Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              11              13       14       end
  

Archive 2011 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions

  
 
JimBuchanan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #1 · p.12 #1 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


The fact that the Bayer array is asymmetrical serves no particular purpose, other than being the color filter array that Bayer developed while at Kodak.

Your pulling me into a discussion I had previously resisted. The asymmetry of the bayer array was explained in an article, that I forget where. I just remember it was asymmetrical.

I think the explanation involves adjacent pixels. Take for example a representative 4 pixel square of GB and RG under it. The G pixel has 4G, 2B,2R adjacent pixels. The B pixel has 4R,4G adjacent pixels. The lower right R pixel has 4G,4B adjacent pixels, and the G pixel has 4G,2B,2R pixels. The top left and bottom right corners cancel each other out, but the top right has a red bias and the bottom left has a blue bias.

This reasoning amplifies the blue/red bias of a typical 4 pixel square and could be the problem the demosaicing algorithms are trying to solve.

So, there's my theory...



Aug 06, 2011 at 06:22 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #2 · p.12 #2 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


theSuede wrote:
This decenterig means that you get one dominant colour fault in one direction from the image center, and the opposite colour fault in the opposite direction.


I don't understand this part. The elements are in a repeated grid so even if they are of different sizes and even shapes, how could that lead to a global asymmetry. I don't see how it could make a difference if the angle is 30 degrees or -30 degrees - you'll have an equal amount of elements on both sides that will per group of elements be identical...

Here is the M9 sensor under microscope magnification by the way:
http://www.photoplaza.nl/lindolfi/BayerM9width340micron.jpg

(Not my picture, provided by user Lindolfi on the LUF forums)



Aug 06, 2011 at 06:26 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #3 · p.12 #3 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


JimBuchanan wrote:
I think the explanation involves adjacent pixels. Take for example a representative 4 pixel square of GB and RG under it. The G pixel has 4G, 2B,2R adjacent pixels. The B pixel has 4R,4G adjacent pixels. The lower right R pixel has 4G,4B adjacent pixels, and the G pixel has 4G,2B,2R pixels. The top left and bottom right corners cancel each other out, but the top right has a red bias and the bottom left has a blue bias.

This reasoning amplifies the blue/red bias of a typical 4 pixel square and could be the problem the demosaicing algorithms are
...Show more

Hmm, no that wouldn't work. Since the groups are repeated the results would be mirror symmetric. The edges where that consistency doesn't hold are just two rows and two columns of pixels while the color cast is all over the entire sensor.

Also worth noting is that Kodak CCDs are not the only ones that show this issue. The NEX-3 and NEX-5 CMOS sensors did it as well. The NEX-C3 sensor has it almost completely eliminated but you can still find traces of it.


Anyway, in more fundamental terms, no local asymmetry in this type of grid could account for a global one. There has to be some sort of shift, some sort of bias that applies globally to the whole sensor.

My own current theory can be illustrated by this crude drawing I made:

http://peltarion.eu/img/comp/nex-m9/cfa_shift.jpg

The squares are the microlenses. So if there is some reason why the micro lenses have a diagonal offset (perhaps the vias or some other electronic junk takes up space so you can't place the micro lens exactly centered on the pixel?) then you'd get a global color cast shift.



Aug 06, 2011 at 06:37 PM
theSuede
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #4 · p.12 #4 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


Yes, the Bayer filter surface itself is rotationally symmetrical in all directions. The silicon underneath, however isn't.

The colour filters are not placed exactly over the center of the pixel (that's square), it's placed over the center of the active pixel surface (that's rectangular, and not equally transparent for all wavelengths).

So it's just as much a question of non-equal vignette as a question of colour "leakage". And the sensor is asymmetrical in construction, it isn't even mirror-symmetric in the horisontal direction if you look at a FEM side view. Red wavelengths have a much higher penetration capability, so it can go straight through a passivation layer, but not a metal. So one side of the "blocking" parts of the active pixel surface is transparent to red, the other isn't. The "red" transparent window in the pixel surface is pushed over to one side of the square containing the entire pixel, while the blue "window" is centered on the square.

