Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: Paul2660 on March 19, 2017, 08:37:41 am
-
Interesting read:
http://nikonrumors.com/2017/03/18/sony-to-no-longer-sell-certain-sensors-to-third-party-manufacturers.aspx/#more-111049
You have to read the full article while it's still in cache on Google.
Personally I wish Sony all the best!!. It will be interesting to see if this has any effect on Nikon, Fuji, and even P1 or Hasselblad.
Paul Caldwell
-
Interesting read:
http://nikonrumors.com/2017/03/18/sony-to-no-longer-sell-certain-sensors-to-third-party-manufacturers.aspx/#more-111049
You have to read the full article while it's still in cache on Google.
Personally I wish Sony all the best!!. It will be interesting to see if this has any effect on Nikon, Fuji, and even P1 or Hasselblad.
Paul Caldwell
fake news by Democrats running I-R, they were already forced to withdrew that published interview article ;D
-
Many a truth is said in jest.
Time will tell. Nikon has discontinued the manufacturing of the D810 and so far has nothing new coming out that I have seen.
Paul Caldwell
-
Time will tell. Nikon has discontinued the manufacturing of the D810 and so far has nothing new coming out that I have seen.
Is that a fact or a rumor?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I believe it to be fact as it came across the news wire a while back. I will try to find the anno from Nikon. I was surprised when I read it since no follow on was announced at CP+
Paul Caldwell
-
No reason to read the article, Sony will continue to provide sensors for the masses and specialty markets until another competitor makes it not profitable to further do so. Anyway contracts with third party entities are likely years out.
Really fake news
-
No reason to read the article, Sony will continue to provide sensors for the masses and specialty markets until another competitor makes it not profitable to further do so. Anyway contracts with third party entities are likely years out.
Really fake news
They'll keep providing sensors, but there's no reason for them to provide their best sensor. Especially when their second-best sensor is still better than anything else out there. Keep the best for themselves, to give their own cameras a leg up on the competition, then sell everyone else their second-best, to compete among each other.
There is another competitor out there - Sony itself. If Sony sold off their best sensor, that would leave Sony cameras with no trump card with which to compete against others. It would be like Nikon selling the D5 AF system, for anyone else to use - it would take away the selling point of their top camera, and wouldn't be a very smart thing to do.
-
There is another competitor out there - Sony itself. If Sony sold off their best sensor, that would leave Sony cameras with no trump card with which to compete against others. It would be like Nikon selling the D5 AF system, for anyone else to use - it would take away the selling point of their top camera, and wouldn't be a very smart thing to do.
It would be similar if Nikon had a business unit selling AF modules.
Besides, the a7 series has been successful without sensor differentiation till now (at least compared to Nikon).
Cheers,
Bernard
-
It would be similar if Nikon had a business unit selling AF modules.
Besides, the a7 series has been successful without sensor differentiation till now (at least compared to Nikon).
Cheers,
Bernard
The A7r succeeded in no small part due to its ability to take Canon lenses via the Metabones adapter, and Canon's significant sensor deficiency (which has yet to be corrected among sensors in the 36-50MP range). Without that, it is unlikely that it would have been anywhere near as successful as it was. Sony knew this, since they were offering a free Metabones adapter with every A7/A7r body for more than a year after it was launched.
The A7r2 has a better sensor for high resolution/detail use than any other full-frame body out there, with the exception of the Pentax in pixel shift mode (which is really cheating, since it uses four separate exposures to get the image - not really comparable). Not only does it perform well at low ISO, but, unlike the 36MP sensors sold by Sony and used by others, it also performs well at high ISO, matching the high-ISO noise and DR of the D5 (normalised for resolution) while maintaining a resolution advantage. If it merely retained the original 36MP sensor, it is doubtful if it would have done as well.
-
The a7rII is a bit better than the D810, the difference is of low significance in the real world.
Now, Canon was indeed far behind, they have mostly caught up. Sensors are unlikely to make a big difference moving forward. This being true btw cameras but most importantly relative to the actual needs of most people.
Just see the success of the Fuji X-T2 with its Sony APS-C sensor. Do you think that Fuji is utteely concerned whether they will get access to the latest breed of Sony APS-C sensor for the X-T3?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The a7rII is a bit better than the D810, the difference is of low significance in the real world.
