Petroglyph
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 6,096
- Solutions
- 9
- Reaction score
- 1,384
45MP FF Sony sensor by January. Yikes.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
New Sony sensor rumour
- Thread starter Petroglyph
- Start date
paulkienitz
Veteran Member
Only makes sense to bring the FF to a level similar to the 24mp APS sensors.
fotobert
Leading Member
That makes 5500 * 8.200 px
We need bigger monitors for PP
Albert
We need bigger monitors for PP
Albert
miles green
Veteran Member
Yikes...
My 16mpx K5 easily prints to 50x70cm (about 20x30 inches), and will pass "fine detail" inspection from a foot away from the paper.
So i guess FF will be for printing the entire wall...?
My biggest problem is already storage, and more specifically, backup space.....
viking79
Forum Pro
Exactly, seems more like medium format competitor for professionals. Processing A7R photos is already painful enough on my 2 year old computer.
I suppose it is just how things go, I imagine somewhere on the order of 100 to 400 MP would be reasonable for Full Frame still, given diffraction limits.
We need a breakthrough in storage technology such that we basically have unlimited storage for minimal cost.
Eric
Last edited:
Fraulain Uebermueller
Well-known member
- Messages
- 215
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 369
That's not nearly enough. The 400 might be enough for APS-C.
The pixel count of the SLRs have gone from 6 to 36 MP in the last 10 years - factor of 6.
Hard drives from about 120GB to 3TB over the same time (at the same price) - factor of 25.
So over the last 10 years out capacity of storing images has increased by a factor of about 4.
And btw, that 3TB holds may 100.000 large raw files.
And that 3TB drive costs a small fraction of the camera.
I see no need for any breakthroughs in HD capacity other than normal development pace.
Chris Mak
Senior Member
How long before we will have 27 inch retina screens, which would bring a horizontal resolution of 6000px within reach? Where does it end?
Chris
Petroglyph
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 6,096
- Solutions
- 9
- Reaction score
- 1,384
ozdean
Forum Pro
MP race is getting ridiculous IMO, I'd rather have iso and dynamic range any day.
How many here are printing larger than Poster size?
How many here are printing larger than Poster size?
jimrpdx
Senior Member
>How long before we will have 27 inch retina screens, which would bring a horizontal resolution of >6000px within reach? Where does it end? Chris
>MP race is getting ridiculous IMO, I'd rather have iso and dynamic range any day. How many here >are printing larger than Poster size? Regards Dean - Capturing Creation
It stops when we all stop buying. If we prove that what we have is enough, perhaps they will heed the call to provide something more than mere megapixels!
>MP race is getting ridiculous IMO, I'd rather have iso and dynamic range any day. How many here >are printing larger than Poster size? Regards Dean - Capturing Creation
It stops when we all stop buying. If we prove that what we have is enough, perhaps they will heed the call to provide something more than mere megapixels!
Unfortunately, it's not just storage. It's camera processing speed and post processing speed. Things are getting slow enough as it is. I for one would much prefer fewer MP and better low-light images. I want in-camera processing to be almost instant and better auto focus. I'll pay for lots of things, but not for more pixels. However, as long as manufacturers depend on the general public in order to survive in this business, we'll have the MP wars continuing.
viking79
Forum Pro
Well, your full frame lenses are going to be diffraction limited around f/2.3 at 400 MP (using tawbaware calculator, obviously there are ranges on how this limit is calculated).
I was throwing out a realistic number. Obviously you could go up to 800 mp or something, but I imagine it will be difficult to get adequate lens performance at such large apertures for a reasonable price. I suppose it all comes down to what people are willing to pay.
Realistically, 140 MP full frame is pushing 200 lp/mm, which probably isn't very realistic to exceed those resolution figures at a reasonable cost.
What we have today isn't great for video. A 3 TB drive might hold 3 hours of heavily compressed 4k video?
My 2 TB drive is fuller than I care for...
Here is my issue. Lets say I have 1 TB of photos to store. No big deal, have to store some factor more than that at my home, anywhere from 2 TB for a mirrored configuration or a bit less for some other methods of RAID, and ideally should store them on the cloud too. This is where I want a "breakthrough" in storage technology to make the cloud storage far cheaper than it is today. I really don't want to spend $50 a month or so on storing that 1 TB in the cloud, not to mention video. I suppose this also comes down to my gripe that I want gigabit ethernet for less than $100 a month
Eric
Last edited:
Jim Beverlin
Senior Member
What are you talking about? Dropbox charges $10 a month for 1 TB, and that isn't even the cheapest option. If the purpose is only backup (not regular access) there are even cheaper options, like $6 a month for unlimited cloud backup space (sites like crashplan)
Which I have, about $70 a month for 1gig up and 1 gig down speed
Last edited:
paulkienitz
Veteran Member
We most certainly do, as well as a breakthrough in processing tech for better/smoother/faster post processing.
viking79
Forum Pro
Russell Evans
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 12,617
- Solutions
- 16
- Reaction score
- 1,732
Loading…
www.theinquirer.net
"Dave Tang of HGST Corporate Development and Strategy explained that although the 10TB hard drive has higher capacity, the shingle magnet technique involves overlapping sectors and so is best suited for write once, read many applications."
Thank you
Russell
viking79
Forum Pro
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum