We weren’t able to send anyone all the way to CP+ this year, and some of the products and details emerging from the trade show have us a little sad about that.
We already shared the news that Fuji will soon be debuting a 50mm tele conversion lens for the X100/s, and now we’ve got some specs and price information for the upcoming Pentax 645D CMOS Medium Format camera. Read more…
So much for a medium format CMOS sensor being a novel idea. Following closely behind Hasseblad and Phase One‘s CMOS medium format announcements is the news that Ricoh is working on its own CMOS MF model, a followup to the 645D that is tentatively being called the Pentax 645D 2014. Read more…
Since its spec sheet leaked on Monday, there’s been plenty of buzz surrounding Pentax’s newly-released K-3 APS-C DSLR. Many are particularly atwitter about the K-3′s unique anti-aliasing system, which relies on a vibrating sensor to remove moire-effects. Because it’s not filter-based, the effect can be turned off.
Therefore, the K-3 offers the moire-eliminating effect of an anti-aliasing filter when it’s needed, and the greater sharpness of a filterless sensor when it’s not. Not only do people care about this innovation, but for many it was a cardinal feature of the camera. Read more…
I’ve got a few days before my big summer vacation, so I thought I’d hammer out an incredibly impractical display technology!
If you’re a fan of Leica’s digital rangefinders and have been skeptical of DxOMark’s ability to determine sensor quality through its rigorous tests, you might want to skip over the lab’s newly published test results on Leica’s M series sensors.
Jack over at the astrophotography blog The Landingfield has published a series of photographs showing what a digital camera’s CMOS sensor looks like when viewed through a microscope. The sensor (seen above) was taken from a broken Nikon D2H — a DSLR from back in the early 2000s.
Last week, we pointed you to a piece by the New York Times on how Fujifilm is attempting to kill moiré without killing sharpness by designing its sensors in a way that eschews the traditional anti-aliasing filters used in digital cameras. Photographer Martin Doppelbauer disagrees with Fuji’s claims: he has published a piece arguing that, “digital cameras without aliasing filters are cameras with a built-in design flaw“:
To omit an alias filter in front of a digital image sensors is like building a sports car with no brakes. Of course, the car accelerates a little faster due to the lower weight and the cornering ability is also better due to the smaller unsprung weight – but ultimately it lacks an essential functional element.
For analog cameras, an alias filter is not required: Film has no sharply defined limit of resolution. It loses contrast and resolution gradually with increasingly higher frequencies. You could say, the low-pass filter is already incorporated in the film itself.
[...] By omitting the alias filter, the recorded image information [...] does not increase! Even though images of cameras without aliasing filters may appear sharper and crisper: Images of cameras with a proper alias filter can easily be re-sharpened to achieve the same visual impression – without side effects.
So according to Doppelbauer, the recent fascination with removing anti-aliasing filters is more based in marketing rather than science.
Alias-filters: Yes or No? [Martin Doppelbauer]
Fujifilm’s new X-Trans sensors diverge from the traditional way CMOS sensors are designed by using an irregular pattern of red, green, and blue pixels. This allows the sensors to eschew the standard anti-aliasing filter, eliminating moiré patterns without putting an extra component in front of the sensor. Roy Furchgott over at The New York Times has an interesting piece on how the new tech is inspired by Fujifilm’s glory days in the film photography industry:
Old fashioned analog photographs didn’t get a moire pattern because the crystals in film and photo paper aren’t even in size and placement. That randomness breaks up the moire effect.
So Fuji built a new sensor employing what it knew from the film business. Instead of using the Bayer array, it created a pattern called the X-Trans sensor which lays out the red green and blue photo sensors in a way that simulates the randomness of analog film.
Furchgott does a good job of explaining the new sensor design (and its benefits) in an easy-to-understand way.
Old Technology Modernizes a Camera Sensor [NYTimes]
Fujifilm made quite a splash in the camera industry when it announced the sleek X100 back in September 2010, but since then the camera’s spotlight has been stolen by newer interchangeable-lens followups, namely the X-Pro1 and the X-E1.
When the X100 was discontinued back in July, many expected to see a followup announced at Photokina in September. It wasn’t. However, it now appears that the camera will be launched in early 2013, equipped with the same X-Trans sensor technology as its interchangeable-lens siblings.
Mirrorless cameras feature sensors larger than compact cameras and bodies smaller than DSLRs, but how do their sensor sizes compare with one another? To give you a better idea of how formats such as Nikon CX and Olympus/Panasonic Four Thirds stack up against each other, Digital Camera Database created this helpful graphic showing the relative sizes of each format.