At low ISO, yes.
But the A7r2 holds up much better than the D810 - and A7r - at high ISOs. Not that the latter two are hopeless, but the difference is quite noticeable at, say, ISO 6400-12800, shooting live theatre or music using eye detection AF. The A7r2 can match the 1Dx2 and D5 image quality-wise, while the 36MP sensor lags behind.
Now, Canon was indeed far behind, they have mostly caught up. Sensors are unlikely to make a big difference moving forward. This being true btw cameras but most importantly relative to the actual needs of most people.
All it takes is one leap in technology. The transition from off-chip to on-chip column-parallel A/D conversion was one such leap. CCD to CMOS was another.
BSI has the potential to deliver this - put a capacitor behind each photosite (possible due to the three-dimensional nature of the circuitry) and you're suddenly looking at possible ISOs several stops lower, and 20 stops of more of DR.
Or something replacing silicon and leading to a big improvement in quantum efficiency, leading to much less noise at the same ISO.
Or a multilayer sensor (like an improved Foveon) capable of distinguishing colour in each pixel, leading to improved colour accuracy and resolution and reduced artifacts.
Just see the success of the Fuji X-T2 with its Sony APS-C sensor. Do you think that Fuji is utteely concerned whether they will get access to the latest breed of Sony APS-C sensor for the X-T3?
I doubt Sony considers any APS-C sensors to be part of a line worth protecting and monopolising.
-
There is another competitor out there - Sony itself. If Sony sold off their best sensor, that would leave Sony cameras with no trump card with which to compete against others.
Perhaps Nikon needs a Trump branded DSLR with optional 24K Gold Plate option. That would surely stir the pot (sales).
-
Surely a Trump branded camera would simply insist the photographs it took were the greatest photographs ever, better than any other photographs, and add that it took better photographs than any other camera, and any information to suggest otherwise was just fake news/alternative facts. Then it woud go & play golf.
-
Surely a Trump branded camera would simply insist the photographs it took were the greatest photographs ever, better than any other photographs, and add that it took better photographs than any other camera, and any information to suggest otherwise was just fake news/alternative facts. Then it woud go & play golf.
It would be just something else for the Commies and Alt Left to bitch about.
-
Hi,
The Sony A7rII has dual gain conversion, a technology that Sony has licensed from Aptina, originally. That feature reduces read noise significantly above 640 ISO.
I guess that Sony or Nikon can have their own sensors. If Sony Imaging sponsors development of a sensor the availability of that sensor may be limited to Sony Imaging. If Nikon sponsors the development of a sensor, it is feasible that Nikon would have exclusive rights to that sensor.
Nikon, like any other vendor, is free to look for solutions from other vendors, like Toshiba or Jazz Tower just to mention some examples.
Best regards
Erik
At low ISO, yes.
But the A7r2 holds up much better than the D810 - and A7r - at high ISOs. Not that the latter two are hopeless, but the difference is quite noticeable at, say, ISO 6400-12800, shooting live theatre or music using eye detection AF. The A7r2 can match the 1Dx2 and D5 image quality-wise, while the 36MP sensor lags behind.
All it takes is one leap in technology. The transition from off-chip to on-chip column-parallel A/D conversion was one such leap. CCD to CMOS was another.
BSI has the potential to deliver this - put a capacitor behind each photosite (possible due to the three-dimensional nature of the circuitry) and you're suddenly looking at possible ISOs several stops lower, and 20 stops of more of DR.
Or something replacing silicon and leading to a big improvement in quantum efficiency, leading to much less noise at the same ISO.
Or a multilayer sensor (like an improved Foveon) capable of distinguishing colour in each pixel, leading to improved colour accuracy and resolution and reduced artifacts.
I doubt Sony considers any APS-C sensors to be part of a line worth protecting and monopolising.
-
fake news by Democrats running I-R, they were already forced to withdrew that published interview article ;D
Although that theory sounds like fun... Reading one Fred Miranda forums: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1481136/2#13966495 looks like IR forgot to send the interview to Sony to double check before publishing and the guy decided to delete it... If that true, he probably created more speculation doing that...
