100 MP System Will Not Be Expensive

Discussion of all digital SLR cameras under the Minolta and Konica Minolta brands
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
PhotoTraveler
Grand Caliph
Posts: 243
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:07 am

Re: 100 MP System Will Not Be Expensive

Unread post by PhotoTraveler »

I'm so confused on someone saying I'm right and I don't even know what. Great moment ruined :(

I think the biggest shift will be non-silicon sensors. Just look at the opposite with OLED. Now they can film line produce them. They can roll out a OLED that is a meter wide and hundreds of meters long in a few years if they wanted, just an issue of the driving circuits. I can't wait to have the walls of a home covered in them, use them for lighting and everything.

When they can do the same with sensors, lots of stuff will change. First and foremost will be round sensors. As the sensor will be dirt cheap to make and there is just lost film (minimal expense) lost around them. Now you can have any crop you want. Put a round sensor in a EVIL type camera. Probably pretty big sensor. Then as I mentioned in the other thread, you largely crop the image down for your zoom. Vignetting just dictates how much you can get out of it. Just crop to the limits of the vignetting.

You also have the big gain that for a Full Frame 35mm sensor you go from a 1000USD unit cost to maybe a dollar. Makes cameras much cheaper.

As I have said in threads here and otherplaces. If you want to be rich, figure out how to make anything on a continuous roll film coating line process and you will be rich. OLED are there now, and will make that 60" flatscreen tv you have been lusting for cost just a couple hundred bucks if not much less. The same process is being used on Solar Panels, not as efficient but much cheaper. The maker of them is sold out of capacity for 3 years right now. You get most microchips and such on such a process and you are a multi-billionaire.
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: 100 MP System Will Not Be Expensive

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

So, pray tell me, how is SSS going to work with curved sensors? SSS is linear which is fine with a flat sensor...with a curved sensor it will have too move in a hemispherical motion N-S, E-W with zero deflection....I have to admit A1000 and David have me fascinated thinking how that is going to happen.
Greg
A1000

Re: 100 MP System Will Not Be Expensive

Unread post by A1000 »

The sensor would have to move in spherical motion, however processing will be so powerful at that time that electronic compensation will be more effective
David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 5985
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: 100 MP System Will Not Be Expensive

Unread post by David Kilpatrick »

Greg Beetham wrote:So, pray tell me, how is SSS going to work with curved sensors? SSS is linear which is fine with a flat sensor...with a curved sensor it will have too move in a hemispherical motion N-S, E-W with zero deflection....I have to admit A1000 and David have me fascinated thinking how that is going to happen.
Greg
I don't think SSS has been considered. Such sensors are almost welded to their lens, designed to match it. Maybe you would have a rear lens group in front of the sensor, with an IS module in it, and if any sort of interchangeable lens was available it would be like the old Retina Reflex - a front group module you change. Also, no mirrors, no screens. Such sensors would be for live view only.

David
PhotoTraveler
Grand Caliph
Posts: 243
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:07 am

Re: 100 MP System Will Not Be Expensive

Unread post by PhotoTraveler »

Bowl Shaped sensors have to be built with a specific rear element in mind. Works fine for something like a Sigma DP1.

If non-silicon sensors happen, you could potentially make a rear lens element, and deposit the sensor structure onto the lens. Then that goes into the camera. Every lens comes with it's own sensor. Probably not the path you would want.

I really don't see bowl shaped/concave sensors happening. Only in special applications like artificial eyeballs due I see it happening.

Now maybe you can have a convex lens, with convex on the back, flat on the front, apply the sensor to the convex surface and mount that in the camera. No for the area of the front of the lens, you have more area on the convex surface, thus bigger photosites. Maybe there could be some benefit from this, along with maybe a slight APO design to this lens. Now the light from the lens strikes this lens on the front like it would on a normal camera today, and the bowl aspects happen within that lens. Not sure if there is real benefit there. You might be able to get it so it has the effect of making a true tele-centric system. The interchangeble lens doesn't have to be telecentric, just near telecentric, and have all lenses stay within a range, this lens in the body handles the last of the correction, so the light goes to each photosite perfectly at 90.

Still, non flat sensors look to cause way more issues than anything they could be a benefit for.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests