If squeezing small pixels makes noise...

Arpe · 02-22-2007, 04:35 PM

If squeezing more, smaller pixels (or the things that make the pixels, you know what I mean) onto a sensor makes noise on the image, why don't they just enlarge the sensor so more of the same size pixel-making-things can fit on? Therefore not increasing the noise levels? I can't see this as a problem, except for the DA lenses that have been made. But all the old lenses are still okay to use up to a full frame sensor.

-=JoN=- · 02-22-2007, 04:43 PM

Originally posted by Arpe

If squeezing more, smaller pixels (or the things that make the pixels, you know what I mean) onto a sensor makes noise on the image, why don't they just enlarge the sensor so more of the same size pixel-making-things can fit on? Therefore not increasing the noise levels? I can't see this as a problem, except for the DA lenses that have been made. But all the old lenses are still okay to use up to a full frame sensor.

price..thats the biggest issue with that.

the only bodies w/ FF's are well over 2 grand (the EOS 1D costs as much as a car)

so...until the tech gets cheaper..we're going to have to live with it

and even those are not perfect

FotoPete · 02-22-2007, 04:46 PM

Hey did you see the APS-H (1.3X) sensor from canon. The press release was marketing the same idea of bigger piexls on a bigger sensor. See Canon makes their own sensors while everyone here and at Nikon buys them from Sony.

slip · 02-22-2007, 08:00 PM

I wonder if anyone will try putting 2 or 4 small sensors together to act as one big one like they are are doing with processors (dual core, quad core, etc)
I would imagine it would be less expensive to make 2 or 4 separate sensors then one huge one.

for example 4 small sensors, each with 3 mg pixels per sensor, all acting as 12 mp.... could even make them (together) the same size as a full frame sensor the size of the canon ones

just an idea..

cheers

randy

-=JoN=- · 02-22-2007, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by slipchuck

I wonder if anyone will try putting 2 or 4 small sensors together to act as one big one like they are are doing with processors (dual core, quad core, etc)
I would imagine it would be less expensive to make 2 or 4 separate sensors then one huge one.

for example 4 small sensors, each with 3 mg pixels per sensor, all acting as 12 mp.... could even make them (together) the same size as a full frame sensor the size of the canon ones

just an idea..

cheers

randy

sigma sort of does that, SORT OF
(sigma sd14)

*isteve · 02-22-2007, 08:41 PM

Originally posted by slipchuck

I wonder if anyone will try putting 2 or 4 small sensors together to act as one big one like they are are doing with processors (dual core, quad core, etc)
I would imagine it would be less expensive to make 2 or 4 separate sensors then one huge one.

for example 4 small sensors, each with 3 mg pixels per sensor, all acting as 12 mp.... could even make them (together) the same size as a full frame sensor the size of the canon ones

just an idea..

cheers

randy

The active area of the sensor is not the whole surface...some surrounding circuitry is required for image processing and readout - so there would be a gap.
However, FF sensors ARE made from 2 smaller sensors, in a way. The largest mask is current use for production chips (of any type) are around APSC size - hence they can be made using a one-pass process in a standard foundry (which makes memory, processors etc) and are relatively cheap.
To make a FF sensor you need to use a 2-pass process - one for the left half and one for the right half. The alignment has to be perfect for the resulting chip to be defect free hence such processes are expensive and the yield is much lower. As a result, the chips themselves are about 10X the cost. Interestingly, the MF chip is about 2X FF size, so this is probably a 4 pass process.
The fact that existing foundries can be used makes production of CCDs and CMOS sensors cost effective. To build dedicated foundries would be very expensive given the number of devices produced (you need millions to break even).

RiceHigh · 02-22-2007, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by Arpe

If squeezing more, smaller pixels (or the things that make the pixels, you know what I mean) onto a sensor makes noise on the image, why don't they just enlarge the sensor so more of the same size pixel-making-things can fit on? Therefore not increasing the noise levels? I can't see this as a problem, except for the DA lenses that have been made. But all the old lenses are still okay to use up to a full frame sensor.

If the photo site size is kept and the pixel count is increased, the overall sensor area will be larger, much larger than the current APS-C 1.5X 135 FF crop, then it would become a FF DSLR, which Pentax is not capable to make one by themselves, without any available suitable FF sensor. Do note only Canon makes their own DSLR sensors so far, Fuji also has theirs but they don't really make the DSLR bodies.

