Is the advance of camera technology going to slow at some point soon?
Aug 29, 2018 18:41:17 #
I have a feeling that what I call "computational photography" will migrate over from cell phones to traditional cameras. In the camera processing of multiple shots for correction of the flaws in the analog part of the chain seems to me to be a prime opportunity for advancement. So...yes there will be major advances coming in the next few years especially in, image stabilization, very low light, HDR, extreme depth of focus and most importantly making less expensive glass perform like more expensive glass. It will be fun to watch except for the collapsing value of my $$$ Nikon kit.
Aug 29, 2018 21:58:31 #
InfiniteISO wrote:
So our IT guy is rolling out new desktops and lapt... (show quote)
Even computer technology pretty much slowed to a stable and semi-predictable course. CPU Clock speeds are mostly still at about 3 to 4 GHz but then two, four, six, eight core processors with or without Hyperthreading. But if you looked at the 1990 to 2000 period you'd think we'd have 10 THz processors by now. Thing is how much heat would such a processor generate?
The next significant camera image IQ advance may be something other than the Bayer Array.
Aug 29, 2018 22:24:06 #
The question is can you out perform your camera or can your camera out perform you? I never upgrade to a new camera until i have realized the full potential of the camera I am holding. I've worked my way up from a Nikon D40X to a D750. I love the D750 as much as I lived the D40x when I first bought it. My next upgrade will probably be a d850 or what ever else is out and affordable a that point. The D750 is close to the 850 in many ways. The shining light of the 850 is the 46 megapixels. This allows you to crop a lot more or blow up a picture much bigger. So far I have not found a problem I could not overcome by just changing a lens. until that point My camera is still out performing me. When I cannot do that anymore, then i've reached the full potential of that camera and I am out performing it. Then its time to either be satisfied or upgrade. btw I still use a 1968 Nikon film camera . Some things never get old!:)
Aug 30, 2018 10:19:56 #
I thank everyone for their input on my question and it's been interesting to read all your viewpoints.
Many of you speculated that megapixel counts will probably continue to rise and pointed out there are already some very large pixel count sensors on the market now. Over the past few years I've taken 10's of thousands of digital images. I've probably printed less than 20. I imagine that most of you are the same. This means that most of our reviews of our work and the work of others is done through a computer monitor. Now a 4K TV has a resolution of 3840 x 2160. An uncropped image from my D90 has more resolution than that. All the monitors that I have at my disposal now have a resolution of 1920 x 1080.
It seems to me that soon we're all going to need an affordable 100 megapixel television or monitor. That would be approximately 13,333 x 7500 for a monitor with a 16 x 9 aspect ratio. And then of course to address all of those pixels, you'd need one heck of a video card.
Many of you speculated that megapixel counts will probably continue to rise and pointed out there are already some very large pixel count sensors on the market now. Over the past few years I've taken 10's of thousands of digital images. I've probably printed less than 20. I imagine that most of you are the same. This means that most of our reviews of our work and the work of others is done through a computer monitor. Now a 4K TV has a resolution of 3840 x 2160. An uncropped image from my D90 has more resolution than that. All the monitors that I have at my disposal now have a resolution of 1920 x 1080.
It seems to me that soon we're all going to need an affordable 100 megapixel television or monitor. That would be approximately 13,333 x 7500 for a monitor with a 16 x 9 aspect ratio. And then of course to address all of those pixels, you'd need one heck of a video card.
Aug 30, 2018 11:29:05 #
jaimeblackwell wrote:
The question is can you out perform your camera or... (show quote)
No question, there.
I owned a D200, my first DSLR, and then upgraded two years ago to the D500. However, I don't think that I ever exceeded the capabilities of the D200. A month after buying the D500, I also bought a D750. To date, I haven't "out shot" either model. One of the considerations, though, is the near quantum leap in technology for the newer models. Faster, cheaper, better. Usually you have to choose two, but with the D500 and D750, I got all three.
As with PC's the technology improvements alone make for obsolescence that can't be overcome by user improvements in techniques and mastery of the platform.
Aug 30, 2018 12:48:45 #
10MPlayer wrote:
Yes but you stand a far greater chance of surviving a high speed crash. You get better gas mileage, more power, and waaaay less air pollution. There has been a price in dollars to be paid but the decreased loss of lives from crashes and cancers has been priceless.
And all of that costs us more money and how to rely heavily on computers. Something our society in a whole has not been ready for. I personally like the days when changing spark plugs was a cheap tune up and there was no computer in your car to tattle tale on your driving or the ability of the car to drive itself. A computer driven car is an accident waiting to happen due to an error in judgement by a driver and the computer was not able to correct because its programing was not set up for that incident or a common computer glitch like when Windows locks up and needs a reset.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.