Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
Actually, there are quite a few systems using LN cooled sensors in use in industrial and gov't applications. I had the chance to look at some of thse a few months ago. Quite impressive results... Packaging was a lot smaller than I had anticipated. Indeed liquid Nitrogen cooled CCDs have been used on telescopes for much longer than they've been used for SLR type cameras. Still I don't want to have to carry of thermos full of liquid nitrogen around with me all the time, although it can be fun to play with sometimes. -Scott
RE: DSLR/PC plateau?
The scientific ccd cameras I have seen have used a thermoelectric cooler (peltier) with circulating water (maybe with glycol). This method is a lot easier to implement than the liquid nitrogen approach :-) Antti-Pekka --- Antti-Pekka Virjonen Computec Oy, Turku Finland Gsm: +358-500-789 753 www.computec.fi * www.estera.fi -Original Message- Indeed liquid Nitrogen cooled CCDs have been used on telescopes for much longer than they've been used for SLR type cameras. Still I don't want to have to carry of thermos full of liquid nitrogen around with me all the time, although it can be fun to play with sometimes. -Scott
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
check the power consumption. it's a little high. Herb - Original Message - From: Otis Wright rusty.@att.net To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 1:14 AM Subject: Re: DSLR/PC plateau? Actually, there are quite a few systems using LN cooled sensors in use in industrial and gov't applications. I had the chance to look at some of thse a few months ago. Quite impressive results... Packaging was a lot smaller than I had anticipated.
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
- Original Message - From: Otis Wright Subject: Re: DSLR/PC plateau? Scott Nelson wrote: You can take care of thermal noise (to a point) by cooling the sensor with something like liquid nitrogen - not that this is very practical unless you are using a telescope. At a given temperature, smaller pixels and higher iso will result in more thermal noise. Actually, there are quite a few systems using LN cooled sensors in use in industrial and gov't applications. I had the chance to look at some of thse a few months ago. Quite impressive results... Packaging was a lot smaller than I had anticipated. Sure, and you are talking about making cameras that cost another 50 grand? Lets try to stay within the realm of probability. William Robb
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
Quoting Chaso DeChaso [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I think the above analysis is overly reliant on the idea of the job as equivalency to 35mm (or Med Format) traditional film photography - equivalency in a variety of ways including not only resolution and such things. [predictions snipped] You may be right, but these innovations will render obsolete ALL earlier cameras to the same degree - so-called conventional digital cameras would be no more or less obsolete than film bodies in the circumstances you describe. - This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
Interesting question: My DSLR becomes obsolete. Therefore it's not worth much. Do I bother to sell it or not? Will there be any market for these obsolete DSLR's? Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/14/04 02:57PM Quoting Chaso DeChaso [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I think the above analysis is overly reliant on the idea of the job as equivalency to 35mm (or Med Format) traditional film photography - equivalency in a variety of ways including not only resolution and such things. [predictions snipped] You may be right, but these innovations will render obsolete ALL earlier cameras to the same degree - so-called conventional digital cameras would be no more or less obsolete than film bodies in the circumstances you describe. - This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
On 14/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: Interesting question: My DSLR becomes obsolete. Therefore it's not worth much. Do I bother to sell it or not? Will there be any market for these obsolete DSLR's? Please define obsolete, in this context. There will always be a market for used camera gear - we are testament to that! Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
On 14 Jan 2004 at 10:01, Chaso DeChaso wrote: Basically, whenever you think these technological changes are levelling off, usually you just aren't being creative or imaginative enough. However, most of the companies out there will take up the slack and do the creative thinking for you. That's progress! ROTFL, are you in PC marketing :-) I don't even need to make up reasons to spend my money. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
Hi, some quick thoughts late in the night follow... One quick example would be when something happens (relatively soon) such as sensors becoming not only way higher in resolution but also much more light-sensitive than film. Among other things, this Well, light sensitivity would be nice, of course, and the the only thing to get new sensors for. Especially for us available night guys. But I think I got quite used to 1600 iso film, souped in good soups, so I don't need much than that. would allow both digital-only (non optical) zoom and total depth of field. Software after the fact would allow you to select the focal plane and bokeh. When Yes, the eq-geeks will dictate it. But for _photography_, I hope I still don't need to heed the geeks. And I don't want to, anyway. Although the dictates of the market are hard. If they are hard enough, I will just drop out of the market, and find my own way. I am using old computers already, and doing fine. And using 30 years old cameras, doing fine. Of course, for photo-income, it's harder and harder. But I will probably find my own small niche, because I think this progress thing is just damn crazy. I will leave it to the technophiles, who can't cate a decent photograph anyway most of the time. If noone invented digital, I would be the happier, btw. For all the equipment changes and thinking changes, one cannot focuse on quality. Not telling that _quality_ is going down the drain anyway. Perhaps I am better accustomed to another world. Where should we go?!? technology for its own sake is _not_ the holy grail, but I think that is