Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?  (Read 40928 times)

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2562
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #40 on: October 29, 2015, 08:29:35 am »

I never print at 300dpi... and I avoid printing from cell phone size pixels... but I do often print larger than 96"X32"....

I normally interpolate to 720ppi myself, or 600ppi, depending on the printer. 32x96" isn't that big, but it's a nice benchmark size for a panorama going up on an average wall, above a couch or mantlepiece, etc. At that size, it's still something that people will stick their nose into and view at 6". It'd be nice to have at least 300 native pixels per inch up to that size. Above that, I don't mind letting the resolution slide a little.

Cellphone size pizels don't matter if you have enough of them. You can bin 16 small pixels into one huge one and end up with the same resolution for low-contrast details, while having higher resolution of higher-contrast details visible in the noise. And it makes for less moire and 'jaggies', smoother transitions, etc. You're not losing data by sampling more finely.
Logged

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #41 on: October 29, 2015, 10:06:17 am »

It'd be nice to have at least 300 native pixels per inch up to that size.


It depends on how good they are...


Cellphone size pizels don't matter if you have enough of them. You can bin 16 small pixels into one huge one and end up with the same resolution for low-contrast details, while having higher resolution of higher-contrast details visible in the noise. And it makes for less moire and 'jaggies', smoother transitions, etc. You're not losing data by sampling more finely.

Yes it does matter... even if you have enough of them...
Logged

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2562
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #42 on: October 29, 2015, 10:46:37 am »


It depends on how good they are...

Yes it does matter... even if you have enough of them...

Rhetoric, not evidence.

You can mathematically demonstrate that 16 smaller pixels can be added to give the same data as 1 larger pixel of the same overall area, but that data from 1 larger pixel can't be subdivided to get back data that wasn't collected in the first place, and that, with a back-illuminated sensor, there's no longer a quantum efficiency penalty with smaller pixels (since all the electronics lies behind the collecting surface anyway).
Logged

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #43 on: October 29, 2015, 11:18:48 am »

Rhetoric, not evidence.

You can mathematically demonstrate that 16 smaller pixels can be added to give the same data as 1 larger pixel of the same overall area, but that data from 1 larger pixel can't be subdivided to get back data that wasn't collected in the first place, and that, with a back-illuminated sensor, there's no longer a quantum efficiency penalty with smaller pixels (since all the electronics lies behind the collecting surface anyway).

16 (or nine, or four) pixels can't be added to give the same data as one larger pixel, but only in theory... Practically one can't remove the artifacts as they are not exactly the same as to be removed with a process similar to that of an (ideal) balanced (or push-pull) signal where subtracting a negative adds a positive and removes noise... In fact, (as with single ended signals) in most cases it is best to care for artifacts to be absent in the first place for each individual pixel... I don't want to be rude, but I would really like not to continue with this conversation as it is obvious that we have different views on the matter... Never the less my conclusions are based on comparisons (for single shot) are made with a reference to absolute quality pixels that are the results of my every day experience with multishot... MY opinion is that for single shot interpolated use, the optimum size pixels for todays technology is between 6min and 7.2max μm... It is my opinion and as I said before, I don't want to argue on the matter with somebody else opinion...
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #44 on: October 29, 2015, 11:19:34 am »

16 (or nine, or four) pixels can't be added to give the same data as one larger pixel, but only in theory...

So, multishot is useless?
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

Theodoros

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #45 on: October 29, 2015, 11:23:47 am »

So, multishot is useless?

Multishot doesn't add pixels dude... it creates a perfect one with no artifacts present and no color interpolation involved... Multishot only depends on mechanical accuracy... dude...
Logged

DucatiTerminator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #46 on: October 29, 2015, 11:28:15 am »

...I don't want to argue...

Wait, WHAT???!!! LOL

Seriously, go back and read most of your posts when someone doesn't agree with you.  ::)
Logged
La gallina vecchia fa buon brodo

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2562
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #47 on: October 29, 2015, 11:33:23 am »

Opinion has no place when something can be objectively proven. It only counts when there's no proof and the evidence is equivocal.

You can hold an opinion that 5 is a larger number than 9. That doesn't make it valid in any way - objective proof trumps any opinion or authority.
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6552
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #48 on: October 29, 2015, 11:38:14 am »

Wait, WHAT???!!! LOL

Seriously, go back and read most of your posts when someone doesn't agree with you.  ::)

Can we please go back to insulting brands and brand reps rather than fellow photographers?

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

DucatiTerminator

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 46
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #49 on: October 29, 2015, 11:46:04 am »

Can we please go back to insulting brands and brand reps rather than fellow photographers?

Edmund

Who is insulting whom? In my corner of the world, calling someone argumentative is hardly an insult. I've lived in your country, and it was hardly considered an insult among my circle there too. YMMV.

Feeling left out? Go back to the brand insulting that we are so used to from you. I am one of those guys that likes them all and tend to look at the good in things and how they can make my life better, happier or easier. Again, YMMV.
Logged
La gallina vecchia fa buon brodo

David Sutton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1245
    • David Sutton Photography
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #50 on: October 29, 2015, 04:22:20 pm »

Who is insulting whom? In my corner of the world, calling someone argumentative is hardly an insult. I've lived in your country, and it was hardly considered an insult among my circle there too. YMMV.

Feeling left out? Go back to the brand insulting that we are so used to from you. I am one of those guys that likes them all and tend to look at the good in things and how they can make my life better, happier or easier. Again, YMMV.

Acting like a young punk maybe alright in "your circle", but in this circle it isn't.
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #51 on: October 29, 2015, 04:37:10 pm »

Acting like a young punk maybe alright in "your circle", but in this circle it isn't.

However, acting like aged trolls is highly encouraged.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

Torbjörn Tapani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #52 on: October 29, 2015, 04:51:41 pm »

16 (or nine, or four) pixels can't be added to give the same data as one larger pixel, but only in theory... Practically one can't remove the artifacts as they are not exactly the same as to be removed with a process similar to that of an (ideal) balanced (or push-pull) signal where subtracting a negative adds a positive and removes noise... In fact, (as with single ended signals) in most cases it is best to care for artifacts to be absent in the first place for each individual pixel... I don't want to be rude, but I would really like not to continue with this conversation as it is obvious that we have different views on the matter... Never the less my conclusions are based on comparisons (for single shot) are made with a reference to absolute quality pixels that are the results of my every day experience with multishot... MY opinion is that for single shot interpolated use, the optimum size pixels for todays technology is between 6min and 7.2max μm... It is my opinion and as I said before, I don't want to argue on the matter with somebody else opinion...
What is meant by todays technology?CCD? CMOS? BSI?  Reflective walls between pixels?
Logged

David Sutton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1245
    • David Sutton Photography
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #53 on: October 29, 2015, 05:07:04 pm »

However, acting like aged trolls is highly encouraged.

Good try but no cigar  :)
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11225
    • Echophoto
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #54 on: October 29, 2015, 05:16:06 pm »

Hi,

CCD, charge coupled device. Readout is by popping charges from pixels to pixels like a bucket line. So in a 24 MP sensor the most unfortunately placed pixel is moved about 10000 times before reaching the readout amplifier, 4000 vertical pops and 6000 horisontal pops. CCDs have often up to 6 readout channels. I don't know how they are interleaved.

CMOS, Complimentary Metal Oxide Semiconductor, means in essence that voltages are measured on each pixel in situ. That means that the charge can be measured multiple times. This is used for a technique called correlated double sampling that can be used to reduce noise.

With CMOS it is possible to use column analogue to digital converters (ADCs). There is a converter for each column. 6000 converters handling 4000 pixels each on a typical 24 MP sensor. That allows simple ADC-designs. Sony and some others use it. Canon does not. That is the reason Canon cannot match Sony in DR.

BSI, back side illuminated sensor. Normally the wiring and junctions are in front of the sensor. So wiring and junction shade some parts of the pixel. With BSI the wiring is on the back side. This has several benefits. Light sensivity is higher, but the pixel is also physically less tall, reducing "crosstalk" effects.

Best regards
Erik




What is meant by todays technology?CCD? CMOS? BSI?  Reflective walls between pixels?
« Last Edit: October 29, 2015, 05:20:22 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21298
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #55 on: October 29, 2015, 05:24:28 pm »

Good try but no cigar  :)

Not even a bent match!

;-)

Rob C

Torbjörn Tapani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #56 on: October 29, 2015, 05:37:47 pm »

Hi,

CCD, charge coupled device. Readout is by popping charges from pixels to pixels like a bucket line. So in a 24 MP sensor the most unfortunately placed pixel is moved about 10000 times before reaching the readout amplifier, 4000 vertical pops and 6000 horisontal pops. CCDs have often up to 6 readout channels. I don't know how they are interleaved.

