New 50MP Full Frame Canon 5DS........

[UKDivemaster]

http://photorumors.com/2015/01/30/th...ra/#more-66532

This is obviously a spoof. But it got me thinking.

Given the absolute limiting factor provided by circles of confusion, what is the actual maximum number of megapixels for a 35mm format camera? (Assuming noise is not a factor and the best performance of a fixed focal length lens).

[chauncey]

This is obviously a spoof

What make you assume that it's a spoof and where does Circles of Confusion enter the equation?
It's nothing more than the pixel density of the 7D MkII upsized to full frame.

[WJT]

Thanks for sharing. I cannot find one negative thing to say. Just happy and hope I can afford one.

[JR1]

I started a thread on this last month

53Mp canon is it a step too far

there are now three !

50 MP Canon Rumour

[JR1]

Thanks for sharing. I cannot find one negative thing to say. Just happy and hope I can afford one.

Ill get the new D5 when it comes out, I have £6k set aside

[chauncey]

Suggestion...with/without AA filter?

[ajohnw]

Thought I had a post go awol for a moment then notice a new thread has been started less the word rumour. Anyway here is what I posted.

All I can say is that the camera buying public have been going for ever increasing pixel counts for as long as digital cameras have existed. I'm inclined to say suckers but it isn't as simple as that but feel the term is much closer to reality if people feel that they can really make use of the extra resolution pixel wise. There are gains but not really in that area. As there are gains when the anti aliasing filter is removed but not for the reason people might be inclined to think.

It is possible for anybody to see what happens when a pixel resolution image is converted from raw. This is an example



And that is pure black and white. Colour is a lot lot more complicated. It will even depend on what the colour is and the mix.

The image can be downloaded here. Also what should be a blurred version that may come close to really good glass but a colour image is an entirely different ball game. (Added - it still has alias problems for me - might be a download problem)

http://www.libraw.org/articles/bayer-moire.html

The other point is why still produce cameras with the anti aliasing filter. DSLR's get put on the end of all sorts of optical systems. That may be why but then at some pixel count that wont be necessary. Numbers that need it will be low anyway.

The lum landscape link I posted earlier may be a bit woolly because it's not possible to get enough data to be precise in this area but it's basically correct but misses the futility in having true optical diffraction limited images. Failing to mention what happens to contrast in that situation is often missing so nothing new there.

This link is also interesting as it shows the effect of aliasing on much lower pixel density high end cameras using what should be top class glass. I feel things have moved on since then but not that much glass wise as it isn't economically possible

http://lavidaleica.com/content/anti-...-filter-primer

John
-

[UKDivemaster]

What make you assume that it's a spoof and where does Circles of Confusion enter the equation?
It's nothing more than the pixel density of the 7D MkII upsized to full frame.

My Maths must be failing me. I thought 20.2 x 1.6 = 32.3MP.

As for the circles of confusion.....

I read somewhere that the minimum circle of confusion on a 35mm camera with a 50mm lens is 0.029mm - but I think this where the viewer finds things acceptably sharp. There has to be a point at which the ability of the lens to resolve light onto a small spot becomes the limiting factor for image resolution not the number of pixels. In other words all the extra pixels would be doing is returning the 'blur' in the circle of confusion.

I might not be using the right terminology but I hope you can understand what I'm trying to find out.

[chauncey]

My Maths must be failing me

sensor area of the 7D MkII is 329 mm squared...sensor area of a Canon full frame camera is 864 mm squared
864 / 329 = 2.6...20.2 x 2.6 = about 52. about the same pixel density.

[UKDivemaster]

Not a spoof then, just had the invite to order: £2,999! Cheap.