6 ms·

To me, the big monoculture risk is Sony's image-sensor fab. As I understand it, Sony, Fuji, Nikon and many others all rely upon the output of one company's manu

by ISL 6y ago

To me, the big monoculture risk is Sony's image-sensor fab. As I understand it, Sony, Fuji, Nikon and many others all rely upon the output of one company's manufacturing process. There's a good reason for it -- they appear to make the very best sensors (edit: in terms of dynamic range and noise) in the commercial-camera market. Canon makes their own sensors, which are good in absolute but not relative terms, which appears to hold them back in performance. I don't know if it is patent-related or process-related. While I use Canon imaging systems, I don't see the choice to use other brands as better or worse. Each manufacturer's line has strengths and weaknesses; you pick the best tool for the job. Essentially every camera and optical system on the market, in absolute terms, is a wonderful instrument for imaging. This reality is intensely freeing -- it means you can focus more on the image and less on the instrumentation. "f/8 and be there" is still wonderful advice.

ksk 6y ago
I don't think its quite accurate to say Canon sensors hold anyone back. Canon photographers continue to win awards, continue to create world-class images, etc, etc. Canon gear is very well represented in the professional photography community. They wouldn't be using the gear if they couldn't get their work done. There are several gear "measurebators" online arguing about base ISO DR and +6EV exposure recovery, who produce nothing with their cameras. We can safely ignore them :) Sony sinks tons of money in their tech because other companies use them as a factory, so that makes total business sense (and along with samsung and a few others, they do have cutting edge imaging tech). Canon is different in that its much more vertically integrated so it rarely makes sense to drop millions of dollars on sensor fab upgrades unless they're going to make the money back. They have dozens of filed patents on all the technology that the competition is using, so I don't think they're lacking on the IP front.
- coldtea 6y ago
  >I don't think its quite accurate to say Canon sensors hold anyone back. Canon photographers continue to win awards, continue to create world-class images, etc, etc. Canon gear is very well represented in the professional photography community. I don't think photography is where the concern lies these days. All medium/flagship cameras from major brands today are more than good enough for photography, commercial, sports, landscape, advertising, editorial, or whatever... It's more about the video...
  - ksk 6y ago
    Agree. Even with video we're spoiled with tech to the point where it takes hundreds of YouTube channels to explain what the heck the tech does and how to best use it. Reminds of a quote - "We are not limited by our tools, just by our imagination". On a related note, I recently re-watched the original Jurassic Park, and the movie quality still blows me away.
PuffinBlue 6y ago
> Canon makes their own sensors, which are good in absolute but not relative terms, which appears to hold them back in performance It's a little early to state this. Once the R5 and R6 come out we'll have a better idea of their capabilities as those are slated to have their new tech (8K video etc etc).
- arghwhat 6y ago
  Even with the current sensors it's true: Things like dual-pixel auto-focus has put Canon sensors ahead of the competition for a long time. (Dual-pixel AF doesn't just give way better AF, it also avoids artifacts from dedicated phase detect pixels that other cameras have.)
  - ISL 6y ago
    True -- as a DSLR-user, with focus happening off-chip, I miss the superior dynamic-range of the Sony sensors more than the DPAF. If I were making video, I suspect I'd be singing the same tune. DPAF is excellent.
    - csharptwdec19 6y ago
      Which TBF hints at the reason Sony does have all of this nice image sensor technology. While they've been a newer player in the Camera industry, they've been doing professional digital video for far longer (SW EP2 was shot on Panavision-modified Sony cameras.) That's on top of their long lineage in the pre-digital-recording TV Market.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Sony does make DPAF capable sensors for phones, but for some reason (probably IP!) they don't use them on their FF cameras.
    - arghwhat 6y ago
      The wonderful world of patents. On an unrelated note, I do believe that Canon has also pulled a patent on quad-pixel AF. Patents being awful aside, quad-pixel AF would be awesome: every pixel becomes a cross-type focus sensor. (For the uninitiated, focus sensors are usually either horizontal or vertical, and cannot detect features that are perpendicular to them. Cross-type sensors are a combination of the two to increase the detection capability.)
slantyyz 6y ago
IIRC, Canon's 1" sensor cameras use Sony sensors too. Don't know if their smaller sensor cameras are home made or not though.
- ranma42 6y ago
  My G3X uses an IMX183 according to a string in the firmware image.
lizknope 6y ago
