Is FF sensors going to slowly phase out?

Started Apr 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
Grevture
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,889Gear list
Like?
Agree, and ...
In reply to Erik Magnuson, Apr 14, 2013

Erik Magnuson wrote:

Bart Hickman wrote:

I stand corrected.  I was under the impression the mirrorless market was growing faster in terms of percentage.  Maybe it's not.

Growing faster as a percentage does not mean growing faster - it just means that the growth is to a smaller base.   For 2013, DLSR growth is projected to be by 1.6 million units (from 16.2 million to 17.8 millon)  Mirrorless by less than 1 million units (from 4 million to 4.9 million).

I would say this is a good example of where PR people at the camera manufacturers often strive to confuse us profoundly by throwing out growth percentages which are correctly calculated, but often used out of context which make them rather disinformative.

I think the high volume lenses I'm thinking about aren't nearly this sharp.  Certainly not much that gets tested at places like photozone.

Again, you are applying the wrong numeric logic - it's not important that a lens+sensor system resolve to the theoretical maximum resolution - it's sufficient that they resolve significantly more than whatever you are comparing to (for a personal definition of "significant.")   Lens resolution is not a "brick wall" type filter - every lens on a D800 will show higher resolution than the same lens on a D3x - just not always by the linear pixel count difference.  BTW, that's not a ratio of 36/24 or 1.5 - that's area and resolution is measured as linear, so the correct ratio is  7360/6048 or 1.2.

Agree, what so many people forget is that when looking at the whole system (lens + camera) it is still (and for a long time will remain) the sensor more then the lenses who limit the total resolution of the camera system as a whole.

A lot of people seem to have been a little overwhelmed by the large number of 36 megapixels in a D800/D800E. But if you look at it more closely, it is not a particularly high resolution even by today's standards. A 24 megapixel APS-C sensor scaled to FF would be roughly 55-57 megapixels. The 10 megapixel 1 inch sensor in the first generation Nikon 1 cameras correspond to about 73-74 megapixels in full frame. And the 20 megapixel 1 inch RX-100 sensor consequently correspond to something like a 145 megapixel FF camera. Not to mention some of the 1/2.3" compacts which have resolutions corresponding to 350-400 megapixels in a FF sensor. In short: 36 megapixels is not that much, nor is it that taxing on lenses.

And as Erik points out, pixel count grows by the square of the increase of linear resolution. Which is why you have to go from 6 megapixel to 24 megapixels to actually have a doubling of linear resolution. And that a D800 has less then 2,5 times higher resolution then a 6 megapixel camera (7360/3000=2.45). To quadruple the linear resolution of a 6 megapixel camera, you need a whopping 96 megapixels.

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

 Grevture's gear list:Grevture's gear list
Nikon D70s Nikon D3 Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
NoNew
NoNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow