Reading mode: Light Dark

14mp:end of game?

Go to last post
A

aviatlo

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
263
Reaction score
0
Location
varese, IT
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination : resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm resolution.

3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines per mm ( . http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )

4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate sensor resolution.

5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts, noise)improvements.

7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
 
I know a guys who worked with Nikon 2 years ago.

Back then, he was told by Nikon engineers that DSLR were not very likely to go far beyond 10 MP because the sensor would then outresolve the resolution of the lenses... with no more gains to be made...

What can therefore be improved then is the dynamic range, sharpeness per pixel, noise levels... and other "physical" characteristics of the body/lens that can reduce image quality (shake, accuracy of AF,...).

It seems to me that Fuji and Nikon's recent annoucements are compatible with such statements.

Best regards,
Bernard
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are
actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more
resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts,
noise)improvements.
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
Click to expand...
 
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
Click to expand...
I measured the high-contrast resolution for this same lens a few years back, and it tested at f/8, these center/tangential readings:
168 l/mm (center), 168/120 (1/2 out), 144/120 (edge)

Maybe not quite up to a Summicron or a Nikkor f/1.8 50mm at this stop, but still respectable. It does appear to keep up with the 14n sensor, and that's more than I can say for several others.
 
aviatlo said:
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
Click to expand...
I though you needed twice the lens resolution: i.e. 200 lpm, before you could actually properly resolve the 104 lpmm sensor.

tony
 
tony field said:
aviatlo said:
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
Click to expand...
I though you needed twice the lens resolution: i.e. 200 lpm, before
you could actually properly resolve the 104 lpmm sensor.

tony
Click to expand...
I am not sure anymore that real world resolution has anything much to do with lens resolution. I have some sample images of a Phaseone H25 (22mill pixels), these are landscape images in winter pointing towards woodland. The trees do not have any leaves on the branches and the lighting is very flat. They show the same problem that all digital shows to me, in low contrast areas the software does not know what to do with the information, so you get a grey patch that lacks texture or definition. Film would not resolve anymore actual detail in twigs branches etc, but it does hold a better texture, you get areas that are lighter and darker that give an impression that there is depth and not just a fuzzy patch, film also holds colour differences better. I think this effect is down to software allocating a position for the information from the RGB censors, how does it know that a information from a certain "R" pixels is to be married to the correct corresponding "G & B" pixel as it will have many neighbours.Hence the smudgy patches, Kodak add to the smudgy effect with their noise reduction in PD.
(This is my guess work, I have zero technical knowledge of this)

Now comparing the H25 against the SLR/n, not easy as I only have downloaded jpg's from the Kodak and a CD of tiffs from the H25. I am very impressed with the Kodak, first off at 300dpi the advantage of 22 million pixels is just 3 inches. This equates to slightly more detail, but not much as best as I can judge, when the Kodak is run through the Photoshop RAW converter.

The H25 images have no moire or purple highlights (but then they do not have any extreme highlights do to the weather).

I do not think in most situations the advantages of the H25 will show through enough to make you go "Wow that's so much better".

I am going to try the SLR/n, if it works as well as I am expecting it to, this will be a sale.

I think the best hope for advances in resolution might come from Foveon or maybe the Fuji S3 with 12 million bits of information but only 6 million positions.
Kevin.
 
that's LINE PAIRS/mm. They commonly resolve 300+ lp/mm in ariel measurements (check Leica's online info). My large format lenses resolve over 200 lp/mm in ariel readings. And you need more than 1x in sensor pixels to resolve a "line". It works out to more like 1.5-2. Think about it. If you are reading a target that's 100 lines per mm and your sensor is only 100 lpmm then you have to align the pixels with the target's lines or you wind up with gray mush.

Wayne
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are
actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more
resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts,
noise)improvements.
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
Click to expand...
 
I love it when I see testing rather than bs guess work. It's almost a lost art - except with professionals that demand the best. I always knew the 1.8 was a hot lens, I just never had tested it.

Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
 
Wayne DeWitt said:
Wayne
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are
actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more
resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts,
noise)improvements.
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I was aware of possible different usage of terms after reading article on Luminous related to MTF and line/line pairs.

I do not know how these terms are used in dpreview tests, so I tried to use references using the same terms. I will apply to learn more, in order to "normalize" results.

What bothers me is the fact that I read many tests in which lens resolution is compared (measured?) using camera sensor. This should be clearly impossible if common lens resolution is 3 times that of current sensors.
In practice, resolution wise, all should produce the same results.
With 125 pixel/mm (14n) limit is 90-100 line(pairs) mm, and this is also
maximum performance indicated by reference for 50 1.4.
Will read leica documents.
Thanks.
Aviatlo.
 
I am amazed at what ACR (with SLR/n) can do about the mush problem addressed above. Still experimenting, but a setting of Sharpness 0, Luminance smoothing 0, and Color Noise Reduction at 15% produced some wonderful images - with zero mush. Then USM later in PS - to suit the print size. Very impressive.

Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
 
Wayne,

I have been around in many sites looking for lens measurements and related criteria, but see that a lens is considered exceptional with MTF 70%@40 l/mm resolution 65 l/mm and that only very few go over 100 l/mm

(50 lp/mm). Can you tell me where I can find data related to these 300 lp/mm ? Or specific link on leica site.
Thanks again.
Aviatlo
Wayne DeWitt said:
Wayne
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are
actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more
resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts,
noise)improvements.
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
ResIpsaLoquitur said:
aviatlo said:
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Click to expand...
It never went away. In fact there are more and better medium
format backs being released all the time.
Click to expand...
RIL

in effect I have been a little implicit here.What I was thinking was: if they do not improve lenses, FF medium format will be needed, but this pushes pixel count to nearly 60 millions, in order to obtain all possible resolution.
Very fast processing required.
Aviatlo
 
Concur in the question - I have never heard of a large format lens resolving that in any measurement, much less film - the best medium format lenses are in the 90-100lp/mm range, and it's all downhill from there.
aviatlo said:
Wayne DeWitt said:
Wayne
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are
actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more
resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts,
noise)improvements.
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
There's confusion about the fundamental relationship between lens resolution, image sensor/film resolution and the resolution of the final (recorded) image.

Paraphrasing a bit, the case has been stated that since sensors are capable of over 100 lp/mm resolution and getting better, and since lenses have no better than 100 lp/mm resolution, that no further resolution can be delivered to the image. As though the lens limits image resolution to its maximum figure.

That is not the way lens and film (sensor) resolution relate to the final image resolution in camera. They are the 2 major factors in the final resolution (there are others) whose contribution is defined by the following mathematical relationship:

1/lens resolution + 1/film resolution = 1/recorded image resolution.

Assuming a resolution of 100 for both lens and film, the image resolution becomes 50. Increasing either factor improves the final resolution, but only by half the amount contributed by that part of the system. And if only one improves, the image resolution can never be as high as the resolution of that part of the system.

The fact that one of the factors is "fixed" (say we own a sample of lenses that we are not going to trade in for higher quality ones, or that higher quality ones are not available) does NOT limit the system to that number as though there is a cut-off.

If only the sensor improves in resolution, it is true that the system resolution improves only slowly as improvement is made. (solve the equation for greater and greater values of only one factor) At a certain point, the "curve" reaches an asymptote - a point of "diminishing returns". Further improvements produce insignificantly greater image resolution increments, and it becomes no longer practical to try. But there is no sharp demarcation.

Presently, further improvements in sensor resolution (pixel density) can yet result in significant improvements to the system (recorded image) resolution even if lenses do not improve. But there are other problems to limit sensor pixel density - noise, file size, response rate. As the fixed real estate on which the pixels are packed becomes more and more crowded, design and fabrication of the chips becomes impossible in practical terms and the larger pixels of a less densely packed chip show better performance.

About 14 MP IS a practical upper limit for the "35 mm" frame size (24 x 36 mm) for the reasons I've stated, but we may still see some sensors at slightly higher densities (maybe up to 20 MP).

Right now there are lens design parameters other than resolution which optical engineers are changing to properly utilize the special characteristics of digital sensors.

VL
 
aviato,

Try these. I had a lot of info on my home computer, unfortunately a crash requires a reload sometime in the future to recover access to those links.

http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/resolution.html

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/technical/highres.html

http://www.nikonlinks.com/~nicke/photo/lenstest/misc_test.html

Regards,
Wayne
aviatlo said:
Wayne DeWitt said:
Wayne
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are
actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more
resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts,
noise)improvements.
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Film is the limiting factor, all recording media is. Lens tests have delivered > 400lp/mm using monochromatic light and glass plates. I have several large format lenses that deliver aerial images of 150-200lp/mm, but it will never record on film - didn't claim that it would. As the other poster expained the reality of the physics involved dictates that the end result is lower than the lesser of the two (lens and imager) by a factor that in most cases is close to 2. In the case of large format, and the inherent poor film flatness, it will be even worse.

Regards,
Wayne
Dante A Stella said:
aviatlo said:
Wayne DeWitt said:
Wayne
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are
actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more
resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts,
noise)improvements.
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Bookmarking site thread, very informative, got any more links?
 
http://www.leica-camera.com/imperia/md/content/pdf/putskolumne/15.pdf

Wayne
aviatlo said:
Wayne DeWitt said:
Wayne
aviatlo said:
1- test performed by dpreview for 14n\50 1.4 combination :
resolution is 2500 lines per picture height.
2- picture height is 24mm - this translates in 104 lines per mm
resolution.
3- resolution for nikkor 50 1.4 at f.8 should be around 100 lines
per mm (
. http://photo.cis.to/pipermail/nikon/2002-November/008216.html )
4 if this is true, resolution limit has been reached, and lens
quality must be greatly enhanced, in order to be able to evaluate
sensor resolution.
5- When using a lens with 14n o slr, -resolution wise- you are
actually measuring the lens, not the camera. Sensor has more
resolving power then
most lenses, probably.
6-this leaves space for qualitative, (DR,speed, artifacts,
noise)improvements.
7- medium format digital is coming back as soon as data processing
speed increases 4x
Just thoughts.
Aviatlo.
http://www.aerocentrovaresino.it
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top