Anyway, Sony already said some years ago that some sensor designs are going to be used in exclusivity by Sony cameras https://www.dpreview.com/articles/0661793352/photokina-2014-sony-interview-we-still-need-to-create-more-lenses , probably the sensors the camera division puts a lot of requirements making an specific design...
-
"Terrible! Just found out Paul Caldwell is posting fake news stories about Sony sensors on the Luminous-Landscape forums. SAD!" - Donald J Trump, 2017.
-
That's me, and I just got unmasked today also!!.
Paul Caldwell
-
... :)
-
Didn't Nikon or Leica have a gold plated commemorative camera a while back?
-
Didn't Nikon or Leica have a gold plated commemorative camera a while back?
I think it was a Leica but it may have been a 'Blad or a Nikon.
-
I think many here don't quite realize the consequences this decision would have.
Considering the corporate culture in Japan, Sony cutting off Nikon and the rest of the market from best in breed sensors will be perceived as an act of war.
The only possible decision from all the other camera companies is to stop sourcing sensors from Sony as soon as they can. Within 2-3 years this will probably mean the end of Sony's supremacy in imaging sensors because Nikon will fund the R&D of a competitor just like Nikon has funded the development of Exmor based APS-C and FF sensors.
Would that be a smart move?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
They're not selling their top-line sensor to anyone else either. Nikon's not being singled out.
It's not like other Japanese companies don't keep their top-tier products in-house too. I don't see Nikon selling their AF system, or Canon making their 200-400 f/4 in F-mount or E-mount. So why should Sony make their top-tier Exmor available to everyone else?
-
I am sure you can figure out the obvious difference by yourself!;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I think it was a Leica but it may have been a 'Blad or a Nikon.
And the answer is:
Gold plated commorative cameras. (http://tinyurl.com/mc9hact)
- Leica, Nikon & 'Blad.
-
I am sure you can figure out the obvious difference by yourself!;)
Cheers,
Bernard
I don't see how you can expect Sony to sell their top-tier components to all their direct competitors, while not expect Nikon or Canon to do the same.
-
I don't see how you can expect Sony to sell their top-tier components to all their direct competitors, while not expect Nikon or Canon to do the same.
I can see that.
Just one hint, is Nikon in the business of selling AF modules, have they been selling AF modules in the past, has any customer of their AF modules been selling 10 times more cameras than themselves using these modules,... I could go on for a few minutes if I didn't have to have my shoes checked at the New Zealand bio-hasard check point.
I am not saying that Sony won't do it, just that it would be a stupid move.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Good point, and it's obvious that the bottleneck of the the Sony supply is still being felt in the industry due to the damage from the earthquake last year. Many APS-C cameras are still not readily available and the X1D and GFX are still shipping in an extremely limited supply. Of course that could be due to other reasons within each company.
Paul Caldwell
-
I continue to be skeptical about the idea of Sony trying to take ILC sales away from Nikon by limiting what sensors it will provide—an idea that has been debated on and off for over a decade. Sony would have to weigh wins and losses from the various ways that purchasing decision would change for people who would buy a Nikon SLR if they continue to have full access to Sony sensors.
Wins: customers who change to buying a Sony EVF camera.
Losses: customers who change to buying a Canon SLR with non-Sony sensor, or who stay with Nikon, now getting a model with a non-Sony sensor.
About break-even: customers who stay with Nikon and buy a camera with a slightly inferior model of Sony sensor, or who change to some other brand, most of which use Sony sensors.
My guess is that the high-end strength of the big two SLR systems, with their lens selection, AF, metering, and optical viewfinders, would make the losses outweigh the gains.
-
Hi,
Canon's recent sensors use new technology and are catching up in DR, but Sony is still the leader regarding DR.
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Sony%20ILCE-7RII
Best regards
Erik
I don't think that Sony being the only provider of high end camera sensors is an ideal scenario. Whether the rumor is true or not, this shows how many camera makers are dependent on the decisions of another company that is also competing in the camera market.
But then again, what to do. I've been waiting for Canon to come up with a sensor not even as good as the Sony alternative, but at least 'better' than what they have now, in terms of DR, to no luck. Another rumor is that the 5DS/DS R won't even get a replacement this year.
