Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-28-2009, 05:17 AM   #46
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,310
You mean, a small point&shoot sensor? I hope not

10-28-2009, 09:32 AM   #47
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by Kenn100D Quote
Hey OGL, Does the sensor of the FF would be a Toshiba brand with BSI?
Back side illumination isn't of much use for DSLR image sensors - it's a technology that only makes sense in tiny sensors for compact cameras. Hence, no matter what anybody tells you, the answer is "no".

There are several reasons why BSI sensors are difficult to fabricate and wouldn't offer suitable performance in an APS-C sized sensor, but the main reason you won't see them is because they're not necessary. In smaller sensors, circuitry comprises a larger portion of the total pixel area (although microlenses make up for some of the loss). On an APS-C sensor, the circuitry takes up a much smaller portion of the total pixel area. That means on a compact camera sensor, there's a much bigger opportunity to increase sensitivity / reduce noise with BSI, where on an APS-C sensor it would make very little difference but would bring increased cost and a new set of problems.
10-28-2009, 06:46 PM   #48
Veteran Member
KungPOW's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,702
The rumored A950 is expected to use a BSI sensor.
10-28-2009, 07:25 PM   #49
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by Angevinn Quote
How many DA lenses did Pentax launch their first DSLR, the *ist D with? Not many, but now look at DA line up from Pentax. Quite impressive! The DFA lenses will come in time. The camera isn't even out yet.
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
I suspect the same. I can imagine the new FF camera being equipped with the good old pre-A diaphragm simulator, so that all K-mount lenses can be used. A camera like this will set like hot cakes, even though there are almost no new FF lenses for it available.
I completely agree. The same stupid "they don't have any [new] lenses for it, so they shouldn't make it" argument could have been used to suggest that they shouldn't make an APS-C dSLR. The FF should have the fully functional manual lens coupling, to set it apart from the dSLR offerings to date and maximize the backward compatibility to a level beyond any other brand.

10-28-2009, 10:38 PM   #50
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by KungPOW Quote
The rumored A950 is expected to use a BSI sensor.
By whom, other than part of the rumor mill?

Sony's last round of DSLR announcements were also "expected" to use BSI sensors, and guess what? They didn't.
10-29-2009, 01:20 PM   #51
Veteran Member
KungPOW's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,702
QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
By whom, other than part of the rumor mill?

Sony's last round of DSLR announcements were also "expected" to use BSI sensors, and guess what? They didn't.

This being the RUMORS section, I am talking about rumors here.

Hence the wording of my post. THE RUMORED A950...

Here is a link so that you are not too concerned I pulled this compleatly out of my ass.

Sony A950 | Photo Rumors
10-29-2009, 02:31 PM   #52
Veteran Member
glasbak's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
Back side illumination isn't of much use for DSLR image sensors - it's a technology that only makes sense in tiny sensors for compact cameras. Hence, no matter what anybody tells you, the answer is "no".

So, all the back illuminated sensors on this page are nonsense ?
10-29-2009, 03:54 PM   #53
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Croatia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 64
QuoteOriginally posted by glasbak Quote
So, all the back illuminated sensors on this page are nonsense ?
These are not actually image sensors, but cooled CCD cameras for astronomy and other special purposes. The cameras are only differentiated by sensor type/size.

The sensors on the page in question are not nonsense, but it seems like an apples and oranges comparison to me. From what I understood, it was not the point that the APS-C/FF BSI sensors are not applicable to DSLRs, but that similar results can be reproduced by technology that is already in place and is cheaper.

I understand the need for large BSI sensors in the Apogee cams, regarding the extreme low-light conditions, but I expect the price of these sensors/cameras to be enormous.

A typical DSLR sensor is a consumer-grade component that needs to be readily available in few hundred thousand pieces at relatively low price. The BSI sensors above are probably small series, high cost devices.

IMHO it would be wise, in this recent online sensor hunt, that we distinguish image sensors for DSLRs from specialized image sensors dedicated to special applications. The cypress sensor above is also an example of the latter.

