DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Cameras of the future - How will they be?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 74, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/08/2007 11:13:55 AM · #1
This fascinates me. I reckon that in 20 years time, sensors and digital zooms will be so good that traditional zoom, wide angle and long primes will disappear. Looking at Google earth and seeing satellite imagery has got me thinking about this.

As far as I understand spy satellite cameras use digital technology to resolve images from enormous distances. At some point this technology will wash down to us consumers and the results could be interesting, to say the least.

Am I talking rubbish? or do you think this could happen.

Apologies if I've posted this in the wrong section of the forum.

Alex
02/08/2007 11:16:22 AM · #2
I can't see the optics being thrown away because better optics on a better sensor is a better picture than bad optics on a better sensor.
02/08/2007 11:24:59 AM · #3
I don't think all optics will be binned, but better sensors may make certain optics redundant. Digital zooms are improving, although they cannot really match good optics yet. On second thoughts though maybe, just maybe optics could be binned if a suitable sensor comes along....

This is curious and it is an ancient article.

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 11:42:11.
02/08/2007 11:45:55 AM · #4
I was just in my school's library yesterday and found the archive of 'digital photography' magazine. Even the issues just 4 years ago were so funny to look at and see how "Sony's new 3.3 MP point and shoot!!!" was coming out.
02/08/2007 11:56:30 AM · #5
ISO speeds up to 51200, and I will say even in the next 10 years.
Since ISO ins't anything more than gain applied to a sensor, no reason this can't improve dramatically in the coming years.
02/08/2007 11:59:26 AM · #6
I think we will eventually see the birth of fluid lenses. But probably not for another 100 ys.

The idea being that you would use forces (either rotational, electromagnetic or perhaps even controlled gravity) to shape the fluid lense to the desire shape. The result being that you can have an 10mm super-wide and a 600mm telephoto.

:)

Okay, so yeah, I'm dreaming right now...but come future...who knows. 100 yrs ago Helicopters were a crazy idea.
02/08/2007 12:03:47 PM · #7
Originally posted by theSaj:

I think we will eventually see the birth of fluid lenses. But probably not for another 100 ys.


Working variable-focal-length fluid lenses have been demonstrated. The catch is, they're for small optical systems, where the shape of the lens is not distorted too much by gravity.
02/08/2007 12:06:19 PM · #8
Mulder - I'm not sure where the MP race will end. Is there a Moore's law for camera sensors??

jaysonmc - noise as we know it will become a thing of the past very soon.

the Saj - fluid lenses - now there's an idea and much sooner than 100 years I imagine.
02/08/2007 12:08:22 PM · #9
Just seen kirbics post - seems as though I may be right. I guess that dSLRs could be thought of as 'small' optical systems? No?

Dpreview has an article here.

'Small' seems to be more like tiny - but that was way back in 2004! When 3.3 MP Sony's were blasting the market.

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 12:14:35.
02/08/2007 12:16:20 PM · #10
Originally posted by Almilan:

Mulder - I'm not sure where the MP race will end. Is there a Moore's law for camera sensors??


It will likely end at around 20-25 MP for dSLRs based on 35mm lens systems. Any higher than that is going to require a new lens system, since 35mm style lenses can't resolve much past 20 MP.

FWIW, 35mm film only resolves to about 6 MP.

My guess is soon we will see a rush to MF-like digital SLRs, especially in the pro lines.
02/08/2007 12:17:46 PM · #11
Here my imagination goes: our eyes will have a very small sensor, which would record the image and keep it in the brain, we will have an eye reader to download the image. Now you might have question, what about size and quality. Our brain will keep images in raw format and you can apply different effect or anything after downloading them. What about delete/format? As of today most of the time, the images that we have in our mind would get fade-out or washed away with new images, so that would happen in the future also!!!!

I am going crazy right??!!!!!!
02/08/2007 12:19:11 PM · #12
Originally posted by Almilan:

This fascinates me. I reckon that in 20 years time, sensors and digital zooms will be so good that traditional zoom, wide angle and long primes will disappear. Looking at Google earth and seeing satellite imagery has got me thinking about this.

As far as I understand spy satellite cameras use digital technology to resolve images from enormous distances. At some point this technology will wash down to us consumers and the results could be interesting, to say the least.

Am I talking rubbish? or do you think this could happen.

Apologies if I've posted this in the wrong section of the forum.

