Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Digital 35mm replacement

Subject: Re: [OM] Digital 35mm replacement
From: "Tom Trottier" <tom@xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 21:55:22 -0500
Hi Ian,

On 20 Dec 99, at 12:18, Ian A. Nichols spoke about
*[OM] Digital 35mm replacement,* saying

> 
> It seems thay many on the list share my views about the digital future
> of photography as we'd like to practise it.
> 
> To sum up:
> 
> We'll only be happy with it when we can afford a 6+ megapixel camera
> that will take interchangeable lenses and store lots of pictures.

No, at least 20 megaPixel (MP)
> 
> A CCD that size is likely to be about the same size as a 35mm frame, so
> the focal lengths and optical performance will have to be about the same
> as we're used to getting from our 35mm kit.

I disagree. The pixels can be arbitrarily small - it just depends on 
how many photons you need to collect. This, of course, would depend 
on the lighting conditions and the aperture. The current 2 MP CCDs 
are about 6x8 mm. For 8 MP it would be 12x16mm for same pixel 
collection size, for 32 MP, 24x32mm.

But you could always give up resolution for shadow detail - just 
agglomerate the small pixels, either at picture time, or later...
> 
> Therefore, it would be good if we could pop our existing lenses onto a
> new digital body.
> 
> I'd further observe that, IMO, putting a digital back onto an existing
> OM body, or using a digital "film cassette" gadget is a dead end, and
> here's why.

See http://www.siliconfilm.com for the digitial "film cassette" 
[coming real soon now...] 

Who needs a new body just yet?  This would be a fine stepping stone 
that works with many bodies & lenses.

Will be nice when they 
        - occupy the entire frame
        - send pic via bluetooth to your 9GB palmtop in your warm picket
        - move from 1.5 Megapixel to 20 Megapixels, 48 bit dynamic range.

Yes, will be a dead end. But only eventually.
> 
> The 35mm SLR is a prime example of the "form follows function" design
> philosopy - it has a lens mount roughly in the middle so there's room
> for the film cassette at one side of the body and room for the take-up
> spool, winding & shutter release mechanisms and battery compartment at
> the other side; that big lump at the top follows the shape of the prism
> underneath, which *has* to be that shape to do its job; the body is as
> deep as it is because you need a chamber with a mirror in it that's big
> enough to reflect a focused image onto the screen, which also has to be
> the size of a 35mm frame. 
> 
> A digital camera needs none of those things.  You still need a chamber
> with an image sensor at the back, but the storage device doesn't need to
> have a specific location in relation to that, unlike film.  Likewise,
> the "viewfinder" could (should) be an LCD screen which could also be
> located anywhere, either viewed directly or through a pop-up mirror &
> lens arrangement (reversing the image appropriately shouldn't be
> difficult to do electronically). It will need a much larger battery
> compartment.
> 
> What I'm getting at here is that in order to work properly, from an
> ergonomic & technical point of view, our hypothetical digital 35mm
> replacement should be designed as a digital body, not somehow adapted
> from a camera designed to use film.  Since it still uses light to make
> an image, though, there's no reason to change the optical part of
> the system.  Not yet, anyway.  Our hypothetical body has no need for a
> mirror, so there's no reason why future lens designs, using the same
> mount, should not have protruding rear elements, which will make
> designing compact fast wide-angle lenses easier.

But if the CCD is much smaller, say, 4x5mm, then our lenses for 35mm 
will be obsolete, optimised as they are for a 6x larger format.
> 
> I'll give it 2 years before the technology is available (if it's not
> already) and another 3 after that before mere mortals who subsists on
> the cast-off -1s & -2(S)s of others can think about getting one.

But how will film progress? Maybe faster?

Tom
-----------------
From:Tom Trottier, 400 Slater St. Suite 415,Ottawa ON Canada K1R 7S7
    __o    <Tom@xxxxxx> <TomTrottier@xxxxxxxxxxx>       ICQ:57647974
  _ \<     Voice: +1 613 291-1168  fax: 594-5412      No ads, please
(*)/'(*)  "Make it as simple as possible, but no simpler" - Einstein
                           Vote for your favourite Olympus camera at
                           http://www.freevote.com/booth/fav_camera
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This email is confidential, may be legally privileged, and is 
for the intended recipient only.
Access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or reliance on it by anyone is 
prohibited and may be a criminal offence.
Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the sender.

< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz