View Single Post
  #3  
Old July 14th, 2009, 08:26 AM
Bart_van_der_Wolf Bart_van_der_Wolf is offline
pro member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4,053
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asher Kelman View Post
I think we will hit the wall eventually, but there's likely much more image quality that might be squeezed out by improving the optics and relying on mathematical solutions to complete focus, define DOF by focus stacking, extend the dynamic range, decrease noise as well as increase resolution.

These are not meant as statements but rather as questions to seed a debate.
And rightly so, especially since the article focused (pun intended) on only one issue, Diffraction at the pixel level. Having more pixels will allow to output them individually at a smaller size, so the diffraction in output is not impacted by sensel size. Diffraction is only related to the relative aperture, the f-number. Smaller pixels do allow a more precise sampling of the diffraction pattern, which allows software to deconvolve it more accurately and restore sharpness.

There are also several other (related) issues, like dynamic range and MTF, that impact image quality. I'm not sure we've reached that "wall" yet, on the contrary.

Bart
Reply With Quote