful than an iPod. Tnese days I simply write Office Automation stuff to keep my hand in.

So I bow to your better knowledge.

I fail to understand however, how 1 bit at a time can be faster than 2, 4, 8, 16, 64,... bits at a time using the same technology. I understand that it can be cheaper, and possibly easier, but quicker? I can't see it.

Mr Darcy wrote:So I bow to your better knowledge.

Sorry Greg, that must've come across the wrong way. I have no better knowledge on anything. I do have a point of view sometimes and I enjoy debating it. Most people get that wrong...

Usually, whenever I appear to be arguing from the standpoint of authority I have no more than a reasonably defendable position and try to encourage constructive counter-argument.

By no means I intend to offend, but I have found this to be a very good strategy for learning.

Cheers
Steffen.

Sorry Greg, that must've come across the wrong way

No offence taken. I do the same thing myself. To others I often appear to be on a soapbox when I am just either stirring the pot or even just clarifying things in my own mind.

In this particular case, While I have spent many years in the IT trade, I am now trying to become a mere user.
That means while I am arguing from a knowledge base, that base is increasingly out of date.
The general principals remain valid though, so I rarely get caught out.
Damn you for catching me this time

Mr Darcy wrote:While I have spent many years in the IT trade, I am now trying to become a mere user.

Oh shit!

Another one!

Clear the decks!

My natural home is "Nerd & Pedant" corner, but I am not allowed in yet BTW

general principals

did I mean the department of Education?

This is exactly the same concept that is behind DLP TV's - only in that case it's obviously for playback not recording an image.

Google for "DLP" and you'll find pleanty of info on how it works.