Some of Nikon's sensors are probably made by Tower Jazz. https://petapixel.com/2020/06/05/towerjazz-hints-that-nikon-is-using-their-sensors-in-the-z50-and-d7500/ https://petapixel.com/2020/06/05/towerjazz-hints-that-nikon-... Nikon has also used Toshiba in the past but probably 80% of Nikon's DSLR sensors were made by Sony.
- slantyyz 6y ago
  The Nikon 1 line, with exception of the J5 (which used Sony's sensor), used sensors made by Aptina. Aptina's sensors were pretty spectacular from an AF perspective in that they had phase-shift AF on-sensor in 2011. The AF was as close as you could get to DSLRs on a mirrorless camera for quite some time. It's just too bad that Nikon came up with a weird set of 1st generation Nikon 1 cameras that made no sense to anybody. IIRC, Aptina ended up cross-licensing their patents to Sony.
possibleworlds 6y ago
Agreed. There's also the Fujifilm X-Trans sensors which try to recapture some of the magic of film. However I really wish more people knew about Sigma and their Foveon sensors[1]. The fact is that there is a completely different technology on the market which produces very different – and arguably far superior – image quality and colour reproduction compared to 99% of digital cameras on the market. The Sigma system can be clunky and the sensor tech has its drawbacks (eg almost unusable above 200 iso), however given the right conditions the images they produce can be stunning. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor
- bitL 6y ago
  Unfortunately, real Foveon is a thing of the past, Sigma switched to a Bayer sensor in their latest "fp" camera and their last Foveon-based Quattro had 3 layers but a 4:2:2 pixel mosaic, making it no longer a "true Foveon". I owned SD1 Merrill and it was the sharpest camera I've ever used, but there is nothing comparable on the market these days.
  - numpad0 6y ago
    Sigma is/was totally planning to unveil fp with Foveon in CP+ until this January, before COVID-19 hit anyway...
  - jeyashankher 6y ago
    I own and still use a DP2X. When things go right, the result is truly breathtaking. 80 to 90% of the photos I take with this are junk, but the remaining 10-20%, boy-oh-boy, truly memorable results!
  - possibleworlds 6y ago
    All true. I do hold out hope for a “true” foveon return. And you can still grab Merrill models second hand, like I did about a year ago. I mainly use an Olympus em5 mkII so I’m saddened by the OP news, although I will wait to see how it plays out before switching to Ricoh and/or Pentax. Guess I have a thing for the underdogs.
- 6y ago
bayindirh 6y ago
Sony's image sensor fab business is a bit different. First of all, there's two companies: Semiconductor and Imaging. Sony opens some of their technologies to other customers by transferring Imaging unit's patents to Semi and allows them for re-licensing. So, not everyone is using the same sensor even if they are coming out from the same fab. Second, there's customer tailored sensor business. Sony can provide a customer a baseline to start and, customer can customize this sensor according to their needs and got it produced for themselves. Lastly, there's strict division between customers in semiconductor side. So Sony Imaging can't access to specs and design of other customers' sensors. How it works in real life? - Sony A7 series use Sony's sensors with all their secrets at their disposal but, not with Nikon's and Fuji's secret sauces. - Nikon orders customized, "Designed by Nikon" sensors to Sony Semi. Sony Imaging cannot access them (unless they buy and disassemble a Nikon Z). - Same for Fuji. They have less rolling shutter in XT-4 for example, and it's again built by Sony, for Fuji. No, Sony Imaging can't play with them. - Canon R5's sensor is "Designed by Canon". I'm not sure they are producing it. Sony or Tower Jazz maybe producing it. I don't know. At the end of the day, the fab is almost one but, designs are many and diversified and, nobody can see each other's design. Like TSMC and Global Foundries.
- ISL 6y ago
  Totally agreed, but if that one fab company falls over, much of the imaging industry has a problem. That's the monoculture.
  - bayindirh 6y ago
    In bigger semiconductor business we have three main fabs. Intel, TSMC, Global Foundries. Intel is closed to outside customers, so again we have a duopoly there. It's not very very different in the bigger picture if you ask me. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
    - noobermin 6y ago
      Two is better than one but more than two is better than both options.
deaddodo 6y ago
I mean, your same argument could be made for TVs/monitors as well. LG, Samsung and AU Optronics make the vast majority of LCD panels. You could buy an LG or a Vizio with the same LG-fabbed panel. In fact, even Samsung TV has been known to use LG panels: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2017/01/23/samsung-forced-to-buy-lcd-tv-panels-from-lg-says-report/#58d5e50aa407 https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2017/01/23/samsung-f...
- neop1x 6y ago
  AU Optronics, InnoLux, Infovision, BOE optoelectronics, IVO, LG - these do laptop panels (also see panelook.com ). There is some competition in TN/IPS. But OLEDs or specialized panel situation may be different.