Alex


This is why he uses a point and shoot... he dont know better! Yes I have a bunc of P&S's but i also understand that all digital zoom is is interpolation or just pure upscaling depednign on the camera. If you actually use digital zoom your losing quality. Blowing the photo upin photoshop is the same thing as the camera's doing. On full res digital zoom using photoshop instead is better. Interpolating a 3MP shot using a 6MP sensor calling it 2x digital zoom... hard to say which is worse.

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 12:30:15.
02/08/2007 12:28:12 PM · #13
I 've heard about cameras that buffer photos before you press the shutter... That would be cool
02/08/2007 12:30:12 PM · #14
The need to spend money on good glass is not going any where in the foreseeable future. Even they spy satellites mentioned in the first post have to have very large aperture mirrors or lenses to resolve the images.

optical zoom is not going anywhere. digital zoom reduces the effective pixels on the camera proportional to the square of the size of the zoom. A 3x digital zoom makes a picture using only 1/9th of the pixels of sensor. A 10x digital zoom uses only 1/100 of the pixels. This would change a 10mp camera to a 0.1mp camera.

02/08/2007 12:33:02 PM · #15
The advances we're likely to see in the near future are evolutionary, as compared to the revolutionary, disruptive technology change from analog (film) to digital. Advances in sensor technology are going to demand more and more of lens technology. We're going to continue to see advances in optical materials and manufacturing. Some other things we're sure to see:
- The demise of Bayer interpolation. Chips that image all colors at each pixel location will eventually take over the marketplace. The only technology currently on the market, Foveon, has shown promise, but is not yet ready for prime time. Ultimately, why not image by recording both the location (row, column) and energy(color) of each incoming photon? Now you've got some real color information to play with. This would require a sensing method that does not rely on charge storage, and is fast enough to count photons at the pixel level. We're a long way from this point.
- EVFs that rival or surpass optical viewfinders. Display technology to do this already exists, but it would be outrageously expensive. You'd need a multi-megapixel display to render the image with the same perceived acuity as an optical viewfinder. The advantages, though, would be numerous, including elimination of the mirror, prism and AF sensor, ability to tailor the viewfinder for WB, boost brightness in low light, enhance edges to show focus more readily, use the main sensor for focus, meaning a theoretically infinite number of possible focus points, allow lenses with short back-focus (important for WA applications) etcetera.
- Improved ISO performance. We're actually not *too* far from the theoretical limits here, maybe a couple stops. One major impediment to getting closer to the limit is that we currently throw away almost 70% of the photons due to color filter arrays. A replacement for the Bayer filter arrangement that makes use of all incident photons could provide a 1.5-stop advantage over a Bayer-array sensor, given the same collection efficiency in the sensor itself. Noise reduction will reach it's limit as we approach 100% collection efficiency, but see below
- Dynamic range is currently limited by the amount of charge it's possible to store at each pixel. Moving away from a charge-storage technology could in theory remove the limit on how much light each pixel can acquire and "count." When this happens, dynamic range can go through the roof, of course at the expense of longer image acquisition times.
One thing's for sure. The future of digital imaging is extremely bright. Ten years from now we will marvel at how far we've come. Think back to where we were in 1997 :-P
02/08/2007 12:36:58 PM · #16
Kirbic try a little further back

Think Back to Kodak's first public dSLR @ 15,000 dollars.

Nikon N90 Body
6 Megapixel sensor

when was it made? 1995 and iv eseen shots from it it takes great clear pictures with no noticible noise at iso 80. The sensor they used was huge full frame i believe?
02/08/2007 12:43:42 PM · #17
rainmotorsports - I uses a p n s, cos I wuz a waitin til them thar dSlr thingummies beganed to werk real good. ;)

gradbert - if we end up with 1000mp sensors, then digital zooms will become possible, no?
02/08/2007 12:46:46 PM · #18
Originally posted by rainmotorsports:

Kirbic try a little further back

Think Back to Kodak's first public dSLR @ 15,000 dollars.

Nikon N90 Body
6 Megapixel sensor

when was it made? 1995 and iv eseen shots from it it takes great clear pictures with no noticible noise at iso 80. The sensor they used was huge full frame i believe?


There was the DCS100, way back in 1991, 1.3Mpx. The DCS420, 1995, was still only 1.5Mpx (this is the one based on the N90 body). These things were *beasts* and were certainly not ready for mass-market. They were special-purpose instruments.

Edit:
The DCS 460 was the one you're thinking about, and it was in fact 6Mpx. It was an APS-C sensor, though. Here is a page with a ton of info on the old Kodak DCS cameras.