Tom Brown · 02-22-2007, 08:54 PM

Am I the only one who feels 6mp is fantastic and 10mp is amazing?

There were big gains to be had by increasing resolution back in the sub 1mp days. These days, however, we have tons of resolution with fantastic noise qualities. I could care less about resolution advances.

-=JoN=- · 02-22-2007, 08:58 PM

Originally posted by Tom Brown

Am I the only one who feels 6mp is fantastic and 10mp is amazing?

There were big gains to be had by increasing resolution back in the sub 1mp days. These days, however, we have tons of resolution with fantastic noise qualities. I could care less about resolution advances.

I do...i still have my sub 1mp camera.

Arpe · 02-23-2007, 01:39 AM

Originally posted by Tom Brown

Am I the only one who feels 6mp is fantastic and 10mp is amazing?

There were big gains to be had by increasing resolution back in the sub 1mp days. These days, however, we have tons of resolution with fantastic noise qualities. I could care less about resolution advances.

Yes but if they could make the 10mp with way less noise you'd like that wouldn't you? What I'm saying is, if people want more pixels, just put more on a bigger sensor. I'm sure the cost argument won't hold up for ever if the past is anything to go by.

*isteve · 02-23-2007, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by Arpe

Yes but if they could make the 10mp with way less noise you'd like that wouldn't you? What I'm saying is, if people want more pixels, just put more on a bigger sensor. I'm sure the cost argument won't hold up for ever if the past is anything to go by.

Its the size of the photosites. The photosites only occupy a small % of the surface area (even less with CMOS). As a result, microlenses are needed to increase the light gathering power, but their small size also limits their capacity.

Improvements in sensor design can reduce the size of the other components (read out channels, aplifiers etc) and increase the sensitivity and well depth of the sensor. There is already more difference between makes of sensor than between sizes of sensor, so there is hope yet. Fuji have proved you can get improved DR and noise on an APS sensor with decent resolution just by improving the basic design.

trog100 · 02-23-2007, 12:30 PM

what always goes thru my mind is the thought that if they can do what they do with the average very small relativity speaking decent compact camera sensor they should be able to do better than we get with the average size dslr sensor..

i cant help but feel dslr technology is a few steps behind point and shoot technology..

owning a panasonic F20.. i do not see the gain i think i should be seeing in image quality from the average dslr.. a gain yes but not as great as it could or should be perhaps..

trog

*isteve · 02-23-2007, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by trog100

what always goes thru my mind is the thought that if they can do what they do with the average very small relativity speaking decent compact camera sensor they should be able to do better than we get with the average size dslr sensor..

i cant help but feel dslr technology is a few steps behind point and shoot technology..

owning a panasonic F20.. i do not see the gain i think i should be seeing in image quality from the average dslr.. a gain yes but not as great as it could or should be perhaps..

trog

Sensor design needs some imagination and people need to look carefully at the compact market to see that greater pixel density does NOT always equal more noise, in fact in general terms most current cameras have LESS noise than prior generations despite much higher pixel densities.
As you say, the SLR market with only 2 major suppliers is lagging somewhat. Now if Fuji would supply Nikon with their sensors....

Alvin · 02-23-2007, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by *isteve

As you say, the SLR market with only 2 major suppliers is lagging somewhat. Now if Fuji would supply Nikon with their sensors....

Fujifilm makes a phenomenal sensor and I'm surprised that they still aren't as big in the market. Other players would be Foveon(?) and Kodak.

nosnoop · 02-23-2007, 04:13 PM

There are rumors that Canon is working on a Foveon type 3 layer sensor design.

Another possibility - why not a 3CCDs design? 3CCD works wonders for Video; it should give amazing results for cameras. 3xAPS-C is probably cheaper than 1xFF sensor. The mirror box and the bulk are the problems. Perhaps when mirror-boxless design arrives, then 3CCD could become a reality.

02-22-2007, 04:35 PM	#1
Arpe Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,452	If squeezing small pixels makes noise... If squeezing more, smaller pixels (or the things that make the pixels, you know what I mean) onto a sensor makes noise on the image, why don't they just enlarge the sensor so more of the same size pixel-making-things can fit on? Therefore not increasing the noise levels? I can't see this as a problem, except for the DA lenses that have been made. But all the old lenses are still okay to use up to a full frame sensor.

