I wonder what its dynamic range, thermal noise resistance and low-light performance are like, though; the smaller the pixels are on a CCD, the less sensitive to light they would theoretically tend to be.
Want to say something? Do so here.
Note to spammers: This comment system applies the rel=nofollow attribute to the poster's URL and all links. Posting links to this page will not improve their search engine rankings.
Please keep comments on topic and to the point. Inappropriate comments may be deleted.
Note that markup is stripped from comments; URLs will be automatically converted into links.
Posted by: toby | http:// | Wed Dec 14 23:07:29 2005
The light field camera was already using a 14MP CCD. There's no mention of the physical size of the CCD in that article, and I think it's safe to assume, given it looks like a medium format camera back that it's not the standard DSLR ~23mm x 16mm size. Being able to interchange it for a film back would be very nice, but who's got the money for this kind of gear?
Just looked it up, and it's 49.1 x 36.8 mm. So there's most of your resolution increase right there.