Kodak Unveils 50MP CCD Image Sensor 228
i4u writes in to let us know that Kodak has announced the world's first 50 million pixel CCD image sensor for professional photography (i.e., for medium-format cameras). Engineering-grade devices of the CCD, the KAF-50100, are currently available. Kodak plans to enter volume production in Q4 2008. "At 50 megapixels, the sensor captures digital images with unprecedented resolution and detail. For instance, with a 50 megapixel camera, in an aerial photo of a field 1.5 miles [about 2.5 km] across, you could detect an object about the size of a small notebook computer (1 foot by 1 foot)." Here's CNet's Crave blog with a few more technical details.
With or without Bayer pattern? (Score:4, Interesting)
The article doesn't seem to mention whether the new Kodak sensor uses the new-and-perhaps-improved pixel pattern that Kodak announced in 2007. See http://johncompton.pluggedin.kodak.com/default.asp?item=624876 [kodak.com]
This must be the new Hasselblad H3DII-50 sensor (Score:4, Interesting)
Bing! Right on the heels of Hasselblad [hasselbladusa.com] announcing their new H3DII-50 camera (to be released in October) which presumably uses this sensor. Hasselblad has also announced a future 645 format sensor (roughly 56mm x 45mm), more details to be revealed at Photokina 2008 (major bi-annual worldwide photography trade show) later this year.
That's a tall tripod (Score:4, Interesting)
>> in an aerial photo of a field 1.5 miles [about 2.5 km] across, you could detect an object about the size of a small notebook computer
That's either a really tall tripod or image stabilization has come a lot farther than I thought.
-b
Re:Note (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a medium format sensor; the silicon imaging area is twice as big as a single 35mm film slide. Currently there's only a handful of cameras that has a "full frame" sensor for 35mm.
So, no, it will NEVER be used in a consumer-level camera. This is for people who shoot billboard ads.
This is the camera that sensor's going into:
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/products/h-system/h3dii-50.aspx [hasselbladusa.com]
$1k per Megapixel is about right for a Hasselblad - the H3DII-39 is about $35k. And that's just the body only. Lenses start at 3k. Zeiss makes'em. Aside from Zeiss's optical reputation, these lenses are special because the clockwork mechanism and the shutter are integrated into the lens.
http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B58B9/Contents-Frame/2DFB31CE532E5E32C125711B0038D874 [zeiss.com]
Unlike a DSLR which has to expose the image sensor a slit at a time at higher shutter speeds, this means that the entire frame can be exposed simultaneously, down to 1/8000 sec.
In other words... not your typical point and shoot or Digital Rebel XSi :-)
Make your own back? (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a Mamiya 645 J (I think it is) and an older Yashica Mat 124 G that I wish had digital backs. I wonder how hard it would be to make my own back.
Not a chance (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think a do-it yourself digital back for your old camera is a very realistic project, unless you're an experienced Analog & Digital electronics designer. Kodak used to have a pretty nice demo board for their CMOS imager chips, which was about as "plug and play" as you could hope for, but I haven't seen anything for their higher-end CCD sensors...
Actually, they do have an evaluation board listed for the previous version of this sensor:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/business/ISS/Products/Fullframe/KAF-39000/support.jhtml?pq-path=11937/11938/12138/12249/12265 [kodak.com]
That probably means they'll have one for the 50MP version soon(ish). Reading the documents on that page should give you an idea of the level of work involved.
Re:Optics (Score:2, Interesting)
Has a lot more to do with the quality of the glass than the size - the size tends to have to do more with how fast you want the shot to be (smaller aperture number/"bigger aperture" -> much bigger lens with normal optics).
The quality of the glass though...there's a reason why the lenses for a Hasselblad H3 are $4k for the same "version" of a $1k 35mm lens. Resolving power, for one.
Re:Film captures 80-100 line-pairs per square mm (Score:1, Interesting)
I think you need to add some qualifications to your statement about film resolution. Fine grain, slow speed, black and white film can capture 80-100 lp/mm under ideal conditions after being developed by a meticulous professional in their own darkroom.
A 20 megapixel 35mm sensor can perform as well as the finest color film--the lack of grain and noise more than make up for the theoretical resolution difference. Hell, even a 5 megapixel digicam can produce prints that look better than anything I ever shot on film.
At this point film is beyond niche market and is headed (very quickly) into the territory where only true eccentrics and luddites will keep on using it.
Re:Note (Score:2, Interesting)
"Since then the story has been rather different. Nikon has refreshed their entire exotic lineup (superteles, tilt-shift) and brought out 3 new Canon killer cameras in the past 8 months (D3, D300, D700) with a 4th expected very soon (D3X)."
I wouldn't qualify any of those cameras as Canon killers--they're new and exotic, and everyone's excited about them, but when push comes to shove, they're baby steps ahead of Canon's 3 yeard old 5D, not leaps and bounds. I'm a huge Nikon fan, but it looks to me like Canon is still ahead at the moment, especially with the XSi--which is an amazing entry level DSLR. Photokina will decide who's top dog for the next release cycle, however--if Canon's new camera(s) aren't amazing improvements on their current line, they're going to be in real trouble, especially with the D3X and Sony's new FF camera on the market. In the end, I think the competition is going to be good for everyone. I'm certainly looking forward to some great price wars come Christmastime!
"Canon really does not seem to have an answer so far. They have a bunch of f/1.2 lenses, but that is of questionable value in the digital age. If you want bokeh the Nikor line of Defocus Control lenses looks more interesting. "
f1.2 (or f1.4) means you can shoot night like it's day without having to lower the shutter speed or push or ISO too far. Even on modern cameras, I don't like pushing the ISO too far. If you haven't done it, I seriously recommend renting a really fast prime or two and doing some night time photography. You'll find it addictive, especially when you manage to pull off a tack sharp hand held shot of your girlfriend at f1.2. DOF is problematic (to say the least), but moonlight or starlight portraiture can be amazingly beautiful.
I find the bokeh argument to irrelevent. Except for some odd lenses (mirror lenses, and the occasional five-bladed design) bokeh is bokeh--it has to be _really_ bad before it actually stands out. I'm far more concerned about what the lens will do to the things that are in focus, rather than out of focus.
"Otherwise the 1.6 crop you get on the DX sensors is like a built in teleconverter."
Except it's not. You gain no reach, you merely have a narrower angle of view. To me, the only good thing about a crop sensor camera is the increased DOF...and I have serious doubts about that, honestly.