too much offtopic. Perhaps the kind of us will get looked at as luddites, old fools (although I am young in years) or just fools... Well, to tell you, I don't want that kind of world. And there are alternatives, fortunately, so far. Better be a fool than somebody who just follows the wave mindlessly. specious. We'll just find more uses that tax the current and future ones. Already you need almost the fastest type of consumer computer just to play a halfway decent software grand piano sample and there's Well, if that's progress, I will more likely adhere to your sig line ;-) or slightly abbreviated: less is more. And if some futurologists (a hint - look up Stanislaw Lem, his futurologist books from 30 years ago /Summa Technologiae/ are quite spot-on, as not only Polacks will tell you). Progress should be about quality, and that it is now not. Not at all. On computers, there are some things that can get better, sure. But WHY?!?! What about human relations, FIRST???! The technology just ain't improving them that much. Sure, I can talk to all of you guys at PDML via the Internet, but I would MUCH MORE like to talk to few of you guys in a local or distant pug. NOT via the internet. The more complex things get, the more hard one can live among them. Chaso DeChaso Less is more cheap - Osvaldo Valdes, Architect In computers, I still think less is more. And in life, it's the SAME! Frantisek
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
On Wed, Jan 14, 2004 at 10:01:21AM -0800, Chaso DeChaso wrote: I think the above analysis is overly reliant on the idea of the job as equivalency to 35mm (or Med Format) traditional film photography - equivalency in a variety of ways including not only resolution and such things. One quick example would be when something happens (relatively soon) such as sensors becoming not only way higher in resolution but also much more light-sensitive than film. Among other things, this would allow both digital-only (non optical) zoom and total depth of field. Now how, in the Holy Name of Optics, would one achieve Total Depth of Field just because the medium is digital? Or do you mean something more mundane, that a more light-sensitive medium allows for a smaller aperture than otherwise? -- ,_ /_) /| / / i e t e r/ |/ a g e l
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
only in science fiction. you can't make a lens that can stand that much magnification and there is a fixed amount of thermal noise that can't be gotten around. Herb - Original Message - From: Chaso DeChaso [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:01 PM Subject: Re: DSLR/PC plateau? One quick example would be when something happens (relatively soon) such as sensors becoming not only way higher in resolution but also much more light-sensitive than film. Among other things, this would allow both digital-only (non optical) zoom and total depth of field. Software after the fact would allow you to select the focal plane and bokeh. When something like this happens all of the sudden everyone will need to do it and almost everyone apart from me will be saying Do you think I am going to lug around a 300mm f/2.8 when the guy next to me can do all the same stuff with a 50mm f/1.4..that's CRzy!
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
You can take care of thermal noise (to a point) by cooling the sensor with something like liquid nitrogen - not that this is very practical unless you are using a telescope. At a given temperature, smaller pixels and higher iso will result in more thermal noise. Lens performance will always be limited by diffraction effects, so hold onto your 300/2.8. What can be counted on (IMHO) is that sensors will continue to get larger and cheaper. -Scott On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 19:37, Herb Chong wrote: only in science fiction. you can't make a lens that can stand that much magnification and there is a fixed amount of thermal noise that can't be gotten around. Herb - Original Message - From: Chaso DeChaso [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:01 PM Subject: Re: DSLR/PC plateau? One quick example would be when something happens (relatively soon) such as sensors becoming not only way higher in resolution but also much more light-sensitive than film. Among other things, this would allow both digital-only (non optical) zoom and total depth of field. Software after the fact would allow you to select the focal plane and bokeh. When something like this happens all of the sudden everyone will need to do it and almost everyone apart from me will be saying Do you think I am going to lug around a 300mm f/2.8 when the guy next to me can do all the same stuff with a 50mm f/1.4..that's CRzy!
Re: DSLR/PC plateau?
Scott Nelson wrote: You can take care of thermal noise (to a point) by cooling the sensor with something like liquid nitrogen - not that this is very practical unless you are using a telescope. At a given temperature, smaller pixels and higher iso will result in more thermal noise. Actually, there are quite a few systems using LN cooled sensors in use in industrial and gov't applications. I had the chance to look at some of thse a few months ago. Quite impressive results... Packaging was a lot smaller than I had anticipated. Otis Wright Lens performance will always be limited by diffraction effects, so hold onto your 300/2.8. What can be counted on (IMHO) is that sensors will continue to get larger and cheaper. -Scott On Wed, 2004-01-14 at 19:37, Herb Chong wrote: only in science fiction. you can't make a lens that can stand that much magnification and there is a fixed amount of thermal noise that can't be gotten around. Herb - Original Message - From: Chaso DeChaso [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:01 PM Subject: Re: DSLR/PC plateau? One quick example would be when something happens (relatively soon) such as sensors becoming not only way higher in resolution but also much more light-sensitive than film. Among other things, this would allow both digital-only (non optical) zoom and total depth of field. Software after the fact would allow you to select the focal plane and bokeh. When something like this happens all of the sudden everyone will need to do it and almost everyone apart from me will be saying Do you think I am going to lug around a 300mm f/2.8 when the guy next to me can do all the same stuff with a 50mm f/1.4..that's CRzy!
