So, which of the big companies is going to be the first to offer an affordable 100mp camera?Fuji is obviously already out there, but this thing is Eight thousand dollars. I suspect that when it happens (eventually) it will be Nikon. I feel like historically they are the company which has introduced high end features at a lower price.
>>4480592There would be literally zero demand, something else has to go backwards for megapixels to go to 100.I would love to see a survey response of every person who brought a camera over 40mp and what amount ended up regretting it.
>>4480599 #Reminds me of 8k with the RED Weapon. To literally edit on a RED camera, takes a computer NASA would use.
>>4480592I suspect it will be Sony for the a7R line>>4480599>something else has to go backwardsProcessing speed that can only be replaced, market-wise, by bit depth
>>4480599>I would love to see a survey response of every person who brought a camera over 40mp and what amount ended up regretting it.I don't regret it, but it made me stop chasing the mp high24mp is perfect for most everything40-50mp is fine enough for when I want more
>>4480610>I suspect it will be Sony for the a7R lineOP said affordable, not overpriced. Sony will probably try and charge $7k+ for it.
>>4480613Same 36mp d800 made me realise how perfect my 24mp d700 is
>>4480599>I would love to see a survey response of every person who brought a camera over 40mp and what amount ended up regretting it.I suspect the vast majority of people buying those camera would say they were happy they did. You don't generally see people throwing around a few grand if they don't have the skill or hardware to use the camera.
It makes me laugh when people say "That will never happen. People don't need it. The hardware cant handle it. etc."I'm old enough to remember people saying the exact same shit about 10mp cameras when they came out in 2002-2003. I used to sell them for a living. We were told that this is the most anyone will ever need. Now FF standard is around 45mp. As basic computer specs continue to improve, camera spec expectations will go up too. There's a lot more today pushing progress. You've got Hasselblad and Fuji pushing out 100mp+ cameras, you've got camera phone specs improving, amateur film makers are using digital cameras more and more. None of these were considerations in the early 2000s. Progress was glacial by comparison.Cameras will go over 100mp. We just have to wait for that baseline PC spec to shift up a level.
>>4480619>You don't generally see people throwing around a few grand if they don't have the skill or hardware to use the camera.Counterpoint: Most people on this board with gear that expensive.
>>4480630counter counter point: Do you hear them complaining that they don't like it.
>>4480624Its boomers that think 100MP is unfathomable. Im surprised it hasnt happened already.
>>4480614ok buddy you make your own affordable 100mp+ sensor camera
>>4480634Not my problem
>>4480592>moggs every camera discussed in this threadNothin' personal kiddos.
>>4480660Its so light in the pocket.
Another snapshitter cares more about grams and millimeters than image quality. Sad, but totally on brand for /p/ gearfags.
the human eye can't see more than 3mp anyway
>>4480614Then OP will be waiting a very long time because nikon is essentially a subsidiary of sony. They resell sony's old camera guts in a new body, turn up the saturation, and call it a different camera. Every time.They bought RED and you know what sensor they used for their cinema camera? A modified a7iii sensor, again.A7IIIs on the market:Sony a7iiiSony a7cNikon Z6Nikon Z6IINikon Z5Nikon Z5IINikon ZFNikon ZRPanasonic S9Panasonic S5Panasonic S5II/XThese are all the sony a7iii. All of them. Same sony sensor. All of them have a minor edit made to the same shitty sony color science and at the most, a slightly modified AA filter or enhanced readout circuitry (sony still designs and manufactures the modification). Only fuji, canon, hassy, and p1 have their own color rendition. A7III, S5II, and Z6II raws can easily land on the same result!Nikon also has tamron (which is majority owned by sony) manufacture a lot of their lenses (including rebrands). And Z mount's non-compete clause spills over to E mount and gives sony first party lenses an edge as well. Curious that nikon would have a policy that benefits sony's sales and makes Z mount less appealing.>>4480660Now this guy has a point. Digital cameras can only get so good before returns diminish sharply. A 100mp digital camera would only have about 75 "real" megapixels. Bayer is always 1.5x less resolution than mono unless shooting a mono target, then it's close but still has aliasing. Meanwhile measly 645 can be comfortably scanned beyond 100 real megapixels if you don't diffract your shit up at f11+ or lose detail to fucked up glass or mirror slap/hand shake.ironically, using a digital camera, but dirt cheap m43 or pentax pixel shift+stitching does the job and no digital camera can do what film does in a single shot, let alone produce an unfakeable physical original that is compatible with real (darkroom) printing.
