|
|||||||
|
Dec 2004
762
|
Do you need optical zoom if you reach the limit of megapixels?
If you have a lot of megapixels for a camera. Say 1 pixel for half? a wavelength of light? or whatever the resolution. do you then don't need optical zoom?
|
| 06-04-2007, 04:38 AM | |
|
|
|
||
|
Dec 2004
762
|
|
|
|
OP, what you are describing is basically what digital zoom is. And as you can tell if you've ever used it, it always creates blurry pictures with less detail and it's also harder to keep the camera steady as any minor shake is amplified quite a bit. Also, a lot of cameras may claim to use a 10MP sensor but won't provide 10MP of detail. |
||
|
Maybe the proper question is if you could get the pixels to approach the SIZE of the photon. In that case, YES, you no longer need an optical zoom if your detector is small enough to discretized individual photons.
The wavelength scale would just introduce noise where various "neighboring" photons would excite the neighboring detectors. The optical zoom would still help on the wavelength scale, however, an optical zoom would be useless once you got onto the photon scale. Just imagine a quantized grid and "zooming in" onto a grid of photos, you just end up losing photons that you are capturing. (16 x 16 grid of photons. You zoom in, and you only get a 4 x 4 grid of photons and are losing some of the image without increasing the detail) If we had a 900nm wavelength, and the normal CCD is assumed to be a 1.5 cm x 1.5 cm grid, we would need a 16666.7 x 1666.67 pixel grid. That's a 277 Megapixel CCD. Which currently does not exist. That's over a GIG per photo (varies with compression). So the real question is, why the OP is even posting this type of question? And what application he is using that requires such fine detail? |
|
|
Dec 2004
762
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Apr 2006
1,856
|
If i mount my 16-45mm zoom lens, i get a decently wide angle at 16mm, and a normal to slight telephoto at 45. If i mount my 100mm, i can get very close to a subject from a distance. Now if i purchase a 300mm... |
|
|
In THEORY you could do away with the optical zoom. Assuming you have a "pure flat" no spherical lens that allowed collimated light source from an infinite distance to go straight into the CCD ( CCD has photon resolution). So you could aim your camera at a 1.5 x 1.5 cm "target" 100 miles away and assuming there was no distortion from the medium (air) you would collect the photons coming straight from the target to your camera and you would have "super fine photon" resolution of the target that was 100 miles away.
BUT, this would be not too useful of a camera because you probably would want to see more than 1.5 x 1.5 cm of "target" no matter how far it is away, which is the need for some type of lens to focus a desired field of view onto your detector. I guess we all need to brush up on our Fourier Optics In short, every "operation" on the photon, be it traveling through air, going through the lens, etc, will introduce additional noise your "K-space" data (Gaussian with non-zero width). And this noise will limit your overall picture quality. This is why a camera with a 10X zoom at only 3mp is better than a camera with 3x zoom and 10mp because the noise is going to be shared among the neighboring pixels anyway and the 10mp picture takes up excessive amounts of space compared to the 3mp one.
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| If you bought the $80 RAZR and Need an Unlock Code. READ. | GuestUser66 | Tech Support | 13 | 09-08-2007 12:31 PM |
| When do you know if your PSU is defected? | YUILover | Tech Support | 24 | 08-19-2007 11:55 AM |
| where the $%#! do you get a replacement dell axim battery cover?! | sonofabit | Tech Support | 10 | 08-06-2007 07:28 PM |
| the matrix online. what specs do you think i need. | blaze | Tech Support | 0 | 04-06-2005 10:01 AM |