[falconeye]

Sony Semiconductor has many other outlets (even if Hoya is the #1, where is the source of the statistics ?) to source that w/o need to share anything with competition (Hoya)...

I didn't say Hoya is #1. I said leading together with ... The source is the Wikipedia article about photoreticles linked in my post. It mentions Hoya as one of six independent big mask shops. It also says that to set up a mask shop may be up to $500 million...

It is true that Sony doesn't require Hoya for the mask. But it could also be true that it may be a significant effort to enable a mask shop to produce FF-sized reticles. And if this is true, it would make sense to share the initial cost with somebody.

And why would we assume that Hoya's Electro-Optics division would not sell reticles to Nikon? It may be too soon to see where Hoya's interests lie in the consumer photo industry.

I would not assume so.
But sharing the initial cost would mean that Sony can buy the reticles from Hoya at a lower price (or shares sensors in turn) while say Nikon would have to pay full. The full frame photoreticle market could be small and difficult enough to allow for a single monopolistic source. And why shouldn't Hoya try to be this source? It's in their core business.

---

Last edited by falconeye; 08-24-2010 at 05:06 PM.

[Mohawk]

Are we still waxing lyrical about the 135 format? FFfanboys, do you really think FF is the be-all and end-all? Others are thinking outside your box:

Canon develops world's first 120 megapixel APS-H CMOS sensor: Digital Photography Review

My wish: K30D + APS-H

[falconeye]

Others are thinking outside your box

btw, it should not be a real problem to scale a current P&S design (2µm pixel pitch) to FF, yielding 216 Mpixels. Where's your point?

[deejjjaaaa]

I didn't say Hoya is #1. I said leading together with ... The source is the Wikipedia article about photoreticles linked in my post. It mentions Hoya as one of six independent big mask shops. It also says that to set up a mask shop may be up to $500 million...

It is true that Sony doesn't require Hoya for the mask. But it could also be true that it may be a significant effort to enable a mask shop to produce FF-sized reticles. And if this is true, it would make sense to share the initial cost with somebody.


I would not assume so.
But sharing the initial cost would mean that Sony can buy the reticles from Hoya at a lower price (or shares sensors in turn) while say Nikon would have to pay full. The full frame photoreticle market could be small and difficult enough to allow for a single monopolistic source. And why shouldn't Hoya try to be this source? It's in their core business.

too much speculation, Falk... especially there are 6+ vendors of this stuff... means too much competition for the thing to be overpriced enough for Sony to have a significant savings by entering into a deal w/ Hoya... and we do not know if it is necessary to setup a completely new "shop" to make bigger masks...

[Mohawk]

There is merit to APS-C, and there is merit in 135. APS-H to me is a nice meld of the two, not the least of which is getting the sweet spot of the lens.

At least Canon appears to be seeing this and is developing the next generation of APS-H.

My 2c.
M

[falconeye]

too much speculation, Falk...

I agree. But I only wanted to say that the entire FF situation may bear a chance for Hoya we didn't see yet.

I'm nowhere near to say that it would be the right thing for Hoya to do. You're right, one would need much more information. I only wanted to share the idea though.

As for competition: there may be many mask shops. But that may not hold true for extra-large reticles (like FF). It is certainly much less expensive to improve the production towards larger reticles (than to set up a mask shop). But again, one would have to know more to assess the matter.

[Rondec]

Does anyone really believe that Nikon produces their own sensors? Tweaks them, yes, but manufactures? No. It is just a pipe dream that Nikon has concocted to sell their own users that their cameras are manufactured with some kind of amazing pixie dust.

[Blue]

Does anyone really believe that Nikon produces their own sensors? Tweaks them, yes, but manufactures? No. It is just a pipe dream that Nikon has concocted to sell their own users that their cameras are manufactured with some kind of amazing pixie dust.

That's a good question. Does Canon or Sony?

[ogl]

There is merit to APS-C, and there is merit in 135. APS-H to me is a nice meld of the two, not the least of which is getting the sweet spot of the lens.

At least Canon appears to be seeing this and is developing the next generation of APS-H.

My 2c.
M

Absurd. APS-H is not the way for Pentax. FF is cheaper.
Canon just shows that they can manufacture sensors with more MP. They had showed already 50 MP sensor before, but never used.
Just like advertising of canon potential

[ewalk]

That's a good question. Does Canon or Sony?

Sony definitely does. They make the majority of the sensors out there.

I *think* Canon makes their own, especially since their crop sensors are a slightly different size than the Nikon/Pentax/Sony equivalents.

[Blue]

Sony definitely does. They make the majority of the sensors out there.

I *think* Canon makes their own, especially since their crop sensors are a slightly different size than the Nikon/Pentax/Sony equivalents.

That was a rhetorical question directed to Rondec's response thinking it is unreasonable to believe Nikon is moving in that direction.

[Aristophanes]

That's a good question. Does Canon or Sony?

Both do. Canon is a very vertically integrated company in all its divisions. Sony is a top-3 electronics source manufacturer and design centre with long-standing photolithography expertise. Sony makes the sensor for the Canon S90, for example.

Nikon? p.11

http://www.nikon.com/about/ir/ir_library/ar/pdf/ar2009/09annual_e.pdf

[ewalk]

That was a rhetorical question directed to Rondec's response thinking it is unreasonable to believe Nikon is moving in that direction.

Hahahaha oops!

[Rondec]

I just think that it is beyond imagination that every time Sony comes with a new sensor (for example a 16 megapixel sensor) then Nikon starts producing a similar sensor with almost exactly the same specs. I understand that Nikon is spinning it as though they are producing these, but I think they are buying sensors from Sony, same as always, and then doing their own processing on top, whether it is hardware or software tweaks.

[FlashCube]

I just think that it is beyond imagination that every time Sony comes with a new sensor (for example a 16 megapixel sensor) then Nikon starts producing a similar sensor with almost exactly the same specs. I understand that Nikon is spinning it as though they are producing these, but I think they are buying sensors from Sony, same as always, and then doing their own processing on top, whether it is hardware or software tweaks.

If you go look at the linked report above, you will see that Nikon put out some serious capital outlay. They are doing something. Exactly what is cryptic. However, if Canon can do it, Nikon can do it better is probably what the Nikon engineers are thinking.