>>4480592Making 100MP capable lenses is never going to get cheaper.
>>4480724>100mp wide open in the corners at 300% zoom capable*Double gauss lenses were fine for wall prints at f5.6, f8… retard. Wide open corner IQ is for faggots. FAGGOTS.
>>4480727>Seething gearfag makes shit up to get angry at.Kek
>>4480730The average lens has ballooned in size, weight, and cost because seething gearfags did in fact make up shit to be angry atComa and spherical aberration in the corners at f1.4 has never affected a photo. Ever. It is meaningless wank. It is no coincidence that significant photography simply stopped happening with the invention of the canon L, sigma ART, and nikon G lenses. photographers stopped taking photos and started shopping around for special gear that might be better for taking specific photos they havent taken and would probably be boring as fuck. Photographers today are so fucking stupid they sit in a chair being neurotic about "equivalence adjusted for IBIS" when the past century was shot on ISO 50 slide film at f8 and the results looked better than their equivalence DR chart corner pixel peeping faggotry.
>>4480737And they get glorified phone cameras as a result with actual phone cameras being "peak" form for a camera.
>>4480746It’s not even close to a phone camera unless you’re an even worse type of gearfag (hipster faggot). It’s just a pointless exercise in robbing people of their money, comfort, and the option to NOT have bad looking supersharp+shitty bokeh f1.2 snapshits.
>>4480765The desired form and functionality that gearfags argue endlessly over is essentially what a phone camera already is. Actual good image quality is of no concern to the gearfag.
For 100mp to be practical for full frame they need to find some way to get a faster readout without a massive drop in dynamic range.
>>4480772What if sony used a quantum computer so their images could be green and not green at the same time?
>>4480774That would be a game changer.
>>4480737True and again medium format lenses mogs absolutely everything new. They reach mongoloid levels of speed too, most RB lenses are 1.7f FF equivalent. The only thing they don't have is autofocus but it's lame and gay anyway + the focus knob is very easy to master >>4480666As if you were gonna fit any modern FF camera in your pocket, buy a bag and eat your vegetables
>>4480717>the human eye can't see more than 3mp anywaySo I'm guessing your head never moves and you havent any memory with which to enjoy any visible image larger than 3mp?
>>4480870correct
>>4480592>affordablethe mainstream doesn't care about mp, they take pics on their phone. there's no reason to offer affordable prices to a niche market for any product
>>4480592I doubt it.I think Nikon took a huge hit economically from the AF kerfuffle, and I feel like they are struggling bit now.And besides, the Z6 is still kept at a (very) conservative 24mp, just like its ancient predecessor the D600 and its contemporary APS-C brother.Even the D800 from 2012 has 36MP.
>>4480616Your D700 is a 12MP piece of junk, anon. Are you mixing it up with something else?
>>4480893Nikon was sony before sony, complete with retarded fanboys recommending plastic junk. Then ask them why not canon… "DR charts and DXO scores" - snoy.
>>4480897D700 is built very sturdy. That is not at all the issue with it. It's just too dated, so the tech doesn't hold up. 12MP is just not enough.
>>4480926Most old nikons have 50 dead pixels, grips falling off, and at least one dodgy button or dial while 5dIIs are all still flawless if not macerated by a roll down a rocky cliffside or falling out of a carShutter failure is also more common on nikon
>>4480947Sure, Anon. Sure.
