It depends on the source of the noise. We could cool the sensors with liquid nitrogen or a Peltier device, making the camera a wee bit larger. I don't use funny faces in my messages ... but pause here for some hilarity.
By the way a real Bonanza of photomicrographic equipment has come into my hot little hands. An automatic camera 35mm, 6x9 and 4x5 from Wild. A Reichert (without motorised camera) but with auto exposure and a Zeiss manual set for 4x5 and Polaroid with exposure meter. All work perfectly and the Wild automatic microscope camera is unused. This thing cost about $15.000 new the last time I saw a price; they still sell for about $5000 used. Anybody interested? I need cash for a *ist D. I also have a load of sub-stage condensers for the older Leitz compound microscopes - I think one of our members has such an instrument. I also have a Leitz phototube that might solve some of his problems! I also have a new Copal shutter, without lens, on a black aluminium board. And more. Don _______________ Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery See New Pages "The Cement Company from HELL!" Updated: August 15, 2003 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dag T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2003 9:57 AM Subject: Re: *ist D > > P� l�rdag, 27. september 2003, kl. 06:09, skrev Chris Brogden: > > >> Eventually, the only way to effectively increase pixel count will be > >> to > >> make sensor larger. Otherwise the pixels get too small and become > >> insensitive/noisy... > > > > At one point in time, it seemed that the only way to make computers > > more > > powerful was to radically increase the size. But, strangely enough, > > they > > keep getting smaller and more powerful. I'd be surprised if the > > light-gathering/processing abilities of current sensors doesn't improve > > dramatically in the future without the need to go with larger sensors. > > > I would, as it would require substantial revisions of both quantum > mechanics and the understanding of the wave nature of light. Both are > fairly well documented through the last centuries. > > The production of micro processors have not reached such fundamental > limits, yet. One reason is that they may use shorter wavelengths in > the production, down towards x-rays. We can�t start taking pictures in > the ultra violet spectrum just to increase the resolution :-) > > DagT > >
