Future of DLSRs??

[astrostu]

i dont get why people want more FPS than like 10 in a camera. Does it not get to a point where your simply holding a video camera, if it shoots at like 50fps.

I don't want >10 fps. It's the idea that you can shoot x fps but only for maybe 1-2 seconds before the camera slows down and it's more sporadic. I want more endurance.

Surprised you didn't mention the ability to take extended exposures (beyond an hour) without either the sensor or the photo going totally crap.

(If you were referring to being surprised that I didn't say this ...) it's because this is more a function of ambient light causing saturation and the sensor noise. I addressed this in my points (b) where I want lower sensor noise for any given ISO, and (d) where I want more dynamic range so that you don't reach saturation so soon (among other things). Otherwise, for things like star trails, you're limited a lot by the brightness of the sky (clouds, city lights, etc.) that will saturate your sensor rather than actual inefficiencies with the sensor.

 

[Alex_B]

Id like to see the full 10 stops of latitude between shadows and highlights that film has, correct me if im wrong but dont dslr's still only have 5 stops?

would not argue about +/- one stop here ,but you are right that at least most small format dSLRs are still slightly worse in this respect than even the narrowest slide film.

the main problem of today's small format dSLRs.

 

[astrostu]

Id like to see the full 10 stops of latitude between shadows and highlights that film has, correct me if im wrong but dont dslr's still only have 5 stops?

Film gives you about 9-10 stops, consumer CCDs maybe 6 stops (early ones 3-4 stops). Astronomical CCDs have 10-11 stops.

My understanding is that the A/D converter in modern DSLRs are either 12- or 14-bit, which give you a range of 0-4095 or 0-16,383 in brightness. I'm not sure how it then opens the RAW in 16-bit, but I'm guessing there's some interpolation. A true 16-bit detector and A/D converter (which I believe is what the astronomical CCDs use) will give you a 0-65,535 range. However, I do not know what the conversion is to f-stops.

 

[photogincollege]

As to the asronomical ccd, sorry i dont have 30000 to drop on the 30 mp hassleblad.

 

[astrostu]

As to the asronomical ccd, sorry i dont have 30000 to drop on the 30 mp hassleblad.

Good ones are more than that. But my point was that the technology is out there and improving, it's just a matter of time before it makes its way into the consumer cameras.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

I agree with Alex, better bayer interpolation.

 

[Garbz]

Otherwise, for things like star trails, you're limited a lot by the brightness of the sky (clouds, city lights, etc.) that will saturate your sensor rather than actual inefficiencies with the sensor.

Depends on your camera. I can say with 100% certainty that a 1 hour exposure on the D200 will be mostly purple thanks to thermal noise on the sensor causing a weird pink purple bleed which starts at the edges after about 10 minutes, and on top of that the standard sensor noise on top of that probably causes about 2-3% of the pixels to die hot.

But the point is we don't want it :thumbup:

i dont get why people want more FPS than like 10 in a camera. Does it not get to a point where your simply holding a video camera, if it shoots at like 50fps.

These people are the same people who are unable to predict what will happen next. Classic case is when a friend of mine spent a good 10 minutes trying to take a picture of a snake with it's tongue out at 5fps and a lot of cursing. I went in noticed the snake would stick it's tongue out about every 2 seconds or so and while moving. I got it on my second shot. A lot of people want 10+ fps for sports or whatnot, but they fail to realise good sports photography happened long before 10fps motordrives came out. You just need to watch the game and push the button rather than push the button and look at the game after.

 

[Alex_B]

sports photography happened long before 10fps motordrives came out. You just need to watch the game and push the button rather than push the button and look at the game after.

There are applications where 10+ fps make sense, this is when you want to capture several snapshots of one motion/process to document it and analyse later. But this is then used in science more often and not so much in sports photography, I agree.

Also for sports I shoot with a 3fps camera, and I mostly use it in single shot mode.

 

[391615]

maybe in 20 years we will be able to take 10mp shots at 100fps.
What about the ability to take several shots at the same time with different focus points, then to chose your focus later, I'm pretty sure Ive heard something about that.

 

[Alex_B]

maybe in 20 years we will be able to take 10mp shots at 100fps.
What about the ability to take several shots at the same time with different focus points, then to chose your focus later, I'm pretty sure Ive heard something about that.

I think with some training everyone is able to get the focus where he/she wants it.

What can be done however, for mor or less static scenes even today already, is to increase depth of field by combining shots of different focus. not in camera, but there is software to do it after you did several shots with varying focus.

Useful for macro photography.

 

[nicfargo]

High ISO without noise. As far as long shutter speeds (over an hour) Canon has something built into their cameras that helps combat this. It is extremely inefficient though and I'm not sure how well it works. Say you take a 30 minute exposure, you have to wait another 30 minutes before you can use your camera again...I can't remember what it does exactly, but I remember reading something about it somewhere.

 

[Alex_B]

High ISO without noise. As far as long shutter speeds (over an hour) Canon has something built into their cameras that helps combat this. It is extremely inefficient though and I'm not sure how well it works. Say you take a 30 minute exposure, you have to wait another 30 minutes before you can use your camera again...I can't remember what it does exactly, but I remember reading something about it somewhere.

it does a second exposure of the same length, but with the shutter closed. then the hot pixels and all the other rubbish of that dark exposure is sort of subtracted from the image you took.

and with my 5D it jst works extremely well for night exposures! it is just a bit of a pain that after a 5 minute exposure you have to wait 5 minutes to do the next one

 

[nicfargo]

yeah, that's what I've heard. I haven't used it yet with my 5D...but I'm sure I'll get around to it sometime...not like you have to be right there next to the camera when It's working.

 

[RKW3]

Super powered batteries that last a few decades. (I actually heard something like that for laptops)

+

some pacman games or something. What else are you supposed to do when you take really long exposures?

 

[rom4n301]

i would like the camera to move around on its own and make perfect pictures for me that would sell like crazy