10-29-2009, 05:16 PM   #54
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,423
Updating old lens designs

Regarding backward compatibility with FF lenses and "updating" existing lens designs:

Many of you are more knowledgeable than I, or are engineers or something, but I thought I'd read several things that argue against updating old designs ->
  1. FA lenses tend to have more glass than manufacturers want to use today. In order to control costs the volume of glass in a design is intentionally reduced. Updating a design rapidly becomes creating an entirely new design.
  2. The EU has prohibited the minute amounts of lead found in the coatings of the FA lenses; otherwise Pentax might still be making them. I wonder whether changes to the chemistry of coatings might have a similar effect on the old lens designs - a redo becomes a completely new-do?
  3. Didn't Hoya "invite" Pentax's venerable old lens designing genius to retire during the Japan-personnel reductions? With him would have gone the experience to redo the old designs.
These are suppositions, not assertions - but then this is a suppositions thread on the Rumors Forum.
10-29-2009, 08:24 PM   #55
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by KungPOW Quote
This being the RUMORS section, I am talking about rumors here.

Hence the wording of my post. THE RUMORED A950...

Here is a link so that you are not too concerned I pulled this compleatly out of my ass.

Sony A950 | Photo Rumors
Well, I'd be happy to place you a bet right here and now that if Sony announces an A950, it will not have a BSI sensor.

QuoteOriginally posted by glasbak Quote
So, all the back illuminated sensors on this page are nonsense ?
No, they're intended for very specialist purposes. You won't find (and nor would you want) any of those sensors in any digital SLR.
10-30-2009, 01:29 AM   #56
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,238
QuoteOriginally posted by glasbak Quote
So, all the back illuminated sensors on this page are nonsense ?
back illuminated sensors are made for P&S camera.
10-30-2009, 07:20 AM   #57
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,143
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
[*]FA lenses tend to have more glass than manufacturers want to use today. In order to control costs the volume of glass in a design is intentionally reduced. Updating a design rapidly becomes creating an entirely new design.
.
Pentax mostly use rather simple designs for their FA lenses. Compare to Canon, particularly IS prime lenses. Many of those have as much glass as super zooms...
10-30-2009, 11:06 AM   #58
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
back illuminated sensors are made for P&S camera.
Actually, he's technically right that those sensors aren't for point-and-shoots. The largest of them are significantly bigger than APS-C.

However, they're also clearly not suited for DSLRs. They're designed for specialist applications where sensitivity and low noise is extremely important, to the expense of extremely high cost / low production volume, low resolution, etc. (4 megapixels for the largest of their BSI chips).
10-30-2009, 01:34 PM   #59
Veteran Member
glasbak's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 346
QuoteOriginally posted by knoxploration Quote
However, they're also clearly not suited for DSLRs. They're designed for specialist applications where sensitivity and low noise is extremely important, to the expense of extremely high cost / low production volume, low resolution, etc. (4 megapixels for the largest of their BSI chips).
Well, 25 years ago, CCD's were specialists expensive sensors, not suitable for consumer camera's of course...

BSI sensors simply have a better quantum efficiency, and if they find a way to make them as cost effective as traditional sensors, they will come to DSLR's also.
Reading all those posts complaining about high ISO noise etc. makes clear that every little bit improvement will be welcome.
10-31-2009, 10:41 AM   #60
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by glasbak Quote
Reading all those posts complaining about high ISO noise etc. makes clear that every little bit improvement will be welcome.
Well, if BSI is that important to improve quantum efficiency, how about getting rid of the Bayer filter, killer #1 in quantum efficiency?

My personal favorite is a completely filter-less design using CMOS with differently doped silicon layers to have different cross section response curves as a function of photon energy. And to record the registering layer. I don't think this idea is published, though Like the eye, it would only see gray in extremely low light

Last edited by falconeye; 10-31-2009 at 10:48 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
cmos, corporation, cypress, design, google, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pixel, semiconductor, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-x Sony Sensor vs K-7 Samsung Sensor karl79 Video and Pentax HDSLRs 9 09-23-2010 09:35 AM
pentax k-x sensor problem mRo Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 11 12-10-2009 05:35 PM
New Pentax CMOS sensor Busiko Pentax News and Rumors 26 03-28-2008 02:54 PM
Sensor cleaning: Pec-Pads or Sensor Swabs gadgetnu Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 29 09-24-2007 10:52 AM
Sensor cleaning > Sensor Swab > void warranty? Twinky Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 07-28-2007 01:10 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:55 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top