by ISL 6y ago

ksk 6y ago

I don't think its quite accurate to say Canon sensors hold anyone back. Canon photographers continue to win awards, continue to create world-class images, etc, etc. Canon gear is very well represented in the professional photography community. They wouldn't be using the gear if they couldn't get their work done. There are several gear "measurebators" online arguing about base ISO DR and +6EV exposure recovery, who produce nothing with their cameras. We can safely ignore them :) Sony sinks tons of money in their tech because other companies use them as a factory, so that makes total business sense (and along with samsung and a few others, they do have cutting edge imaging tech). Canon is different in that its much more vertically integrated so it rarely makes sense to drop millions of dollars on sensor fab upgrades unless they're going to make the money back. They have dozens of filed patents on all the technology that the competition is using, so I don't think they're lacking on the IP front.

coldtea 6y ago
>I don't think its quite accurate to say Canon sensors hold anyone back. Canon photographers continue to win awards, continue to create world-class images, etc, etc. Canon gear is very well represented in the professional photography community. I don't think photography is where the concern lies these days. All medium/flagship cameras from major brands today are more than good enough for photography, commercial, sports, landscape, advertising, editorial, or whatever... It's more about the video...
- ksk 6y ago
  Agree. Even with video we're spoiled with tech to the point where it takes hundreds of YouTube channels to explain what the heck the tech does and how to best use it. Reminds of a quote - "We are not limited by our tools, just by our imagination". On a related note, I recently re-watched the original Jurassic Park, and the movie quality still blows me away.

PuffinBlue 6y ago

> Canon makes their own sensors, which are good in absolute but not relative terms, which appears to hold them back in performance It's a little early to state this. Once the R5 and R6 come out we'll have a better idea of their capabilities as those are slated to have their new tech (8K video etc etc).

arghwhat 6y ago
Even with the current sensors it's true: Things like dual-pixel auto-focus has put Canon sensors ahead of the competition for a long time. (Dual-pixel AF doesn't just give way better AF, it also avoids artifacts from dedicated phase detect pixels that other cameras have.)
- ISL 6y ago
  True -- as a DSLR-user, with focus happening off-chip, I miss the superior dynamic-range of the Sony sensors more than the DPAF. If I were making video, I suspect I'd be singing the same tune. DPAF is excellent.
  - csharptwdec19 6y ago
    Which TBF hints at the reason Sony does have all of this nice image sensor technology. While they've been a newer player in the Camera industry, they've been doing professional digital video for far longer (SW EP2 was shot on Panavision-modified Sony cameras.) That's on top of their long lineage in the pre-digital-recording TV Market.
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  Sony does make DPAF capable sensors for phones, but for some reason (probably IP!) they don't use them on their FF cameras.
  - arghwhat 6y ago
    The wonderful world of patents. On an unrelated note, I do believe that Canon has also pulled a patent on quad-pixel AF. Patents being awful aside, quad-pixel AF would be awesome: every pixel becomes a cross-type focus sensor. (For the uninitiated, focus sensors are usually either horizontal or vertical, and cannot detect features that are perpendicular to them. Cross-type sensors are a combination of the two to increase the detection capability.)

slantyyz 6y ago

IIRC, Canon's 1" sensor cameras use Sony sensors too. Don't know if their smaller sensor cameras are home made or not though.

ranma42 6y ago
My G3X uses an IMX183 according to a string in the firmware image.

lizknope 6y ago

Some of Nikon's sensors are probably made by Tower Jazz. https://petapixel.com/2020/06/05/towerjazz-hints-that-nikon-is-using-their-sensors-in-the-z50-and-d7500/ https://petapixel.com/2020/06/05/towerjazz-hints-that-nikon-... Nikon has also used Toshiba in the past but probably 80% of Nikon's DSLR sensors were made by Sony.

