Woah...5 years back, I haven't shift to DSLRs yet,was still using film :bsmilie: but that's a long long list.... Most affected was the Sony list
[Rumours] Oly-Kodak Sensor Partnership?
- Thread starter drakon09
- Start date
Woah...5 years back, I haven't shift to DSLRs yet,was still using film :bsmilie: but that's a long long list.... Most affected was the Sony list
Woah...5 years back, I haven't shift to DSLRs yet,was still using film :bsmilie: but that's a long long list.... Most affected was the Sony list
And Olympus was at the bottom of the list, they were among the last to receive replacement sensors (or even to have the recall for Oly cameras acknowledged) so those who had this piece of garbage in their cameras had to shelve their cameras and either not take pictures, or get a new camera (that hopefully didn't have the same faulty sensor).
As for the Sony list, most of those devices are camcorders...the only other manufacturer on the list that made camcorders with that sensor was Canon.
oh, so because of this recall some years back, sony still makes the worst sensors till today?
btw, in the original post u quoted from me, i was not trying to say that sony sensors are any good/bad. it was just a matter of what was available to the consumers/maufacturers, which was the point. the brand could have been others too, besides sony.
bousozoku
Senior Member
Sony seems to be doing pretty well with the backlit sensor technology now.
Kodak showed that they could make a mobile phone camera sensor good enough to compete with a point-and-shoot sensor, so given the extra room on a Four-Thirds sized sensor, you'd hope that they'd be able to create something much more impressive.
Besides, what medium format body doesn't use a Kodak sensor now? They don't have high ISO capabilities but then, how many people shoot on the street with a handheld medium format camera?
If Olympus produces one model geared toward professionals without any Live View or movie modes or art filters, maybe they really are listening again.
Kodak showed that they could make a mobile phone camera sensor good enough to compete with a point-and-shoot sensor, so given the extra room on a Four-Thirds sized sensor, you'd hope that they'd be able to create something much more impressive.
Besides, what medium format body doesn't use a Kodak sensor now? They don't have high ISO capabilities but then, how many people shoot on the street with a handheld medium format camera?
If Olympus produces one model geared toward professionals without any Live View or movie modes or art filters, maybe they really are listening again.
Ok, i see where u r coming from. Mind if i ask what field do u specialise in as a researcher? Anything to do with image acquisition like maybe deep sea research or some kind of data acquisition requiring the use of sensor as the pri input source?
IIRC, besides, Sony & Matsushita, NEC & Sanyo also make sensors, so why not get them to OEM or custom make those MF backs or lab standards sensors? MF backs & those found in Leica r custom design (eg, Phase's CCD is different from Mamiya's CCD), not off the shelf type. Why only Kodak? Is it becos they have lots of marketing power behind the success in selling sensors? From what i deduced why Kodak is the preferred choice, their sensors' white papers more often than not, shows better Quantum Efficiency & lower noise floor, compared to competitors of similar products. Kodak also has lots of patents behind their sensor tech to boast its superiority. Nothing offensive from ur post, i'm all open for discussion
Btw i also like to try out astro photgraphy, juz that the cost is really hi to get some basic decent images. Any tips?
I saw Wai's astro pics some yrs back & they look pretty goodRumours said its a CMOS specially designed for Oly, not CCD. Sorry to burst ur bubbles. :angel:K3N said:
If u have the E300 & E1 cams & do a side by side shoot of the same subject, u'll get what i mean. The 1st gen of the TruePic is not there yet. The algo behind E1 DSP is really something that has set the standard for Oly, so high till the extend that they can't really reach it again with the NMOS cams, at least i haven't seen any yet. IMHO, E1 IQ is on par with Fuji S2 pro standard, its really that good.CTN said:
So let us all just wait & see :lovegrin:
Edited: Besides Kodak's superior QE & lower noise floor, the linearity of their sensors is also pretty untouchable. Check their white papers, dun juz take my word for it
Last edited:
My take differs. If Oly produces the next flagship w/o LV & video, they'll miss the boat big time. Marketing & selling of products is all about where the money is, not where the pride is. Like it or not, money is THE ingredient that keeps companies afloat. Rem juz a few yrs back? CZ & Leica almost went bankrupt, so what if they make the world's best lenses? U ain't selling means u r going down. The truth is always hard to swallow. Reality bites
I kinda have to agree with nightpiper, having a model geared towards professionals without live view or movie modes or art filters is shooting themselves in the head, though its a little bit practical for photographers, its not really so much so the same for consumers
hi nightpiper, my research interest focuses more on biology. we do use some imaging devices like for simple microscopy work (confocals, brightfields, etc), nothing complex.
