100 million pixels-here it comes!

Have your say on issues related to using a DSLR camera.

Moderator: Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

100 million pixels-here it comes!

Postby Matt. K on Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:37 pm

Regards

Matt. K
User avatar
Matt. K
Former Outstanding Member Of The Year and KM
 
Posts: 9981
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:12 pm
Location: North Nowra

Re: 100 million pixels-here it comes!

Postby birddog114 on Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:40 pm

Matt. K wrote:http://www.dpreview.com/news/0606/06061901dalsa100mp.asp


So is it will be our next super dupper whooper FF? :lol: :lol: :lol:
Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
User avatar
birddog114
Senior Member
 
Posts: 15881
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Belmore,Sydney

Postby NikonUser on Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:41 pm

Can I cram one of them into my D2X?
http://www.australiandigitalphotography.com

Living in poverty due to my addiction to NIKON... Is there a clinic that can help me?
User avatar
NikonUser
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1064
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 6:18 pm
Location: Canberra - **D2X**

Postby birddog114 on Tue Jun 20, 2006 2:43 pm

NikonUser wrote:Can I cram one of them into my D2X?


That will goes into the reverse sensor & camera on my truck :lol:
Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
User avatar
birddog114
Senior Member
 
Posts: 15881
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Belmore,Sydney

Postby Matt. K on Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:02 pm

Maybe we should hang on to our Hasselblads a little longer. 100 million pixels on the back of the blad would be a serious contender for a 10 x 8 full plate camera. 8) 8)
Regards

Matt. K
User avatar
Matt. K
Former Outstanding Member Of The Year and KM
 
Posts: 9981
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:12 pm
Location: North Nowra

Postby LostDingo on Tue Jun 20, 2006 8:28 pm

Matt. K wrote:Maybe we should hang on to our Hasselblads a little longer. 100 million pixels on the back of the blad would be a serious contender for a 10 x 8 full plate camera. 8) 8)


hmmmm....100 megapixel :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

You can get a 39 megapixel Hassy now 8) 8)
User avatar
LostDingo
Senior Member
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:18 am
Location: Rozelle

Postby Steffen on Tue Jun 20, 2006 8:37 pm

The sensor measures 4" x 4" :shock: That makes even a Hasselblad look puny... I guess they have to wait for the 1.5x crop version :wink:

Cheers
Steffen.
lust for comfort suffocates the soul
User avatar
Steffen
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 4:52 pm
Location: Toongabbie, NSW

Postby Big V on Tue Jun 20, 2006 8:42 pm

You have to love the Astronomers, always pushing the envelope and asking for more pixels and less noise. They have the budgets to make these happen and the toys they get to play with are always expensive because they are the early adopters of the technology and have to pay for the privelage. The first astronomy ccd camera that I used at the observatory was a sbig st7, electronically cooled, under a megapixel and cost 7 grand in 1999.
Canon
User avatar
Big V
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2301
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 1:37 am
Location: Adelaide

Postby smac on Tue Jun 20, 2006 8:44 pm

Maths isn't my strong suit, but if a 12 megapixel camera in RAW captures a 19 meg file, does that mean that a 100 megapixel sensor will capture a 158 megapixel RAW file?

That would mean that a 4 Gig card will capture 25 shots......ouch. That 16Gig card is looking more attractive.

Stuart
'Tis better to have loved and lust than never to have lust at all.
User avatar
smac
Member
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:15 pm
Location: Baulkham Hills, Sydney

Postby LostDingo on Tue Jun 20, 2006 8:44 pm

Steffen wrote:The sensor measures 4" x 4" :shock: That makes even a Hasselblad look puny... I guess they have to wait for the 1.5x crop version :wink:

Cheers
Steffen.


If a 22 megapixel Hassy is approx $22k than 100 megapixel would be :?: :?:
User avatar
LostDingo
Senior Member
 
Posts: 951
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:18 am
Location: Rozelle

Postby Gordon on Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:42 pm

smac wrote:Maths isn't my strong suit, but if a 12 megapixel camera in RAW captures a 19 meg file, does that mean that a 100 megapixel sensor will capture a 158 megapixel RAW file?

That would mean that a 4 Gig card will capture 25 shots......ouch. That 16Gig card is looking more attractive.

Stuart


Astronomers dont usually bother with CF cards ;) I know some surveys use very large HDDs, they put a new one in for each night's data.
Here on our NEO survey with a 4K X 4K CCD we compress our data (up to 800 32GB images plus various other files), usually it just fits on 2DVDs per night.

Gordon
D70, D200, CP5700
User avatar
Gordon
Member
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: Loomberah/Siding Spring Observatory


Return to General Discussion