Kodak Unveils 50MP CCD Image Sensor

i4u writes in to let us know that Kodak has announced the world's first 50 million pixel CCD image sensor for professional photography (i.e., for medium-format cameras). Engineering-grade devices of the CCD, the KAF-50100, are currently available. Kodak plans to enter volume production in Q4 2008. "At 50 megapixels, the sensor captures digital images with unprecedented resolution and detail. For instance, with a 50 megapixel camera, in an aerial photo of a field 1.5 miles [about 2.5 km] across, you could detect an object about the size of a small notebook computer (1 foot by 1 foot)." Here's CNet's Crave blog with a few more technical details.

Comments

Note

[ucblockhead]

This is pretty much useless without really expensive lenses, so don't expect to see it in any consumer-level cameras.

Re:Note

[dfghjk]

Wrong. Current 12MP DX sensor SLRs have pixels smaller than 6 microns and they are certainly not limited to f/5.6 by even the most absurd definition of "diffraction limited". This sensor has a pixel size roughly the same as a 10.5MP DX frame SLR so f/13 or f/16 no problem. f/22 starts to see diffraction. There is no hard limit, only a knee in the curve of resolution.

ISPs better prepare

[spir0]

those of us in third world countries like New Zealand who have to pay in blood for our bandwidth are going to start seeing Users sending (or trying to send) their friends 40+ meg attachments once those cameras become standard consumer issue. Trying to explain to my dad how to load MS Paint, and shrink the image, resulted in him writing down the instructions, and then promptly ringing me the first time he had to follow those instructions.

The major ISPs in this country who offer "broadband" plans with 200MB traffic per month -- yes, you read that right: MB -- are going going to have to do some serious reassessing. As it is, with Xbox demo games upward of 1GB, I don't know how we're putting up with this garbage.

As Uncle Ben said: "With great power comes great responsibility." Everybody wants the power, but nobody wants the responsibility.

I'll probably be marked as a troll, but this is a serious issue. How many of you have received one page word docs, or excel spreadsheets from companies, only to find that those files were over 5 megs? just a bunch of text, and fecking huge 12 million DPI logo.

I'm not saying we should stay in the dark ages, but we need to start preparing.

Re:Hasselblads?

[afidel]

Why, that's only ~72MB per shot, or about 13.9K pictures per TB, are you really going to shoot 69,444 shots before your 5TB NAS is obsolete? If you are you're probably a professional and the couple grand for the storage is a drop in the bucket compared to your other costs. I can't even fathom what 69K shots would have cost in media format film and developer solution (not to mention if you farmed it out to a lab!)

Re:I've measured around 400 Megapixels equivalent

[torako]

You demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of what I was comparing. Naturally a good photographer can take fantastic pictures with any kind of equipment, just as a bad photographer won't improve his skills by using a $3000 DSLR.

So I guess there's no point of ever comparing any two cameras now, because it all depends on the photographer?

Wrong, because there are still properties that can be compared objectively. The available lenses for SLR systems are usually better (measurable) than the fixed lenses on P&S cameras. So it's unfair to compare those two.

The metering and focusing systems are usually more accurate and faster on SLR cameras, making it again unfair to compare them with P&S cameras.

And those are just two examples of what might be compared, without even touching the digital vs. film issue.

And to a certain extent just giving an SLR to a P&S snapshot guy will improve his photos, even if it's just a better automatic exposure or less noise on higher ISO settings (he will still continue to take the same boring photos he has taken before of course).