File :-(, x, )
eku !8cibvLQ11s
I had a dream, just before I went to bed last night.
In ten years, all we pros will be shooting digital medium format. That's because the sensors are becoming sharper and bigger and better, and after we have 100 megapixel full frame cameras, the next step is to move to medium format. Well, not because we want to, but because manufacters want.
And we all are going to diss FF cameras for having cropped sensor.

It will be sooo great in year 2017.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 30DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsPhotographerLauri KosonenMaximum Lens Aperturef/4.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2007:09:12 19:14:57Exposure Time1/15 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/4.0Exposure Bias-1.5 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length17.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width427Image Height640RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Vincent
That would mean new lenses for both Canon and Nikon (+ pentax, + Sony + Sigma)

Hassleblad, Mamiya, all those old lenses would be new hat again, Kinda doubt that happening.

I read a thing about Kodak having a filter that triples the sensitivity by putting stacked photosensors over the sensor (With one simply detecting brightness, 3 color) I think more things like that will simply add to the Full frame Sensors already out there.

Mamiya has an "affordable" Medium format Digital now, under 10,000 for 22 Megapixels I think. Should be a fantastic camera, But its freaking huge... people don't want big ass camera's!

In 10 years a camera that is capable of clean ISO 25,600's would be freaking awesome, So thats all I'm really looking forward to. That and give me some F1.0 lenses!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
gigapixel cameras already exist
>>79526
why would you think nikon wont want to sell you a new set of lenses for your new 6x6 digital camera? they're selling you a new set of crappy small field lenses for your 35mm semiframe camera right now...

Camera-Specific Properties:Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.5Image-Specific Properties:Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/5.0Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/5.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length41.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width3504Image Height2336RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
The 35mm SLR body style is unlikely to change, even within the next ten years. It's fairly portable, easy to handle, and a good basic design for sports, photojournalism, and general use photography.

I believe the next evolution will involve more advanced sensors and higher bit depth.
>> Anonymous
photojournalists set the trends for how we amateurs shoot (see: the rise and fall of 35mm, the preponderance of print film, the rise of digital slrs, zoom lenses, hotshoe flash, so on and so forth), so whatever they use in 10 years, we'll use in 12.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>79578
Truth.

I think, if anything, what's more likely to happen is that smaller sensors will increase in quality and decrease in price to the point where the little pocket point & shoots of tomorrow will give you the image quality of an SLR of today. And the top-quality SLRs of tomorrow will give you absurdly awesome things like a noise-free ISO 409,600.

>>79545
I think that Nikon would rather sell you new lenses for your 35mm system than to sell you into a whole new system, especially since the lens compatibility all the way back to the 50s has been one of their big selling points (e.g., against Canon's FL->FD and then FD->EF transitions).

Or rather, they'd *like* to sell you both, but they don't think they'd be able to, so they've decided to concentrate on just one. Just like Mamiya no longer makes 35mm cameras.

I think there's always going to be pros who use the big stuff for the maximum amount of quality (i.e., eventually we'll have a digital that surpasses the quality of large format film) and there's always going to be pros who use the small stuff for the maximum amount of portability.
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
>>79638
>I think, if anything, what's more likely to happen is that smaller sensors will increase in quality and decrease in price to the point where the little pocket point & shoots of tomorrow will give you the image quality of an SLR of today.

Before that happens, someone has to learn how to bend light a bit differently. I mean, diffraction is a big issue why small sensors just arent as good as big, no matter how good glass is attached to them.
I don't say it's impossible, I just say it might not be that possible to achieve in ten years. (Now, maybe that happens, or maybe not.)


But the least I hope is the digital medium, or even large format to becoming more cheaper for us amateurs to use.
>> Anonymous
>>79638lens compatibility all the way back to the 50s has been one of their big selling points

that is not the case
the dx lenses are not compatible with 35mm format
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
     File :-(, x)
>>79718
they are, they mount, focus, and meter, but you just get a hell a lot of vignetting.
Pic very related
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>79718
Yeah, there are all sorts of little compatibility snafus. Much harder to figure out if a given Nikon lens will work on a given Nikon than th figure out if a given Canon lens will work on a given Canon. But the lens compatibility, however nebulous, is still one of their selling points.

>>79660
If nothing else, maybe sensors will get to the point where it's economical to stick a full-frame (or even APS-C) sensor in a cheap fixed-lens camera. They've been able to fit full-frame-sized imaging surfaces into pocket-sized cameras for decades, after all.
>> Anonymous
>>79721
thats not compatibility
half the frame is worthless
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>79755

Then you've missed the point, it's about 50 years worth of lenses being able to be used on current era of digital cameras.

... but honestly again, why bother with this shit? The great thing about the regulars on this board that regardless of what cameras we use there's rarely every a shit fight going on about makers. It's always anon fags.

So i'll be content being a tripfag and stop feeding the troll.
>> Anonymous
>>79755
we're talking backwards compatibility, not forwards compatibility here anyway
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>79718
They work just fine with the D3 in a DX crop mode. So there's that. DX lenses have their own advantages, such as being lighter and smaller.

The Nikon system is god.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
And in 10 years, I'd love to be doing my PJ work with a Nikon D5 and my personal documentary work with a Leica M10. Studio stuff, maybe a Hasselblad body and whatever crazy back Phase One is making.
>> Anonymous
>>79638... like a noise-free ISO 409,600...
there is an upper limit to effective ISO ratings. i did the math on this a long time ago an iirc it was roughly ISO 1,500,000 but thats only for a panchromatic B&W sensor that is chilled to abosulte zero. in other words it senses every photon that hits the focal plane and has zero noise...this is an interesting topic and relevant to my interests
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
>>79954

Tell us (me) more about this? How did you do the math etc...
>> Anonymous
>>79956
i read something about the quantum efficiency of film and figured what the speed would be for absolute quantum efficiency
>> Anonymous
Assuming Moore's law it will be about four years before top end DSLRs are using the full 35mm frame
>> Anonymous
>>79990
Uh, aren't they doing so already?
>> Anonymous
>>79990
Moore's law deals with cramming more transistors into the same amount of space.

Moore had nothing to say about increasing the space that transistors go on.
>> Anonymous
>>79995
No, you fail it.
You can read gordon moore's original article. It is online in over nine thousand different places and only four pages long with lots of pictures.
0r you can kill yourself.
>> Anonymous
There are already full-frame medium format digital cameras out there. They are like $20k and go up to I think 39MP, which is absolutely ridiculous unless you want to turn your picture into a billboard in Times Square. 100MP is just ludicrous, I see no sense in making them that high, it would be a much better use of everyone's time to refine sensors and especially work on digital lenses, mess with ISO as others have said, etc etc.
>> Anonymous
if image resolution is of no interest to you then you can always bin your pixels 4x4 and get an effective 16x increase in ISO
>> Anonymous
>>79949
Lighter means less glass AKA less lens
Post some of your 110 pix plz, lol
>> American
how about Murphy's law?
>> Anonymous
I'd love to have a GPS in the camera which reveals the exact location of the photo in the EXIF.
>> Anonymous
>>80627
Such things exist. Maybe not built into the camera yet, but I know that Canon's recent SLRs have it available as an option.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>80629
loads of cameras have it just they arnt aimed at the consumer, friend who does a lot of mapping work has one.
>> Anonymous
>>80635
It will probably be standard in DSLRs in a couple of years since everybody can afford GPS nowadays