On Mon, 20 Dec 1999, Tom Trottier wrote:
> > 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)
Oops, my figure of 6 megapixels was based on the typical file sizes I
get from scanning 35mm at 2700dpi - 18-20 MB/3 (3bytes per pixel). But
then, the scans are usually cropped a bit. Doing a bit of maths suggests
that the full frame at 2700 dpi would give more like 10 megapixels (can
we shorten that to MPx?). I'd be quite happy with that myself, thougH I
realise that someone wanting to produce exhibition-size prints would
demand more.
> > 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.
Subject to the limitations of the fabricating technology, though.
> This, of course, would depend
> on the lighting conditions and the aperture.
And the integration time or "shutter speed" as they call it for
historical reasons. I've always thought that it was a misleading term
even for silver photography since the shutter curtains only ever move at
one speed. "Exposure time" would be a better term, especially since the
units are those of time, not velocity. Still, that's another thread
again, and the photographic world is too stuck in its ways to change
now ;)
--
________________________________________________________________________
* | |
| / | |/-\ | Ian A. Nichols |
| | | | | | |
| \-/| | / | i.a.nichols@xxxxxxxxxx |
| * iann@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
< 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 >
|