-
I continue to be skeptical about the idea of Sony trying to take ILC sales away from Nikon by limiting what sensors it will provide—an idea that has been debated on and off for over a decade. Sony would have to weigh wins and losses from the various ways that purchasing decision would change for people who would buy a Nikon SLR if they continue to have full access to Sony sensors.
Wins: customers who change to buying a Sony EVF camera.
Losses: customers who change to buying a Canon SLR with non-Sony sensor, or who stay with Nikon, now getting a model with a non-Sony sensor.
About break-even: customers who stay with Nikon and buy a camera with a slightly inferior model of Sony sensor, or who change to some other brand, most of which use Sony sensors.
My guess is that the high-end strength of the big two SLR systems, with their lens selection, AF, metering, and optical viewfinders, would make the losses outweigh the gains.
Agree. Sony will be doing only damage to itself if they don't sell the sensors they make, and they make a lot of sensors. I'm sure they probably keep the best out of the factory for themselves (with CMOS you can always have some sensors with a bunch of dead pixels or some other defects that lower slightly the performance but are still usable). They do make a profit selling sensors to others, while the internal camera division doesn't have to pay for them (or they just move money around to cover costs).
Sony knows well they don't have anything that can compete with Canon and Nikon in their respective markets, so they will only be losing money by cutting Nikon away. Even cutting supply to other MILC makers like Olympus and Fuji will be bad for their business, as those will just find someone else to get the sensors from.
Competitors are going to sell their cameras no matter what, people buy them not for the sensors but for the features. Sony isn't stupid and knows this well, this is why they will never stop selling sensors to anyone willing to buy.
-
Agree. Sony will be doing only damage to itself if they don't sell the sensors they make, and they make a lot of sensors. I'm sure they probably keep the best out of the factory for themselves (with CMOS you can always have some sensors with a bunch of dead pixels or some other defects that lower slightly the performance but are still usable). They do make a profit selling sensors to others, while the internal camera division doesn't have to pay for them (or they just move money around to cover costs).
Sony knows well they don't have anything that can compete with Canon and Nikon in their respective markets, so they will only be losing money by cutting Nikon away. Even cutting supply to other MILC makers like Olympus and Fuji will be bad for their business, as those will just find someone else to get the sensors from.
Competitors are going to sell their cameras no matter what, people buy them not for the sensors but for the features. Sony isn't stupid and knows this well, this is why they will never stop selling sensors to anyone willing to buy.
No-one said Sony's going to choke off the sensor supply entire. Just that they won't sell them their best ones.
There's no reason Sony has to sell Nikon/Pentax their best sensors when their second best are already better than anyone else's best. If Sony keeps their best model of sensor for themselves, and sells the second-best, Nikon, Pentax and others are still going to buy it. It's not like they can make a better one themselves, or buy it from elsewhere. It's Sony's second-best or nothing.
Then consumers are left with a choice - move to Sony if you want the best sensor (helped by Metabones and other adapters to ease the transition), or stick with Nikon if you want to use their features. Sony wins either way - either you buy their camera, or you buy their sensor. Meanwhile, Sony continues improving the other parts of the camera (AF, EVFs, etc.), capitalising on the aspects that cannot be replicated without real-time through-the-sensor focusing, while gradually winning converts over as they maintain their sensor edge and improve their lens collection and other features.
-
Hi,
I guess it is more like Sony is making some sensors for Sony imaging. The 42 MP sensor may be such a sensor. We have at least not seen it in a non Sony camera.
It is also feasible that a customer, say Nikon, specifies a sensor and pays for development costs. Nikon may have exclusive rights for that sensor for a period of time. The Nikon D800 sensor may be an example of that.
Best regards
Erik
No-one said Sony's going to choke off the sensor supply entire. Just that they won't sell them their best ones.
There's no reason Sony has to sell Nikon/Pentax their best sensors when their second best are already better than anyone else's best. If Sony keeps their best model of sensor for themselves, and sells the second-best, Nikon, Pentax and others are still going to buy it. It's not like they can make a better one themselves, or buy it from elsewhere. It's Sony's second-best or nothing.
