How many years......

Do you all think it will be before a pinhead sensor camera can produce an image like this at 100% crop. Do you think we will even get there? (Joms.... don't click on that link, it will make you sick with envy... as it did me.)

100% crop from the middle 1/16th of the frame - D800

--
Nikon AF - One Shot ..... One Kill

:-)looks to me your cam is already there.

Probably in 5 years.

http://www.tum.de/nc/en/about-tum/news/press-releases/short/article/30292/

I clicked it hoping I will see something but... But it is achievable now Nighty. Just fill the frame because superzoom has FL advantage then resize the picture down to that cropped size of D800. Care to share the original uncropped version?

-=[ Joms ]=-

You'll have to ask the OP Here you go

I don't quite think you understand what you're looking at. Or maybe you do?

That is a 100% crop of an original shot. There's no pinhead sensor on the planet that can do that. My question is.. will one ever? I don't thinks so.. not anytime soon. BTW, If one gives tat crop a quick pass of topaz denoise ... you'd be left with an image that most pinhead sensors would be hard pressed to produce full frame.

--
Nikon AF - One Shot ..... One Kill

I know you can never achieve that crop quality from a pinhead sensor when you shoot the subject at widest end that is why optical zoom is there to get you closer.

-=[ Joms ]=-

I think the question should be:

"How long do you think cams that now use pin head sensors will have full frame sensors in them and produce images like this?"

My answer to this would be "much sooner than many think" but maybe not with the full zoom ranges as now...

--
Best Regards
Sunshine
Visit my website for lots of pics and fun...
www.sunshine-web.com
ps If you see someone without a smile on, give him one of yours...

I think Fuji can put a 1" or 4/3 or even apsc sensor in the X-S1 or HS50 body with the same lens.

-=[ Joms ]=-

The lens of the XS-1 will not cover the larger 1", 4/3 or APS-C sensors. Besides with larger sensors, it no longer reach the 35mm equivalent of 624mm. 1" sensors have a 2.7 X crop factor, m43 have 2x and APS-C have 1.5 X crop factors so even if the XS-1 lens could over a larger sensor without vignetting or soft corners (unlikely), you'd loose much of the reach that the higher crop factor of the 2/3" sensor provides.

I'm fortunate enough to own the D800, and personally, I don't think tiny sensors will ever be able to match the IQ of the larger FF sensor of that camera.  The physics just don't work for the smaller sensor as you'll never achieve the extremely low SN/R of the larger sensor so images over base ISO will look worse, and you'll never be able to isolate subjects like a FF camera as DOF on the smaller sensor is extremely deep.

Yes if course I know that. But how much FL? The HS50 has 180(?)mm so with 1 sensor or 4/3 you'll get 360-400+ mm equivalent.

-=[ Joms ]=-

Yes cropping DSLR pictures kills the image quality. Better is to use a bridgecamera with a zoooooooomlens (like the HS50).

Peter

Agree with both revised question and the answer to it.

--
Tim

That's a nice crop ... but I have a 1/16th crop from the X-S1 shot at M size that also makes me perfectly happy ...

Original full sized JPEG

The rest are cropped and processed from the RAF in LR ...

My original processing some time ago ...

Today's experimental crop ...

The 100% crop itself ...

And finally, expandad out (magnified by about 2x) to my usual 1000px display size ...

Obviously not quite the D800 ... but still very good for those who wander the woods or the zoos at midday ...

--

http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Wrong. As always.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

A full frame sensor will drive costs of the whole kit to above $2000 ... because a body and two lenses of similar reach today would cost about 4 grand. And are huge and heavy.

There is no way to make a bridge camera with the stunning range they have today with FF sensors ... the laws of physics deny it.

But ... pushing the X-S1 up to a 1" sensor might be possible and still get to, say, 500mm ...

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Now that would be a nice camera, so long as they keep the decent viewfinder.

In fact as you know the X-S1 would still be a nicely balanced camera with a bigger lens.

--
The 10% Rule:
You Must Be 10% Smarter Than The Equipment You're Operating

Believe it or not but I hit the link without reading it. My first reaction seeing the pic and no data was: he's joking.

Hence my reaction. So, lets put it this way. If you see that pic without knowing with what cam it was made and without knowing lens,speed and iso settings what does it look like? Pinhead pic? Not a bad one but nevertheless.:-D

I would love to gain some resolution in the XS1~2 camera, and would give up (not gladly) some of the long end….on the other hand if the resolution was better then maybe a little cropping would make up for any loss in actual FL.

The size of the XS1 really works for me, as a matter of fact I use a much smaller (physical size) zoom on dslr only because it is far more comfortable and balances well.

I was fooling around shooting birds and squirrels last fall, using d800+80/400 tokina (consumer lens). This is a perfect size IMO but it is old design, no stabilization prone to CA but…..I like it for walking around.

I noticed a moth on the ground…shot at 300mm, handheld etc………the fact that one can crop so deeply is just eye opening if you are accustomed to typical sensor sizes.

click on original since first is an animated gif

wj

--
nikonfujicanonandricoh

and if that was the pic...I agree but it is but a small portion

the recent availability of such high resolution sensors (to the masses) really does change a lot of perceptions I used to hold. Pixel peeping (generally) of these huge files is very much a waste of time if your purpose is to determine whether or not it is good enough for web or small sized printing.

wj

--
nikonfujicanonandricoh

Kim Letkeman says: Cropping DSLR pictures does not kill image quality. Using a bridgecamera with a zooooooomlens instead is just plain stupid.

Sounds great, as always.

Peter