slantyyz 6y ago
The Nikon 1 line, with exception of the J5 (which used Sony's sensor), used sensors made by Aptina. Aptina's sensors were pretty spectacular from an AF perspective in that they had phase-shift AF on-sensor in 2011. The AF was as close as you could get to DSLRs on a mirrorless camera for quite some time. It's just too bad that Nikon came up with a weird set of 1st generation Nikon 1 cameras that made no sense to anybody. IIRC, Aptina ended up cross-licensing their patents to Sony.

possibleworlds 6y ago

Agreed. There's also the Fujifilm X-Trans sensors which try to recapture some of the magic of film. However I really wish more people knew about Sigma and their Foveon sensors[1]. The fact is that there is a completely different technology on the market which produces very different – and arguably far superior – image quality and colour reproduction compared to 99% of digital cameras on the market. The Sigma system can be clunky and the sensor tech has its drawbacks (eg almost unusable above 200 iso), however given the right conditions the images they produce can be stunning. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor

bitL 6y ago
Unfortunately, real Foveon is a thing of the past, Sigma switched to a Bayer sensor in their latest "fp" camera and their last Foveon-based Quattro had 3 layers but a 4:2:2 pixel mosaic, making it no longer a "true Foveon". I owned SD1 Merrill and it was the sharpest camera I've ever used, but there is nothing comparable on the market these days.
- numpad0 6y ago
  Sigma is/was totally planning to unveil fp with Foveon in CP+ until this January, before COVID-19 hit anyway...
- jeyashankher 6y ago
  I own and still use a DP2X. When things go right, the result is truly breathtaking. 80 to 90% of the photos I take with this are junk, but the remaining 10-20%, boy-oh-boy, truly memorable results!
- possibleworlds 6y ago
  All true. I do hold out hope for a “true” foveon return. And you can still grab Merrill models second hand, like I did about a year ago. I mainly use an Olympus em5 mkII so I’m saddened by the OP news, although I will wait to see how it plays out before switching to Ricoh and/or Pentax. Guess I have a thing for the underdogs.
6y ago

bayindirh 6y ago

Sony's image sensor fab business is a bit different. First of all, there's two companies: Semiconductor and Imaging. Sony opens some of their technologies to other customers by transferring Imaging unit's patents to Semi and allows them for re-licensing. So, not everyone is using the same sensor even if they are coming out from the same fab. Second, there's customer tailored sensor business. Sony can provide a customer a baseline to start and, customer can customize this sensor according to their needs and got it produced for themselves. Lastly, there's strict division between customers in semiconductor side. So Sony Imaging can't access to specs and design of other customers' sensors. How it works in real life? - Sony A7 series use Sony's sensors with all their secrets at their disposal but, not with Nikon's and Fuji's secret sauces. - Nikon orders customized, "Designed by Nikon" sensors to Sony Semi. Sony Imaging cannot access them (unless they buy and disassemble a Nikon Z). - Same for Fuji. They have less rolling shutter in XT-4 for example, and it's again built by Sony, for Fuji. No, Sony Imaging can't play with them. - Canon R5's sensor is "Designed by Canon". I'm not sure they are producing it. Sony or Tower Jazz maybe producing it. I don't know. At the end of the day, the fab is almost one but, designs are many and diversified and, nobody can see each other's design. Like TSMC and Global Foundries.

ISL 6y ago
Totally agreed, but if that one fab company falls over, much of the imaging industry has a problem. That's the monoculture.
- bayindirh 6y ago
  In bigger semiconductor business we have three main fabs. Intel, TSMC, Global Foundries. Intel is closed to outside customers, so again we have a duopoly there. It's not very very different in the bigger picture if you ask me. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
  - noobermin 6y ago
    Two is better than one but more than two is better than both options.

deaddodo 6y ago

I mean, your same argument could be made for TVs/monitors as well. LG, Samsung and AU Optronics make the vast majority of LCD panels. You could buy an LG or a Vizio with the same LG-fabbed panel. In fact, even Samsung TV has been known to use LG panels: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2017/01/23/samsung-forced-to-buy-lcd-tv-panels-from-lg-says-report/#58d5e50aa407 https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarcher/2017/01/23/samsung-f...

neop1x 6y ago
AU Optronics, InnoLux, Infovision, BOE optoelectronics, IVO, LG - these do laptop panels (also see panelook.com ). There is some competition in TN/IPS. But OLEDs or specialized panel situation may be different.