CMOS, Complimentary Metal Oxide Semiconductor, means in essence that voltages are measured on each pixel in situ. That means that the charge can be measured multiple times. This is used for a technique called correlated double sampling that can be used to reduce noise.

With CMOS it is possible to use column analogue to digital converters (ADCs). There is a converter for each column. 6000 converters handling 4000 pixels each on a typical 24 MP sensor. That allows simple ADC-designs. Sony and some others use it. Canon does not. That is the reason Canon cannot match Sony in DR.

BSI, back side illuminated sensor. Normally the wiring and junctions are in front of the sensor. So wiring and junction shade some parts of the pixel. With BSI the wiring is on the back side. This has several benefits. Light sensivity is higher, but the pixel is also physically less tall, reducing "crosstalk" effects.

Best regards
Erik
Right. Not all pixels are created equal. What size design rules, copper?, microlens. It just goes on and on. http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/09/27/photokina-interview-samsung-nx1-redefine-pro-performance-quantum-leap-tech
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11225
    • Echophoto
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #57 on: October 29, 2015, 05:45:28 pm »

Hi,

We are not that far from quantum limits. We can collect half of the photons (or so) and readout noise is perhaps 3-6 photons. With present CMOS technology shot noise, that is the square root of incident photons will dominate over readout noise mostly. That essentially means that sensitivity is not going that much higher with current Bayer designs.

We can increase full well capacity, allowing for lower ISOs.

Best regards
Erik


Right. Not all pixels are created equal. What size design rules, copper?, microlens. It just goes on and on. http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/09/27/photokina-interview-samsung-nx1-redefine-pro-performance-quantum-leap-tech
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3690
Re: Is Sony taking over our corner of the world?
« Reply #58 on: October 29, 2015, 06:24:52 pm »

Technologically the (photo) world keeps moving. Creatively IMO you've gotta draw lines in the sand at various points, otherwise you're just continually chasing after the latest advancement. Always testing (or waiting for the next thing to test), never creating. Always imagining what you could do with y rather than doing something with x. This is the main reason why—when it comes to the 35mm format—I'm so insistent on using (mostly) lenses I'm familiar with and have grown fond of over years & even decades. I know how they work and what they can do.

Camera bodies are more creatively problematic in that tech advances are more pronounced and come faster. So much more of a distraction. I pretty much ignored camera tech stuff between 2008 & 2012 and am now set to do so again for awhile. Let's see what 2020 brings!  :)

-Dave-
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6391
all modern "CMOS" sensors are really Active Pixel Sensors
« Reply #59 on: October 29, 2015, 06:32:26 pm »

Hi,

CCD, charge coupled device. Readout is by popping charges from pixels to pixels like a bucket line. So in a 24 MP sensor the most unfortunately placed pixel is moved about 10000 times before reaching the readout amplifier, 4000 vertical pops and 6000 horisontal pops. CCDs have often up to 6 readout channels. I don't know how they are interleaved.

CMOS, Complimentary Metal Oxide Semiconductor, means in essence that voltages are measured on each pixel in situ. That means that the charge can be measured multiple times. This is used for a technique called correlated double sampling that can be used to reduce noise.
Actually, while we are defining things, that use of the name "CMOS" for modern sensor types is widespread but rather misses the point, since all sensors are MOS devices, and "CMOS vs n-MOS vs p-MOS" is not the significant design difference.  The far more informative description used in technical documents is Active Pixel Sensor, which is often abbreviated to "APS" – but I can see why that could be confusing, given the weird tradition of using that failed film format as an indication of sensor size.  Active pixel sensor designs are usually implemented as CMOS devices, but Panasonic has made some with n-MOS, and CCD's are built with p-MOS or n-MOS.

The key distinction of the active pixel sensor design is that the signal (the charge on a tiny capacitor, aka electron well) is read out via the voltage induced by that charge without moving the charge, allowing for amplification in the transfer (the "active" part) as well as direct transfer photosite-to-edge, and repeated reading of the charge, for noise reduction.

Also, about "interleaving": the CCD hop count is often halved by having read-out of each quadrant of the sensor to the nearest corner, with an ADC at each corner.  So on a 6000X4000 sensor, each line does up to 3000 hops to the nearest edge, and then each charge on each half line does up to 2000 hops along the edge to the nearest corner (or with 2000 and 3000 swapped.)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 12   Go Up