It might be informative to develop a flat surface M9 file in capture one (or dcraw) with all settings at "original linear RGB values", i.e no colour processing. Then you can see the vignette as it is - if you develop the raw file as you normally do, you're looking at the result of a matrix convolution applied at the first part of the colour profile. This makes green out = -0.17R + 1.61G - 0.44B (or something close to this anyway), so you "channel-mix" the raw channels to get a standardized colour output. This convolves the raw channel results, making them impossible to analyze.

And I'm guessing this is way over the level that's called for in a thread like this. I can see that I'd ideally need a few thousand words of context to make my ramblings even remotely understandable in a post like this.



Aug 06, 2011 at 07:03 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #5 · p.12 #5 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


Alright, thanks that makes perfect sense. So the photosites have an asymmetric construction with materials with different absorption coefficients. Furthermore as different wavelengths have different energies there will be a difference in how well they can penetrate it.

I'm guessing then that the asymmetry of on the semiconductor must be corresponding to the global color cast asymmetry (i.e it's diagonal).

Don't worry about the level, it's fine at least for me (I'm an EE engineer by education although I haven't worked with anything relating to semiconductors or optics since university - but I know the basics).



Aug 06, 2011 at 07:29 PM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #6 · p.12 #6 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


I appreciate the discussion. Very interesting. Thanks guys.


Aug 06, 2011 at 08:54 PM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #7 · p.12 #7 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


Ah.. I though that photo is from NEX-C3.

Dunno, NEX doesnt have same problem cause CMOS is generaly more "flater" than CCD?

Otherwise, why are colors shifting.. I just remember that CCD reads data in row. Sounds strange, but maybe that row reading does something with colors. Cause I cant think about any logical explanation why it has different color on each side. Lens are pretty much uniform and sensors tend to be quite simetrical too.



Aug 07, 2011 at 06:49 AM
yanstermonster
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #8 · p.12 #8 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


I am still totally shocked at what I have seen in this thread. The corner performance of the NEX C3 with non-retrofocus wideangle lenses is HUGE NEWS! Although Panasonic introduced the first "mirror-less" cam in 2008, it seems like the C3 is the first 'true mirror-less' & affordable cam. By 'true' I mean one that can take advantage of compact high IQ non-retro wides.
The Luminous Landscape seems to have really missed the boat on this issue. Although they publish a lot of articles on the issue (focus peaking "Letter to Leica", backup bodies for M9, and C3 hands on review), I am surprised they missed one of the most important topics of all.



Aug 10, 2011 at 02:17 PM
Ajay C
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #9 · p.12 #9 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


Luka and theSuede:

While what Suede largely applies in the CCD world, there is no physical pixel level shifting in the CMOS sensor world.

1. It is very unusual for pixels (the physical photo site) to be shifted. Over ~20 new sensor designs of various pixel sizes and formats pass through us, I don't think I have seen a single sensor where the photosite itself was shifted. However, depending on the size of the pixel, the micro-lenses are shifted radially outwards (most of the time only X direction is shifted, also gapless u-lenses helps). Also, smaller pixels need more micro-lens shift than larger pixels. Even then, position dependent gain algorithms are used to fixel for color imbalances. This is typically referred in the industry as color correction matrix or a similar term. The idea is to multiply the pixel response by the inverse vignetting profile of the sensor, per channel.

2. About the pixel not being rotationally symmetric, modern pixels are drawn to a square format for example 2 um x 2um. What is different though in the X & Y direction of a pixel is the fill factor aspect ratio. (Fill factor is the physical opening of the pixel which collects photons). That is, the metal layers on top of the pixel are not symmetrical (ie not the same in the X&Y direction). However, as the metal stack rises they tend to get symmetrical. i.e. metal 4 layers tends to be more symmetrical (x,y directions) than say metal 2 or metal 3.

3. About the red CFA being larger in size, that is not true in the CMOS world. Before depositing CFA layers on the pixels, there is no way to tell which pixel represents which color plane, i.e. the sensor is monochromatic. And, all the pixels (and the fill factor) are the same size, which means the CFA should be centered on to this physical opening of the pixel, and the metal stack geometry. If you look at a sensor RGB quantum efficieny (QE) curves, red channel typically has the lowest QE, i.e. red pixels have the lowest conversion gain (conversion of incident photons to electrons in the pixel), and to obtain pure white (D65 illuminant), the red channel will be amplified the most before it is mixed with both greens (actually green channel is split into Gr_Red and Gr_blue) and blue. DxO sensor data will have this amplification metric (from which QE can be derived).

Sorry, I went overboard with some details but I know it will be of use to, at least, a few!



Aug 11, 2011 at 11:02 PM
theSuede
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #10 · p.12 #10 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


That the green channel has the highest efficiency is in part an active design choice made by the sensor manufacturers. You need the camera to work between 2400K and 15000K CCT light, and to minimize the impact of low/high temperature WB on noise, this is modeled after the "normal usage situation".

A deeper cell depletion volume would increase the NIR efficiency, but the gain you get would be counterproductive. It would mean that when you shoot in CIE A light, incandescent, the red raw channel would saturate the AD input way before the green channel, and several (scene related white) Ev earlier than the blue channel. And since green make up 50% of the area (and most of our "contrast" acuity in human vision) you need to optimize for the green channel - over all WB temperatures. So there's actually no need to "fix" this problem.

And there's absolutely no reason to optimize the sensitivities for "D65" light, since that's the standard output CCT, not the main input CCT. If I would have to pick a colour temperature to optimize for, it would be somewhere around 4200K, with CIE "D" weighting. That's closer to daylight than to indoor lighting - a good "general photographic average".

The colour correction matrix is the base conversion from sensor input to CIE XYZ stimulis in most cases. You can of course linearly transform this one step further to sRGB as DxO does, but that is also quite counterproductive from a purely photographical PoV. It's the "lowest" form of colour correction you can apply, like the base "no correction applied" profiles in DCraw. To correct for corner colour issues you would need a "position dependent colour matrix", with "position dependent" being the main part of the sentence. The colour matrix has to be applied anyway, all over the sensor surface - if you want a colour response that is referable to any given colour space standard. To correct for angle colour anomalies you need to modulate the correction matrix with "position".

CMOS does still have pixel aperture differences, even though all pixels look the same underneath the CFA layer... As I tried to explain, red wavelengths have a much stronger penetration energy than the shorter blue wavelengths.

The passivation volumes AROUND the metal in the sensors is impenetrable for the blue wavelengths. Longer, red, wavelengths don't even notice they're there. This means that even though the pixels physically have the same layout, the effective light energy aperture changes. Red has a large effective aperture in the pixel surface, blue has a lot smaller effective aperture.

To get the real QE from DxO's measurements you have to curve fit a few of their measurements together, there's no way to infer it in a direct way. What you basically want to do is to try to subtract read noise and AD gain non-linearity effects from the "full SNR curve", and then compare that result against the theoretical maximum (at the ISO that DxO specify - with the "saturation point" ISO definition). This can be done - see www.sensorgen.info, one example of an (almost) complete implementation of this method. But the estimation error isn't negligible.



Aug 12, 2011 at 06:24 PM
Ajay C
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #11 · p.12 #11 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


Joakim,

I agree with almost everything you have written, including the design tradeoffs, CCM and LSC corrections. I, intentionally, oversimplified a lot of things just to give a broad and general feel for things, not to give the complete design specifics / characterization methods. The same for red penetration and D65 illumination example. Just picked a common number.

Honestly though, I always thought this kind of talk was confined to SPIE or Image Sensors conferences, it is the first time that I have read about sensors in such detail on an photo forum. You seem to be rather well informed with sensor technology. Any chance you work in the field ?



Aug 12, 2011 at 11:57 PM
AhamB
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #12 · p.12 #12 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


I'm definitely enjoying the discussion, although I can't wrap my head about all the terminology (I'm educated to be a photonics engineer but am not working in that field anymore).


Aug 13, 2011 at 07:05 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #13 · p.12 #13 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


denoir wrote:

Guys, I think you are misinterpreting the tests. You think it looks worse than it should, but it doesn't. It's just that it is being compared to an M9 which is in a completely different league. There is no small format camera on the market that comes even close to the per pixel sharpness and micro contrast the M9 produces. The comparison is as uneven as if one was comparing the M9 to a medium format digital camera. If the MFD image was resized to the 18 mpixels of the M9 then the latter would look like crap in comparison.

If
...Show more


I know this is from way back in the thread but I'd say that it was far too "crisp"! It looks like there is quite a lot of actual detail lost and some false detail introduced.

Is that due to the RAW converter or is that the camera's pre-processing?




Aug 13, 2011 at 07:36 AM
Bifurcator
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #14 · p.12 #14 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


Nevermind... this answered it for me:

denoir wrote:
Alright, RPP time.

This is just a repeat of the last test set but processed with RPP.

C3 (50 Lux), 7D (50 MP):

http://peltarion.eu/img/comp/nex-m9/F_rpp_crops.jpg




Aug 13, 2011 at 07:40 AM
Jerry_R
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #15 · p.12 #15 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


DP Review - NEX-C3: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonynexc3/


Aug 22, 2011 at 09:41 PM
LightShow
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #16 · p.12 #16 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


Doh! beat me to the review.


Aug 22, 2011 at 10:43 PM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #17 · p.12 #17 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


I just bought a NEX C3 after the theft of my NEX 5. What strikes me immediately is how much nicer the picture is, from a colour, contrast and white balance point of view. I will get into sharpness etc.. later on, but this camera produces pictures which immediately, even just on the LCD look very, very sweet.
OTOH, I had hoped that the corner softness of the 16mm f:2.8 was due to the sensor and that the lens might be vindicated with the C3. Nope. It is better, as in "less horrible".



Aug 24, 2011 at 02:57 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #18 · p.12 #18 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


Sorry to hear about your NEX 5 Philippe. You are really having bad luck with others helping themselves to your camera gear

Lightroom 3.5 RC1 is out and supports the NEX-C3 - it can be downloaded here http://labs.adobe.com/


I've spent some time now looking through my C3 images in Lightroom, and I don't know. Sharpness is fine, no complaints there. I do feel however that there is something wrong, something lacking in the images. I can't put my finger on it, but it is rather similar to what I've experienced when I've used a 7D after using a 5DII. My initial guess was that it is the consequence of not getting the edge/corner effects from the lenses. But it can't be it as it also holds for lenses such as the 90 Cron AA which has stopped down basically uniform rendering across the full image circle. So I can't currently be more specific. And it worries me a bit. I'd like to use the C3 for landscape photography (live view + tilt screen = awesome), but I don't think I trust it enough for that. Hmm...

The RAW files present a similar story. It does very good shadow recovery and has OK latitude in the highlights. At the same time the files feel very 'brittle', tiny changes in contrast or black levels or fill light have very significant impacts on the image. The changes are crude, colors get clipped easily and similar things. I had hoped that Lightroom would improve that, but it's the same thing.

Ugh. I really wish that I could like this camera. For tripod based photography it's fantastic - it feels like a mini medium format Hasselblad with a waist level viewfinder. At the same time I *loathe* using the M9 from a tripod. It's awful in so many ways. However the C3 pales in comparison when it comes to image quality and as much as one part of me wants to, I can't make such a sacrifice in IQ for a gain in usability. It's annoying not able to (yet at least) precisely define what it is about the C3 output that bugs me, but it does. So for me it's back to Plan #1 - to have the C3 as an emergency backup M mount camera should my M9 break down. It's a pity - I had hoped to actually make use of it.



Aug 24, 2011 at 06:23 PM
bigkidneys
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #19 · p.12 #19 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


philber wrote:
I just bought a NEX C3 after the theft of my NEX 5. What strikes me immediately is how much nicer the picture is, from a colour, contrast and white balance point of view. I will get into sharpness etc.. later on, but this camera produces pictures which immediately, even just on the LCD look very, very sweet.
OTOH, I had hoped that the corner softness of the 16mm f:2.8 was due to the sensor and that the lens might be vindicated with the C3. Nope. It is better, as in "less horrible".



Jesus Philipe, I think someone has a painted target on you and your gear. Sorry to hear that but I guess it's one way to justify trying something new Me on the other hand, just says screw it and buys it without justification... Just picked up an X100 to go with my Nex 5 which may seem somewhat redundant but I really like the portability especially with the traveling I get to do on occasion.



Aug 24, 2011 at 08:59 PM
JimBuchanan
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #20 · p.12 #20 · Sony NEX-C3 first impressions


bigkidneys wrote:
Jesus Philipe, I think .........................with the traveling I get to do on occasion.


Where is the value, related to this thread, in this post?



Aug 24, 2011 at 09:49 PM
1       2       3              11              13       14       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              11              13       14       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.