Check out Street Photography section of our forum.
50-megapixel Canon EOS 5DS and 5DS R
Mar 26, 2015 09:33:14 #
The big problem back then was MSDOS and the early windows versions up to Windows 95 treated the processors like they were still 8 bit processors.
We used UNIX and then then Linux because of the Antiquated Microsoft software.
The processors had already moved to 16 and 32 bit memory addressing. Now 64 bit is the norm.
I have systems with 64 CPU's 256GB memory and 1 PB of raid storage. 1PB is 1000 TB. which is 1,073,741,824 MB or 10^15 bytes,
But I do not want to spend the type of money required to upgrade my systems at home to that level. I would rather spend the money to get some fast 500 or 600 mm L series lenses and a Full frame camera. :-}
We used UNIX and then then Linux because of the Antiquated Microsoft software.
The processors had already moved to 16 and 32 bit memory addressing. Now 64 bit is the norm.
I have systems with 64 CPU's 256GB memory and 1 PB of raid storage. 1PB is 1000 TB. which is 1,073,741,824 MB or 10^15 bytes,
But I do not want to spend the type of money required to upgrade my systems at home to that level. I would rather spend the money to get some fast 500 or 600 mm L series lenses and a Full frame camera. :-}
Mar 26, 2015 09:46:11 #
tmehrkam wrote:
The big problem back then was MSDOS and the early ... (show quote)
If not for the break-up of Ma Bell (and the stupid idea that Unix could not be licensed), we would all be using Unix today and both Microsoft and Apple would be companies that only exist in an alternate universe.
Mar 26, 2015 13:19:17 #
We would be much better off without Microsoft.
Apple at least uses Berkley Unix under the covers of OSX.
And then there is Android. Linux under the covers.
Apple at least uses Berkley Unix under the covers of OSX.
And then there is Android. Linux under the covers.
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Mar 27, 2015 06:20:10 #
The problem with the ever increasing pixel counts is that they have to make the pixels smaller and smaller to fit more on the sensor. There are downsides to that. Diffraction will begin to soften an image at earlier apertures when stopping down a lens. Cambridge in Colour has an excellent diffraction calculator. Plug some values into the calculator.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography-2.htm
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography-2.htm
Mar 27, 2015 06:25:36 #
dsmeltz wrote:
My recollection is that base memory (in the 80's) was 640k, extended was the difference between the 640k that the machines could deal with and the 1Meg that was on the chips. While the machine could only "look" at 640 at a time it could switch around looking at different parts of the 1Meg. Expanded memory was achieved by temporarily swapping some of what was on the 1Meg a dedicated part of the Hard Drive (the expanded memory) with other information already in expanded memory.
But then again Mr. Gates ended with a pie in the face literally :)
Mar 27, 2015 07:06:39 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Nikon should go to 100MP. That will keep Canon busy for a while. :D
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Mar 27, 2015 07:25:21 #
Canon is using the Sony 50 megapixel sensor in their new camera and it is rumored that Nikon will be using the same sensor when they release their new camera. Now the other rumored is that it might be in a Medium Format Camera like the Hasselblad.
Check out Commercial and Industrial Photography section of our forum.
Mar 27, 2015 08:01:50 #
davyboy
Loc: Anoka Mn.
I like what Kelby said don't go chasing pixels invest in your best friend a good tripod
Mar 27, 2015 08:09:33 #
Bugfan
Loc: Toronto, Canada
Whether Canon or Nikon come up with a 100 megapixel or larger camera doesn't excite me. I think this is a marketing gimmick more than a solution to a photographic problem.
If they want to increase the sensor to a medium format or larger I'll get excited about higher resolution. But as long as it's only 35 mm, raising the resolution higher all the time is simply going to further degrade the image. IQ is also dependent on physical pixel size so the higher the resolution the smaller each pixel circuit has to be to fit all of them on the same sized sensor.
What distresses me is that we're going to head back into the pixel wars of years back where the public always lusted for another megapixel for their latest camera believing that was the road to award winning images. That eventually died off but now it looks like we're in for another one of those inane wars.
IQ is not going to be ever more pixels, it's going to remain where it has always been, the skills of the photographer.
If they want to increase the sensor to a medium format or larger I'll get excited about higher resolution. But as long as it's only 35 mm, raising the resolution higher all the time is simply going to further degrade the image. IQ is also dependent on physical pixel size so the higher the resolution the smaller each pixel circuit has to be to fit all of them on the same sized sensor.
What distresses me is that we're going to head back into the pixel wars of years back where the public always lusted for another megapixel for their latest camera believing that was the road to award winning images. That eventually died off but now it looks like we're in for another one of those inane wars.
IQ is not going to be ever more pixels, it's going to remain where it has always been, the skills of the photographer.
Mar 27, 2015 08:13:34 #
Bugfan wrote:
Whether Canon or Nikon come up with a 100 megapixe... (show quote)
Canon appears to understand this. The rumors for the 5D IV are for a 28MP sensor not another 50MP.
Mar 27, 2015 08:19:13 #
Psergel wrote:
I want 155MP, noiseless 12800 ISO, 20EV Dynamic Range, 200 cross type focus points and a 4TB SD card.
I want it now, I want it yesterday and I'll want F'n more tomorrow!!
Oh........ and.....no video please.
I want it now, I want it yesterday and I'll want F'n more tomorrow!!
Oh........ and.....no video please.
All this and for less than $1000.00!
Check out Professional and Advanced Portraiture section of our forum.
Mar 27, 2015 08:32:59 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Nikon should go to 100MP. That will keep Canon busy for a while. :D
LFingar wrote:
Why would Nikon switch from Sony when Sony have the better technology. We know Sony has a 50MPix (approx) sensor in production, that's where Nikon is likely to go.If they do they will probably just end up buying their sensors from Canon! :-D
Mar 27, 2015 08:33:21 #
harrimg wrote:
Pretty certain that's not the case.Canon is using the Sony 50 megapixel sensor in their new camera ...
Mar 27, 2015 08:33:47 #
CO wrote:
On Sensor Megapixels has Zero to do with diffraction. It is true that with increasing MPix, the higher resolution of detail may well reveal the effects of diffraction sooner but the image will not be worse because of that. It's the same with lens resolution; a 50MPix sensor may out resolve a lens but the image won't be any worse for that, just not "better".The problem with the ever increasing pixel counts is that they have to make the pixels smaller and smaller to fit more on the sensor. There are downsides to that. Diffraction will begin to soften an image at earlier apertures when stopping down a lens. Cambridge in Colour has an excellent diffraction calculator. Plug some values into the calculator.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography-2.htm
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography-2.htm
Mar 27, 2015 08:34:07 #
Bugfan wrote:
Absolutely no evidence that there is any truth in your statement, rather the reverse...... But as long as it's only 35 mm, raising the resolution higher all the time is simply going to further degrade the image. IQ is also dependent on physical pixel size ......
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.