02-22-2007, 08:41 PM	#6
*isteve Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 1,187	There would be a line down the middle!! Originally posted by slipchuck I wonder if anyone will try putting 2 or 4 small sensors together to act as one big one like they are are doing with processors (dual core, quad core, etc) I would imagine it would be less expensive to make 2 or 4 separate sensors then one huge one. for example 4 small sensors, each with 3 mg pixels per sensor, all acting as 12 mp.... could even make them (together) the same size as a full frame sensor the size of the canon ones just an idea.. cheers randy The active area of the sensor is not the whole surface...some surrounding circuitry is required for image processing and readout - so there would be a gap. However, FF sensors ARE made from 2 smaller sensors, in a way. The largest mask is current use for production chips (of any type) are around APSC size - hence they can be made using a one-pass process in a standard foundry (which makes memory, processors etc) and are relatively cheap. To make a FF sensor you need to use a 2-pass process - one for the left half and one for the right half. The alignment has to be perfect for the resulting chip to be defect free hence such processes are expensive and the yield is much lower. As a result, the chips themselves are about 10X the cost. Interestingly, the MF chip is about 2X FF size, so this is probably a 4 pass process. The fact that existing foundries can be used makes production of CCDs and CMOS sensors cost effective. To build dedicated foundries would be very expensive given the number of devices produced (you need millions to break even).

02-23-2007, 09:30 AM	#11
*isteve Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 1,187	The size of the sensor is not the issue Originally posted by Arpe Yes but if they could make the 10mp with way less noise you'd like that wouldn't you? What I'm saying is, if people want more pixels, just put more on a bigger sensor. I'm sure the cost argument won't hold up for ever if the past is anything to go by. Its the size of the photosites. The photosites only occupy a small % of the surface area (even less with CMOS). As a result, microlenses are needed to increase the light gathering power, but their small size also limits their capacity. Improvements in sensor design can reduce the size of the other components (read out channels, aplifiers etc) and increase the sensitivity and well depth of the sensor. There is already more difference between makes of sensor than between sizes of sensor, so there is hope yet. Fuji have proved you can get improved DR and noise on an APS sensor with decent resolution just by improving the basic design.

02-23-2007, 01:49 PM	#13
*isteve Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 1,187	I totally agree Originally posted by trog100 what always goes thru my mind is the thought that if they can do what they do with the average very small relativity speaking decent compact camera sensor they should be able to do better than we get with the average size dslr sensor.. i cant help but feel dslr technology is a few steps behind point and shoot technology.. owning a panasonic F20.. i do not see the gain i think i should be seeing in image quality from the average dslr.. a gain yes but not as great as it could or should be perhaps.. trog Sensor design needs some imagination and people need to look carefully at the compact market to see that greater pixel density does NOT always equal more noise, in fact in general terms most current cameras have LESS noise than prior generations despite much higher pixel densities. As you say, the SLR market with only 2 major suppliers is lagging somewhat. Now if Fuji would supply Nikon with their sensors....

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
My Pentax DSLR makes a rattling noise - is it defective? Something is loose inside!	Adam	Maintenance and Repair Articles	5	11-19-2019 07:25 AM
Focus Ring on DA 35 macro makes a clicking noise; manual focus ... this normal?	eadrian75	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	04-12-2011 12:51 AM
Nature Excuse me, Squeezing through!	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	5	02-20-2011 07:30 PM
Noise (like small motor running) while Live View is activated	brosen	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	10-14-2009 10:01 PM
K100D Super makes noise when I turn it on	jct us101	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	03-14-2009 12:46 PM

02-22-2007, 04:43 PM	#2
-=JoN=- Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NYC Posts: 999	Originally posted by Arpe If squeezing more, smaller pixels (or the things that make the pixels, you know what I mean) onto a sensor makes noise on the image, why don't they just enlarge the sensor so more of the same size pixel-making-things can fit on? Therefore not increasing the noise levels? I can't see this as a problem, except for the DA lenses that have been made. But all the old lenses are still okay to use up to a full frame sensor. price..thats the biggest issue with that. the only bodies w/ FF's are well over 2 grand (the EOS 1D costs as much as a car) so...until the tech gets cheaper..we're going to have to live with it and even those are not perfect

02-22-2007, 04:46 PM	#3
FotoPete Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,774	Hey did you see the APS-H (1.3X) sensor from canon. The press release was marketing the same idea of bigger piexls on a bigger sensor. See Canon makes their own sensors while everyone here and at Nikon buys them from Sony.