Then consumers are left with a choice - move to Sony if you want the best sensor (helped by Metabones and other adapters to ease the transition), or stick with Nikon if you want to use their features. Sony wins either way - either you buy their camera, or you buy their sensor. Meanwhile, Sony continues improving the other parts of the camera (AF, EVFs, etc.), capitalising on the aspects that cannot be replicated without real-time through-the-sensor focusing, while gradually winning converts over as they maintain their sensor edge and improve their lens collection and other features.
-
Image Resource has corrected the interview: http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2017/03/26/sony-thailand-factory-tour-qa-mapping-out-the-future-of-the-interchangeable IR took the interview down when they realized they forgot to double check with Sony the text, as they usually do with all interviews, here is an extract:
Kenji Tanaka/Sony: As you know well, our key driver is the image sensor, and we already invested a lot of money for the image sensor development. And the sensor is a custom [design, meaning that] only Sony can use these sensors, and our strength is our in-house technology. So I invested in that and we will keep investing in the in-house technology like image sensors.
[An extended editorial note from Dave Etchells: This has been the subject of a *lot* of misinformation, misinterpretation and speculation on the 'web, so let me attempt to set the record straight...
This at first glance was new information for me; since as far as I had been aware, other manufacturers always eventually got access to the same sensors that were used in Sony cameras. Instead, Tanaka-san was saying that there would be some developments that were co-developed by Sony's camera division, and that those would of course remain proprietary.
(I'd initially said that I thought there was a time delay involved, between when Sony could use the most advanced sensors in their own cameras vs when competing camera makers had access to the tech, but they informed me that there was no public position to that effect, and particularly no timeline for that sort of thing. - I'd said that other makers got access to the most advanced sensors a year after the Sony camera engineers did, but there appears to be no such official timeline.)
What clearly seems to be the case, though, is that Sony camera engineers are able to work with Sony's sensor engineers, to develop unique system architectures that take advantage of their unique integration capabilities, when creating their own cameras.
It's important to note that this isn't in any way a matter of holding back "higher-quality" sensors to disadvantage competitors. When it comes to quantum efficiency and fundamental noise levels, we're up against fundamental physical limits, with all the manufacturers. The limiting factor in extremely high-ISO noise levels isn't an issue with the silicon or a particular fab process, it's the "shot noise" that results from random variations in how many photons arrive at each pixel in a given time. If Sony were to somehow dial back specs in the sensors they offer competing camera manufacturers, other sensor makers would rapidly step in to fill that gap.
Instead, Sony's advantage is that their camera engineers can collaborate directly with their sensor-engineering team, to jointly develop new system architectures that fully leverage their exceptional integration technology.
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
The clarfication is pretty clear,...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Sony's advantage is that their camera engineers can collaborate directly with their sensor-engineering team, to jointly develop new system architectures that fully leverage their exceptional integration technology.
Sounds good but I wonder how effective that is in practice. I have always marveled at how Nikon cameras seem to be able to eek something extra (http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D7200,Nikon%20D750,Sony%20ILCE-6000,Sony%20ILCE-7M2) out of Sony sensors compared to Sony cameras. Kudos to Nikon engineers.
Jack
-
Talk about eeking an extra amount from a Sony sensor, consider what Pentax did with the same 36MP sensor with the K1. Still impresses me. Amazing value.
Paul Caldwell
-
Sounds good but I wonder how effective that is in practice. I have always marveled at how Nikon cameras seem to be able to eek something extra (http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D7200,Nikon%20D750,Sony%20ILCE-6000,Sony%20ILCE-7M2) out of Sony sensors compared to Sony cameras. Kudos to Nikon engineers
Also, I was thinking that if the D500 and D5 sensors are made by Sony... those must be specific designs for Nikon... no other manufacturer is using those 20Mpx sensors...
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Adjusting for the spin that a Sony rep. is likely to put on the facts, this is my interpretation:
Sony Semiconductor Solutions Corporation (http://www.sony-semicon.co.jp) designs some sensors "on spec" for sale to all comers, like the ones listed at http://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/products_en/IS/sensor2/products/index.html However it also collaborates with some large customers to design and produce sensors that are exclusive to that customer, either permanently or for a period of exclusivity. Nikon and Sony have partnered like this a number of times going back to the CCD era; more recently this has been done with Sony Imaging, Phase One, and Fujifilm (the last only customizing CFAs and micro-lenses, not the electronic part).