>>4480926>12MP is just not enough.The Nikon D2x achieves a record 90lp/mm with just 12mpx, which exceeds the resolve of all other DX cameras that I have tested regardless of their megapixel count! Stop buying into the megapixel lie.
>>4481318Whenever someone brings up lp/mm it is assured to be a lie in practical use. Yeah nah a d2x isnt outresolving a 90d. Remember "but this was scanned on a hasselblad flextight, lp/mm, 6x7 = 45mp!!!!" schizo, despite anons posting tests that showed double, doghairs 800mp 4x5 scan, and huskyfags 70mp 6x6 scan? Lol
>>4481325>Whenever someone brings up lp/mm it is assured to be a lie in practical use.If practical use = not shooting complex real world scenes in RAW with the finest prime lenses on a sturdy professional grade tripod in optimal light, then viewing a laboratory grade print with top grade optical aides, then yes.>Yeah nah a d2x isnt outresolving a 90d.I have yet to test the 90D.
>>4480592Most platforms are too restrictive to post one so you're just going to scale it down.
>>4481327You’re just delusional sorry m8. Clear case of doing something wrong, not knowing what, and thinking you did everything perfectly.
Just another example of how megapixel count fails to guarantee resolution, the 36mpx Nikon D800 achieves 120lp/mm, whereas the D800E achieves 140lp/mm. But the 24mpx Nikon D3x achieves a record setting 160lp/mm.
>>4481329All of my tests are conducted under strict laboratory grade standards, and other test have confirmed these findings.
>>4481330How tho?
>>4481330Sorry. My notes say that the D800E achieved a consistent 130lp/mm.
>>4481334To begin with, most digital cameras trade resolution for low noise and distortion. This is a largely unavoidable compromise.
Knowing how many resolution-axing design flaws DSLRs have these could very well be real but really accidental results. But they do not represent reality, only an error rate, calibration issues, and a bogus procedure mixed with ken rockwell’s even more bogus definition of a good lens.
>>4481338You should read his d3x review. It's pretty funny how salty he is about it.
>>4481339You should take anything Rockwell says with a healthy grain of salt!
>>4481337Part of the physical sensor design, right?
>>4481341No. This is handled in the processing stage. The sensor is just an optical antenna.
>>4481342What this have to do with color stretching mayne?
>>4481346Be careful. Color stretching is a dark art and you may not like the answers you receive.
>>4480592>remebriating that consumer cameras are a small part of Nik’s actual company.Nikon should fucking do it already. They already make more sophisticated sensors than that, they just don’t produce them in quantity & at a cost low enough to build a camera around that isn’t priced like a fucking Leica, so they keep using Sonys boring old sensors. It was like 5 years ago they came up with some extremely fast sensor for processing shitfucktons of video as well, but as long as there are cheaper alternatives that are good enough for the market, all that stuff sits in their industrial technology divisions in devices the size of houses. Youd’ think with buying Red they’d have a use to scale some of that mfg and start ramping up pressure in the sensor market.
>>4481706Consumer cameras and lenses are the largest part of the company. What sensors are you talking about? RED outsourced its sensor manufacturing so there's no scale there and even if they picked up TowerJazz they could have Sony fab the same sensor for less.
>>4481330You mean lines per mm? Lp/mm means line pairs per mm not lines per mm
>>4481706Ho lee fuk son.https://www.nikon.com/business/industry/electronics/#product-lineUpso Nikon’s been busy making other shit huh. They make the machines that make processors??? The industrial measurement & inspection section under the litho machines is insane.
>>4481740>>4481740Cameras are an even smaller part of Canon, they do even more lithography than Nikon, and they have been making sensors in house forever unlike Nikon. So Canon or even Samsung are more likely candidates.
>>4480592Canon. They just made the worlds most affordable f/1.2 FF lens. Next will be a 100mp body.