02-22-2007, 08:00 PM	#4
slip Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,535	I wonder if anyone will try putting 2 or 4 small sensors together to act as one big one like they are are doing with processors (dual core, quad core, etc) I would imagine it would be less expensive to make 2 or 4 separate sensors then one huge one. for example 4 small sensors, each with 3 mg pixels per sensor, all acting as 12 mp.... could even make them (together) the same size as a full frame sensor the size of the canon ones just an idea.. cheers randy

02-22-2007, 08:15 PM	#5
-=JoN=- Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NYC Posts: 999	Originally posted by slipchuck I wonder if anyone will try putting 2 or 4 small sensors together to act as one big one like they are are doing with processors (dual core, quad core, etc) I would imagine it would be less expensive to make 2 or 4 separate sensors then one huge one. for example 4 small sensors, each with 3 mg pixels per sensor, all acting as 12 mp.... could even make them (together) the same size as a full frame sensor the size of the canon ones just an idea.. cheers randy sigma sort of does that, SORT OF (sigma sd14)

02-22-2007, 08:53 PM	#7
RiceHigh Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,934	Originally posted by Arpe If squeezing more, smaller pixels (or the things that make the pixels, you know what I mean) onto a sensor makes noise on the image, why don't they just enlarge the sensor so more of the same size pixel-making-things can fit on? Therefore not increasing the noise levels? I can't see this as a problem, except for the DA lenses that have been made. But all the old lenses are still okay to use up to a full frame sensor. If the photo site size is kept and the pixel count is increased, the overall sensor area will be larger, much larger than the current APS-C 1.5X 135 FF crop, then it would become a FF DSLR, which Pentax is not capable to make one by themselves, without any available suitable FF sensor. Do note only Canon makes their own DSLR sensors so far, Fuji also has theirs but they don't really make the DSLR bodies.

02-22-2007, 08:54 PM	#8
Tom Brown Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Saskatchewan, Canada Posts: 106	Am I the only one who feels 6mp is fantastic and 10mp is amazing? There were big gains to be had by increasing resolution back in the sub 1mp days. These days, however, we have tons of resolution with fantastic noise qualities. I could care less about resolution advances.

02-22-2007, 08:58 PM	#9
-=JoN=- Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NYC Posts: 999	Originally posted by Tom Brown Am I the only one who feels 6mp is fantastic and 10mp is amazing? There were big gains to be had by increasing resolution back in the sub 1mp days. These days, however, we have tons of resolution with fantastic noise qualities. I could care less about resolution advances. I do...i still have my sub 1mp camera.

02-23-2007, 01:39 AM	#10
Arpe Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,452 Original Poster	Originally posted by Tom Brown Am I the only one who feels 6mp is fantastic and 10mp is amazing? There were big gains to be had by increasing resolution back in the sub 1mp days. These days, however, we have tons of resolution with fantastic noise qualities. I could care less about resolution advances. Yes but if they could make the 10mp with way less noise you'd like that wouldn't you? What I'm saying is, if people want more pixels, just put more on a bigger sensor. I'm sure the cost argument won't hold up for ever if the past is anything to go by.

02-23-2007, 12:30 PM	#12
trog100 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: UK Posts: 642	what always goes thru my mind is the thought that if they can do what they do with the average very small relativity speaking decent compact camera sensor they should be able to do better than we get with the average size dslr sensor.. i cant help but feel dslr technology is a few steps behind point and shoot technology.. owning a panasonic F20.. i do not see the gain i think i should be seeing in image quality from the average dslr.. a gain yes but not as great as it could or should be perhaps.. trog

02-23-2007, 03:25 PM	#14
Alvin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Mississauga, Ontario, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,517	Originally posted by *isteve As you say, the SLR market with only 2 major suppliers is lagging somewhat. Now if Fuji would supply Nikon with their sensors.... Fujifilm makes a phenomenal sensor and I'm surprised that they still aren't as big in the market. Other players would be Foveon(?) and Kodak.

02-23-2007, 04:13 PM	#15
nosnoop Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1,299	There are rumors that Canon is working on a Foveon type 3 layer sensor design. Another possibility - why not a 3CCDs design? 3CCD works wonders for Video; it should give amazing results for cameras. 3xAPS-C is probably cheaper than 1xFF sensor. The mirror box and the bulk are the problems. Perhaps when mirror-boxless design arrives, then 3CCD could become a reality.