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 12:50:15.
02/08/2007 12:50:25 PM · #19
Originally posted by Almilan:

rainmotorsports - I uses a p n s, cos I wuz a waitin til them thar dSlr thingummies beganed to werk real good. ;)

gradbert - if we end up with 1000mp sensors, then digital zooms will become possible, no?


They have a 4 Gigapixel Camera already its used for landscapes. Takes 4 guys to unload it from a pickup truck. Check out the gigapixel project.

They images produced when viewed at 100% look like your standing next to the object but the pictures were taken at 2 or 3 miles away.

THIS IS NOT DIGITAL ZOOM. However if the camera did a 200% interpolation thats digital zoom, and all your downis resizing the picture to be larger. Your not actually zooming your resizing.

Make fun of how i type, write, speak, or think again and ill buy you a copy of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders so you can look up Asperger's Syndrom and High level autism.

Lets see special education till 9th Grade, IEP, 504. 2 Teacher classes, Failed 6th grade english and 9th grade english, dropped out of spanish. Failed concepts of algebra 3 times......

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 12:52:25.
02/08/2007 12:50:44 PM · #20
I agree mostly with Kirbic's assessment, but in addition:

Advances in optics will produce a new type of 'superzoom' that will all but eliminate the need for interchangeable lenses without sacrificing optical quality.

A 'Foveon' type sensor may become more common but manufacturing technology will bring back the 3 sensor camera with 70% light transmission, similar to Panasonic's 3ccd video cameras but with much greater sensor size and density.

Advances in signal processing and sensor technology will completely eliminate image noise considerations.

Looks good to me!!

02/08/2007 12:55:31 PM · #21
Originally posted by rainmotorsports:


This is why he uses a point and shoot... he dont know better!


Thought you were making fun of me!! I'll send you those books if you like ;)

And thanks for the 4 Gp camera info, rainmotorsports. I did not know about that. Very interesting. I shall check it out.
02/08/2007 12:57:09 PM · #22
Originally posted by Almilan:

Originally posted by rainmotorsports:


This is why he uses a point and shoot... he dont know better!


Thought you were making fun of me!! I'll send you those books if you like ;)

And thanks for the 4 Gp camera info, rainmotorsports. I did not know about that. Very interesting. I shall check it out.


I was but I have every right to. Check my equipment list lol all P&S's.

Anyways about the project you can see it here //www.gigapxl.org/

and PS i was gonna send them to you? why you already have a copy?

Message edited by author 2007-02-08 12:57:53.
02/08/2007 01:03:54 PM · #23
I have owned a fair number of early digital cameras that became quickly obsolete. Among those are:

Kodak Nikon DCS200 with N8008A body.
Kodak Nikon DCS420 with N90 body.
Kodak Nikon DCS460 with N90 body.
Minolta RD-175 with three ccd sensors.
Canon Pro 70 with CYM+G instead of bayer array.
Canon Pro 90 IS with CYM+G and image stabilization.

All these cameras were considered breakthroughs at the time they were marketed, but all were rapidly discarded in favor of more compact and capable technologies. I still love my old beasts!
02/08/2007 01:05:33 PM · #24
Originally posted by ElGordo:

I have owned a fair number of early digital cameras that became quickly obsolete. Among those are:

Kodak Nikon DCS200 with N8008A body.
Kodak Nikon DCS420 with N90 body.
Kodak Nikon DCS460 with N90 body.
Minolta RD-175 with three ccd sensors.
Canon Pro 70 with CYM+G instead of bayer array.
Canon Pro 90 IS with CYM+G and image stabilization.

All these cameras were considered breakthroughs at the time they were marketed, but all were rapidly discarded in favor of more compact and capable technologies. I still love my old beasts!


ElGardo i know the DCS460 with only iso 80 isnt as versatile as a newer dSLR. But i really want a DCS460 cant find the darn things. That and im sure all their parts that are non nikon are hard to find. But ive seen some beautiful images from them.
02/08/2007 01:08:15 PM · #25
You are right rainmotorsports - you are right, but I always thought the FinePix was a little more than a point and shoot - so I thought you were poking fun at me - but I was not at all offended. I just poked back - a weeny bit.

Thanks for the link.

PS I do have those books and they are making me feel much better, so I thought they may be helpful to you too:)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/28/2020 09:22:28 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/28/2020 09:22:28 AM EST.