Reasons for wanting higher mega pixel count

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
JimKasson
JimKasson Forum Pro • Posts: 26,223
Re: Managing blur

Joachim Wulfers wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

Joachim Wulfers wrote:

JimKasson wrote:

KE_DP wrote:

Considering Moore's Law photography data in gigapixels are only a matter of time - maybe even terapixels.

There are some considerable difficulties building a lens that can provide terapixels of information -- as opposed to noise -- in a single capture. The simplest one is diffraction.

Isn't diffraction already setting in at Apertures of 5.6 or 8 in a camera like the A7R4? If that is the case what happens with all the nice landscape optics where photographers shoot at F11 and over?

There is no aperture where diffraction suddenly appears. Landscape photography is partially about managing sources of blur. Defocus blur and diffraction blur should both be considered. Some DOF apps allow that. In addition, I think that sensor blur due to the finite pixel aperture should also be considered.

I've written a tool to optimize those three things, but it's not portable.

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/choosing-f-stops-and-focus-distance-for-landscapes/

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/optimizing-f-stops-and-focus-distance-for-landscapes/

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/optimizing-aperture-and-focus-distance-an-example/

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/optimizing-aperture-and-focus-distance-another-example/

https://blog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/ff-examples-of-optimal-blur-management/

Looking at these examples will give you a feel for what's involved. Often, the sharpest images are obtained with quite a bit of diffraction blur.

At the risk of sounding ignorant, which I am about this topic, what I meant is that the diffraction of a lens, even at 5.6 or 8 may cause part of the light captured to miss the pixels (when you visualize each pixel as a cup) once the pixels become extremely small. At 3.8 µm the pixels of an A7R4 are already becoming some of the smallest among all formats (smart phones not included). Perhaps that is what you call sensor blurr?

I haven't tested the a7RIV, of course, but effective fill factor on the BSI FF Sony sensors has been close to 100% up to now.

The fill factor (1 - any portion of the pixel/microlens that is unresponsive to light) is part of the sensor blur, as is the AA filter, if present. Low fill factors produce sharper images, but are more prone to aliasing.

Jim

-- hide signature --
 JimKasson's gear list:JimKasson's gear list
Nikon D5 Sony a9 Sony a7 III Nikon Z7 Fujifilm GFX 100 +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
CE3
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow