Sp12 wrote:
I should hope so. Nikon doesn't make any CMOS. They buy Sony, who happens to have the highest resolution commercially available 35MM sensor out there, which they've had for 3 years. Canon is far behind in the high-resolution CMOS development game -- Nikon is only worse because they're not even playing.
Is there any chance that Sony will make sensors for pro cameras? It seems that they are into the small/tiny market and nothing new for the FF market in years.
EB-1 wrote:
Is there any chance that Sony will make sensors for pro cameras? It seems that they are into the small/tiny market and nothing new for the FF market in years.
EBH
I would assume if Nikon is releasing a D800 with 36MP, this would form the basis of any new Sony update to the a900/850 range. At one stage it appeared they were going to abandon FF, but I think they'll persist for another generation. But it needs to add a hell of a lot of features to be competitive.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I would assume if Nikon is releasing a D800 with 36MP, this would form the basis of any new Sony update to the a900/850 range. At one stage it appeared they were going to abandon FF, but I think they'll persist for another generation. But it needs to add a hell of a lot of features to be competitive.
Well, I've commited to buying at least one D800 if it is available soon and has high resolution. S*ny is useless for lack of lenses.
I strongly believe that we could see another consolidation of product lines in the making:
1Ds(x) and 5D(x)
This seems to be the next logical step for Canon to make and if I were a betting man I would specifically expect it to be announced in a November 3 press release.
Superb product. Now hopefully, the 1D4 and 1Ds3 prices will drop.
I have always found it curious that people become experts on the intricate details of camera sensors, technology, etc., and lack formal skills (eductation or hands-on) to make such unsubstantiated claims.
I am impressed by this product and would surely take a D3S, D3X, 1D4 or 1Ds3 off anyone's hand. I can make do.
Sp12 wrote:
The difference is that I say "we can see from their internal lineup", you say "because they obviously can, they just choose not to". I think our definitions of high-MP CMOS technology don't match, since mine isn't simply pixels/mm^2 (see 120MP example above), but IQ combined with smaller and smaller pixel pitches.
Clearly. Anyone with a 45nm fab (old) is capable of putting out literally gigapixel sensors on 35mm format. The difference is that Canon is far behind on packing those pixels together tightly and forming high levels of IQ while maintaining reasonable rates of readout. Not only is the 24MP Sony sensor denser, but it has much better color response and DR while matching Canon's 5FPS, despite the higher MP count.
I don't feel that personal attacks are necessary....Show more →
The real answer is somewhere in between.
Unless you are in the factory and on the engineering team .... you do not understand the entire picture.
for all we know Canon limits consumer products as compared to military products. This just an example.
Plus there are other electrical factors involved that hardly get talked about that would influence CMOS design/production.
Is it possible that Canons factory is processing on 10-15 year old machines (or older) ... sure.
Do we know where Canon photography division sits as far as priority for capital when you look at the entire corporate structure?
in the end... if we consumers buy everything Canon builds .... why do they need to push as hard in every area?
Ziffl3 wrote:
Do we know where Canon photography division sits as far as priority for capital when you look at the entire corporate structure?
It seems to me that the priority is very high. Why do I say that? If you examine Canon’s financial statements, you will see that, under segment reporting, canon reports results under three business segments: (1) Office, (2) Consumer, and (3) Industry and other. The consumer group covers cameras and inkjet printers, and among the three segments, the consumer segment was responsible for 36% of total revenues and approximately 43% of net profit. That is a big deal.
Also, regarding future outlook, Canon says, “With regard to the consumer products market, demand for digital SLR cameras is expected to achieve robust growth. Amid the slowed growth for compact digital cameras due to weak consumer spending in developed countries, demand in emerging markets continues to grow steadily.”
Sp12 wrote:
Clearly. Anyone with a 45nm fab (old) is capable of putting out literally gigapixel sensors on 35mm format.
If Chipworks are to be believed, Canon's current FF sensors (5DII, 1DsIII) are still made on a 350nm (!) process.
That's three generations behind a 45nm CMOS process.
uh, you do realize that making pixels smaller than the wavelength of the light being captured doesn't really work
also, getting the process size down helps with the interconnects and lowering the power requirements of the chip but doesn't have much to do with the pixel pitch
pixels below about a micron (1000 nm, about 800 MP at FF) don't make any sense; at 2 micron pitch have about 200 MP in FF; point and shoots & phones are already near the practical limit of 2 micron pitch- the photon noise and system noise are killers at small pitch
(visible light is from about 390 to 800 nm)
jorkata wrote:
If Chipworks are to be believed, Canon's current FF sensors (5DII, 1DsIII) are still made on a 350nm (!) process.
That's three generations behind a 45nm CMOS process.
I thought that prior to announcement of 1DX, BOTH 1D4 and 1Ds3 receive equal billing as far as flagship title is concerned. For example, the 1D4 mentioned here.
In fact, the G12 is considered Canon's flagship for compact cameras.
