David Klepacki
New member
Thierry, excellent table. I have not seen this one. Thank you!
David
David
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Thierry, excellent table. I have not seen this one. Thank you!
David
Bob, I don't mean to pick on you tonight, but you are wrong again. The 60MP camera would not have the same resolution as the M8. It would actually have much more, except in the realm of macro dimensions.60 MPix in a 4.5 X 6 format would result in about the same lp/mm resolution capability of the current M8 sensor. This would create a lens limited platform. Unfortunately, the physics of it all would reduce the signal to noise ratio as well just due to photon shot noise, so some of the MF-ness would go away.
-bob
David,Bob, I don't mean to pick on you tonight, but you are wrong again. The 60MP camera would not have the same resolution as the M8. It would actually have much more, except in the realm of macro dimensions.
The Leica M8 has a 10MP sensor in a 3:2 configuration resulting in a pixel image of 3936 x 2630.
A hypothetical 60MP MFDB sensor in a 4:3 configuration results in a pixel image of roughly 8944 x 6708, but to compare apples with apples, I will make it the same 3:2 configuration as the M8, or 9486 x 6324.
Now, let's say that the British Museum calls you up and asks you to do some important copy work for them. It involves photographing some artifacts of size 10cm x 10cm. For simplicity, let's just look at the longest dimension and a single image capture. And, to compare apples with apples, we must assume for each camera that a lens and shooting distance are used so as to provide the same field of view and depth of field.
If you took your M8 to do the job, you would be taking 10cm of the information and distribute that over its available pixels of 3936, giving you a resolution of 3936 / 100mm = 39.36 p/mm = 19.68 lp/mm.
If you took your 60MP MFDB to do the job, you would be taking that same 10cm of information and distribute that over the much larger number of pixels, namely 9486. This would result in a resolution of 9486 / 100mm = 94.86 p/mm = 47.43 lp/mm, or more than twice the resolution of the M8.
This MFDB will always provide higher resolution images, up to the limit of the lens. Only above that limit (which can be up to 250 lp/mm for some MF lenses), will the M8 begin to yield higher resolution. However, this will only occur at the macro scale, never at infinity.
Yes, I disagree. The camera data concerning the sensor size and number of pixels is the only accurate data in the table. The other derived numbers concerning resolution and print size are not correct....
So I think this data speaks for itself, do you disagree?
thanks
-bob
David, I understand what you are saying, but think there is a flaw in your base assumption. I would like to point out that a conventional line-pair is black and white. Black contains no color information, and white contains ALL colors ----- as such, black won't excite any pixel regardless of color while white will in fact excite them all... As for generating them in the PROPER color, that is where the Nyquist limit comes in, so all in all, I think Bob's comments are on point...Yes, I disagree.
~snip~ The M8 has only 1968 pixels in the horizontal direction in any one color, NOT 3936.
Jack, there is no flaw in my argument. I happen to be a professional physicist, earning my PhD quite a long time ago, so I know what I am talking about.David, I understand what you are saying, but think there is a flaw in your base assumption. I would like to point out that a conventional line-pair is black and white. Black contains no color information, and white contains ALL colors ----- as such, black won't excite any pixel regardless of color while white will in fact excite them all... As for generating them in the PROPER color, that is where the Nyquist limit comes in, so all in all, I think Bob's comments are on point...
Moreover, I have done direct resolution testing of actual test targets with B&W line pairs, and have always found the best lenses hit about 70% of maximum possible sensor resolution, or about Nyquist limits. AND I calculated the maximum theoretical resolution just as Bob did. So at least in that regard, I have some direct empirical support for Bob's points...
Cheers,
You're right. Hass back in one photo, P45 in the next! I reported itBTW folks this is a scam . No way you can put a P45 on a H3/39 and still be a H3/39 . Actually pretty lame. Look at the images of it
http://cgi.ebay.com/Hasselblad-H3D-...oryZ3351QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
BTW folks this is a scam . No way you can put a P45 on a H3/39 and still be a H3/39 . Actually pretty lame. Look at the images of it
http://cgi.ebay.com/Hasselblad-H3D-...oryZ3351QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Jack, it is certainly possible to see test charts hit the Nyquist limit. This just means that the raw conversion process is extremely good. I can show you test charts where the resolution has even exceeded the Nyquist limit, which should not be physically possible, yet it can happen if the estimation of the missing information is clever enough.Hmmm.... my test target (not an ISO 12233) holds black and white line pairs along with Red, Blue and Yellow line pairs, arranged in vertical horizontal and tangential orientations. In all the testing I've done, I almost always have at least one lens that will hit the Nyquist limit for the sensor in question, and usually several will, at least centrally on all colors. Moreover, often times yellow or blue are the strongest rendering, showing slightly more resolution than black or red, and sometimes the tangential show a bit better than the vertical or horizontal. Regardless, using your argument, the best I should be able to hit is around half Nyquist with the colored pairs, yet all the same, I frequently hit Nyquist with all colors? So I suspect either you are misunderstanding us, or are possibly misinformed, or Bob, myself and Nyquist are all wrong...
Guy Mancuso said:BTW folks this is a scam . No way you can put a P45 on a H3/39 and still be a H3/39 . Actually pretty lame. Look at the images of it
http://cgi.ebay.com/Hasselblad-H3D-3...QQcmdZViewItem
You're right. Hass back in one photo, P45 in the next! I reported it
Alarming that people are bidding on such a scam.
Great contribution Doug.I have been looking for one of those yellow stream icons to express my thoughts reading this dribble but can't find one.