| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/19/2006 01:27:13 PM · #1 |
//www.dalsa.com/news/news.asp?itemID=252
I cant wait till this comes to the consumer market!!! ;)
Message edited by author 2006-06-19 13:27:22. |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 01:33:26 PM · #2 |
as long as it makes mpeg videos, i will have to upgrade.
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 01:34:11 PM · #3 |
| WoW cool! I will be force to upgrade my computer too, in order to PP the photos... |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 01:41:31 PM · #4 |
If they make it in a 4x5 (vs this 4x4) configuration (125 MP?) you should see a resurgent market for view cameras and lenses ... might be a good time to pick one up just in case : )
Oh yeah, did they mention that the Navy is probably paying about $80 million USD for that?
Message edited by author 2006-06-19 13:42:18. |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 01:45:15 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
If they make it in a 4x5 (vs this 4x4) configuration (125 MP?) you should see a resurgent market for view cameras and lenses ... might be a good time to pick one up just in case : )
Oh yeah, did they mention that the Navy is probably paying about $80 million USD for that? |
THe military always pays too much for stuff. I'm thinking the consumer retail price will be $49.95 :P |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 02:00:20 PM · #6 |
That thing is huge...if I wore it around my neck I'd look like some rapper from the 80s. You could just walk around taking random pictures of anything...shooting from your hip. Get back to your computer and just look for things to crop into to make an awesome image off...probably get about 5 different looking images from the same shot. So when is this going to be out for us...2050? That be cool...I'll only be 68 then...I'm going to start saving up now.
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 02:15:46 PM · #7 |
Am I the only one who is curious why the navy needs a 100MP sensor to "assist USNO in the determination of the positions and motions of stars, solar system objects and the establishment of celestial reference frames."?
It seems weird. You want sensitivity, for sure, and increased MP helps with noise, but the celestial reference frames seems to indicate navigation to me, and I doubt you need to be seeing low magnitude stars for that.
I'm probably missing something, but I also think it's just as likely a case of the Navy saying, why use 20MP when we could spend millions on 100MP.
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 02:18:03 PM · #8 |
i'm wondering how long it takes between exposures
/ & if this is a bayer'ed sensor or just grey level ..
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 02:26:43 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by TomFoolery:
I'm going to start saving up now. |
And also start saving for a proper lens to hang in front of it.
|
|
|
|
06/19/2006 02:30:19 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
It seems weird. You want sensitivity, for sure, and increased MP helps with noise, but the celestial reference frames seems to indicate navigation to me, and I doubt you need to be seeing low magnitude stars for that. |
The dimmer the star, the more likely it is to be farther away. The farther away it is, the less likely it is to exhibit detectable motion relative to the observer, and therefore its utility as an accurate, "un-moving" reference point is enhanced.
But the heck with that, when are they going to install one of these in the Hubble? |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 02:31:58 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by Azrifel:
Originally posted by TomFoolery:
I'm going to start saving up now. |
And also start saving for a proper lens to hang in front of it. |
See my previous post (about the Hubble). Though it's big enough to use in a pinhole camera : ) |
|
|
|
06/19/2006 02:36:50 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Am I the only one who is curious why the navy needs a 100MP sensor to "assist USNO in the determination of the positions and motions of stars, solar system objects and the establishment of celestial reference frames."?
It seems weird. You want sensitivity, for sure, and increased MP helps with noise, but the celestial reference frames seems to indicate navigation to me, and I doubt you need to be seeing low magnitude stars for that.
I'm probably missing something, but I also think it's just as likely a case of the Navy saying, why use 20MP when we could spend millions on 100MP. |
CCDs have a long and storied history in Astronomy. They were originally developed in the 70s as a revolutionary replacement for the photographic plate to record light from distant objects that were much fainter and do it much faster than photographic plates. Astronomy was changed forever. This is just another development of a bigger, better CCD to record even fainter light sources faster which allows astronomers to conduct more research.
I had a professor in 1972 who was proud that the CCD he built could detect and record 1 photon of light if it struck the sensor.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/11/2025 01:45:55 PM EDT.