>>4482006Canon has firmly been in the 24MP corner for years now and I don't see them mixing that up anytime soon. The R6III only has a 32.5MP sensor because it's borrowed from the C50. Most RF consoomer lenses have shit sharpness and contrast outside of the mid-frame @ 24MP and going higher would only exacerbate the lens deficiencies>inb4 don't buy high res camera and bottom-shelf lensesWell yeah but that really only excludes like 5 lenses.
>>4482015Thats like saying Canon will never make a sub $500 f/1.2 lens because theyve never made a sub $500 f/1.2 lens... but they did
>>4482016Well, no. I'm not saying they can't break the mould; they've made things no-one else has. I'm saying their sensor tech is not directed towards hi res. Look at the R5II. It's a fucking meme for more than one reason. 45MP and it has the SNR and DR of a late 2010s aps-c dslr. The RP was 26MP, the R was 30MP and they realised they weren't there yet. The R6 was 20MP because they knew they needed to backtrack to something their lenses could resolve properly on.They have settled on 24MP (which is fine imo) and the majority of usecases are 100% fine with this. Their lenses aren't suited for smaller pixel pitches. Sure they could pull a 180 and this new 45mm lens *could* have insane resolving power but I don't see it happening any time soon. Honestly to answer the thread question I reckon Snoy is going to hit 100MP first but I still doubt it'll be good.
>>4482017Sure Sony will hit 100MP, but its not going to be affordable like OP asked
There is already 245mp in use
I used to believe the megapixels and full frame dont matter "they are only for photos you want to zoom in" which is every single thing that's worth taking a picture of with a real camera instead of your phone
>>4482021Shit ergos
>>4482021IMX811 has 10%(probably more) less light sensitivity than IMX411 due to smaller pixels
>>4482021P1 makes a 280mphttps://www.phaseone.com/solutions/geospatial-solutions/aircraft-systems/pas-280/>>4482030mostly but still for wide angle you get better DR, tonal range ect,>>4482021nice troll, its obviously for telescopes
>>4482100With a shutter it could be a camera but 2/3s of the market is vlogslop tryhards
>>4480599>something else has to go backwards for megapixels to go to 100signal to noise ratio
>>4482113Nope. FPS, electronic shutter, and video capability.
>>4482115+mirrorless hybrid AF because on sensor hybrid AF depends on scan speedwith SLRs or ORFs the AF sensor could be separate and have a blazing fast scan and focus quickly with less processing power. this is why ancient DSLRs focus more confidently than half baked mirrorless
>>4482115only retards want these featuresvideofags need to rope
>>4482117Correct
>>44806248MP is all I need.
>>4480720>645 can be comfortably scanned beyond 100 real megapixels if you don't diffract your shit up at f11+ or lose detail to fucked up glass or mirror slap/hand shakethis is utter bullshit, maybe one or two film stocks shot in a testing environment. 99% of 6x7 shooters probably aren't producing images which could even resolve 50mp of detail, nevermind 645 shooters.https://www.mountainphotography.com/gallery/4x5-film-vs-digital-resolution-comparison/https://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2014/12/36-megapixels-vs-6x7-velvia/
>>44827016x7 is clearly 80mp theresorry you shot everything at f32 and forgot to lock up the mirror. SLRs suck yeah.
>>4482701Modern MILC scanning setups can easily outresolve drums by stitching pixel shifted shots.
>>4482116>DSLRs focus more confidently than half baked mirrorlessQuicker, but less reliable and less functional
>>4482703> 6x7 is clearly 80mp>645 is 100+mpWhich one is true?Yes, this guy in his clinical lab tests using extremely fine grain film stocks managed to get crazy resolution out of 6x7. Do you shoot 6x7? Can you provide me with a scan with 50mp of resolved detail? I doubt you can. I doubt anyone in this thread can, because as I said, those numbers are not attained by 99% of medium format shooters.
>>44827826x7 is 80mp on an old ass drum645 exceeds 100mp with modern scanning equipment