ok i see your point too. hmm... i am not certain about those parts about quantum efficiency and stuff. so perhaps i can't discuss much with you on that. hehehe.. i do believe that marketing/business components could have come into play, since sony might not be so happy making sensors for its competitor, more so now that they have the NEX system. yes, you could be right too, that Kodak was the preferred choice. anyway we are just speculating here. but i must say that the Oly partnership with Kodak is more exciting than Sony for sure, at least to me.
as a personal interest, i don't do astro photography. i do know of some people who uses mirror lenses on crop-sensors to get the reach for moon only. for star trails, i used film when i was much younger, and would probably do the same today, due to all the complications involved in doing so with digital sensors. and last thing i feel is that sg is not a very good place for astro observations...
ok i see your point too. hmm... i am not certain about those parts about quantum efficiency and stuff. so perhaps i can't discuss much with you on that. hehehe.. i do believe that marketing/business components could have come into play, since sony might not be so happy making sensors for its competitor, more so now that they have the NEX system. yes, you could be right too, that Kodak was the preferred choice. anyway we are just speculating here. but i must say that the Oly partnership with Kodak is more exciting than Sony for sure, at least to me.
as a personal interest, i don't do astro photography. i do know of some people who uses mirror lenses on crop-sensors to get the reach for moon only.
for star trails, i used film when i was much younger, and would probably do the same today, due to all the complications involved in doing so with digital sensors. and last thing i feel is that sg is not a very good place for astro observations...Side track here, but astro photography is quite complicated. One method is to literally strap a camera to a telescope (and I really mean a proper telescope), and take a photo. That's the only way you are ever getting a decent image I'm afraid. I don't think the best zooms out there will cut it (You are talking about say 1000mm focal length thereabouts at the minimum!).
But that aside, Kodak doesn't make CMOS senosrs? And the Panasonic Japanese design head hinted in an interview that there were patent issues with CMOS.
But that aside, Kodak doesn't make CMOS senosrs? And the Panasonic Japanese design head hinted in an interview that there were patent issues with CMOS.
Last edited:
The sensor in live view cameras is NOT CMOS!!! It's NMOS. You can see the difference here (look for the diagram with the blue and orange arrows, didn't want to hotlink the image):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse330/
It has the image quality (supposedly) of a CCD, with the lower power consumption of CMOS...but having used both (E-300 CCD and E-330 NMOS, as well as having used other CCD and NMOS based Olys) I prefer the images from the CCD.
bousozoku
Senior Member
I don't see anyone in the photographic industry holding patents to CMOS since the big deal about CMOS was in the 1980s and related to computer-related circuitry.
If Panasonic don't want to pay to license the technology, that's another thing, but I doubt that they have to worry about patents holding them back.
Does it matter what fabrication technology the chips use really, as long as they do the correct job?
Well, it's using CMOS in a different way other than memory or processing...using CMOS for image capturing would certainly required a new patent (referring to the old CMOS patents of course).
When CD first came out it was designed for audio. Then the computer industry saw a use for it so a patent had to come out for that use. Then someone came up with CDR, another patent. Then CDRW, another patent. After a few years someone came up with a way to pack in so much more data for video use using a CD sized disc...another patent.
Panasonic wanted to come up with a better technology other than CMOS...CMOS in inherently noisy, and requires a very aggressive noise reduction to get a decent looking image (you can't turn off this noise reduction on cameras that use it). And they wanted a technology that didn't require so much electronics taking space away from the photosites due to the electrical pathways required between photosites on a CMOS sensor. That's why they opted for NMOS instead.
This page shows the difference between CMOS and NMOS photosite size and distance (look for the black boxes with the yellow boxes):
http://dpnow.com/2392.html
The different sensor types have different personalities. It's the same reason why you can get a particular model of car with different engine choices, or laptops with different processors (whether you want power or economy/battery life).
Hope it'll be a Kodak CCD but their pMOS technology sounds interesting.
http://www.advancedimagingpro.com/print/Advanced-Imaging-Magazine/Looking-at-the-Expanding-Sensor-Market/1$5151
That would be good if it comes through ... I'll be happy even with the "current" Kodak sensor inside the Leica M9 , or S2 ...
.
, or S2 ....
I remember hearing a story about why Oly dropped Kodak as a supplier. Looks like the relationship has been mended, if this is true.
Anyway, there are lots of sensor companies out there :
http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.com/
Anyway, there are lots of sensor companies out there :
http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.com/
bousozoku
Senior Member
Yet, and it doesn't matter a lot because Canon now has similar pixel densities (in APS-C) and their noise isn't nearly as much of a problem as it is for Four-Thirds. On the other hand, the Nikon D3000 is embarrassing, for whatever reason Nikon has chose to make it that way.
So, if the final product isn't as clean, who cares?
