The Future of DSLR...

Hi,

I was just thinking about the recent development of DSLR cameras over the last 2 years. 25 megapixel Full Frame Image Sensors are now due to become the 2008 'professional' standard and pro-consumer cameras hover around 10mp with smaller sensors. How will this situation be in 2015? Will we see 50 or 100 megapixel FF sensors?

What I am also wondering is how much of all this innovation actually contributes to taking better quality pictures? Do you think the overall standard of professional underwater photography will increase because of these innovations?

And for pro-consumer camera's: is there really a need for more megapixels? Except when you want to shoot 2x2meter posters, you do not really need more than 10-20 megapixels? Some people argue it comes in handy for cropping, but if there is no need to crop I guess there is also no need for more megapixels?

I would very much like to hear from folks who have more knowledge about the technology if there is a limit to the development of DSLR (comparable quality to film, or maybe even better?) and when you think we will reach point.

Cheers

Vincent

Hi Guys,

I read, with interest, an article on DPreview, I think, about one of the

about to be released compacts that will be housing a larger DSLR sized sensor.

From memory, I think that it was a Sony?? and the sensor was a CMOS. I believe

that it was one of those three layer 'thingies' and the camera has a fixed 28mm lens?

One would believe that this would result in a significant increase in image quality...

Bruce...

I hope the future holds three things:

1. Greater dynamic range

2. Lower noise

3. Higher ISO (with lower noise, of course )

I am happy with 10 MP, don't want/need more.

However, I would LOVE to have a camera with a sensor that had the same noise at ISO 25600 as my Canon 40D has at ISO 400. 6 extra stops would be sweet for photographing wildlife with a 500 mm lens. I can dream, can't I?

I think that it was a Sony?? a

Nope. It is the Sigma DP1. MSRP supposed to be $999, though.

personally, I would love the resolution of 35mm film in a dSLR, which mathematically is equivalent to well over 20mp (or something like that), however I see no practicality.

With my 10mp camera I can print with good resolution up to 20x30" prints. At the moment, I can't even think of a reason to print that big!!

At any rate, I feel camera companies are stressing megapixles way to much.

It used to be an improvment when a higher mp camera came out but somehwere along the line it became a sales pitch instead- now when people are shopping for a camera, the first question they ask is 'how many megapixles'

In reality they are getting more and more gimickey. Sure it sounds good on paper and looks good on the little LCD screen, but lets blow up a picture off of a 12mp Nikon dSLR vs. a 6mp Olyumpus stylus and compare results. Was is worth the extra 2 grand? Most people who have expirianced this phenominon say no. The difference is actually quite minimal quality wise- the SLR has nothing but speed on the point and shoot and thats rapidly going away as well.

I guess the best example I can think of is the D2H. a 4MP dSLR!! And it still has the ability to out-perform many others on the market and given the right crowd is rather highly sought after (not to mention costs an arm and a small portion of your leg).

in 2015 I expect to see 50+mp cameras just as I expect to se $10/gal gas, but as is true with both, I don't expect the quality to be any better.

-Mike

I hope the future holds three things:

 

1. Greater dynamic range

 

2. Lower noise

 

3. Higher ISO (with lower noise, of course )

 

I am happy with 10 MP, don't want/need more.

Agree that those points are more important to me than megapixels at this time.

personally, I would love the resolution of 35mm film in a dSLR, which mathematically is equivalent to well over 20mp (or something like that),

I recall the number being 30-35 megapixels in one place I read about it awhile back, but could be wrong. Right now I shoot 8 megapixel cameras, and the reason I would jump to the new round of models is not the extra megapixels but the above list, Live View, Sensor cleaning and some of the other improvements are more of a basis for me considering spending more cash now

personally, I would love the resolution of 35mm film in a dSLR, which mathematically is equivalent to well over 20mp (or something like that), however I see no practicality.

35mm film may be able to hold more information than a 20MP FF sensor... trouble is the loss of information when you try to get the info off the film. Analogue projection and enlargement and scanning all employ optics, which contributes to a practical loss of resolution in any reproduction process.

With digital capture, say 20MP, when you reproduce it, you don't loose any res.

I agree that res is getting to the point that the lenses are the weak link, so hopefully they will concentrate on things that will enhance work flow...how 'bout:

Dynamic range + colour gamut - wider

GPS - location info into meta-data (sure we'll have to shoot one frame pre-dive...)

Sensitivity - higher with lower noise

Format - square sensors, so we can chose to make our rectangles from whatever part of the sensor we want

Lag times - shorter

Viewfinders - bigger, brighter

Ergonomics - always hoping for the seamless interface

Out of camera results - better jpegs