Is Fujifilm testing the big Sony Sensor?

[jsiva]

I think Captain Kirk is way cooler than Han Solo.

[Wayne Fox]

This is interesting as I had always thought that the x-trans had a different layout of pixels than the standard Bayer pattern.

If all it is instead is a color filter array over a Bayer pattern then I guess it would be quite possible.

I forgot they already have the glass out there as don't they make some of the Hasselblad glass? 

Paul C

yeah, difference is where the various color filters are placed.  I don't recall why it's supposed to be advantageous, always thought with all of the greens basically next to each other it would be harder to interpolate the original color.

[Wayne Fox]

I also wonder if Fuji will continue with xTrans.  From what I understand, the denser the sensels get on the sensor, the less of an advantage of xTrans becomes. I think there are rumors Fuji is planning on moving away from it so the files can be handled better in raw processing software.

[eronald]

yeah, difference is where the various color filters are placed.  I don't recall why it's supposed to be advantageous, always thought with all of the greens basically next to each other it would be harder to interpolate the original color.

They get color smearing instead of the usual aliasing effects.

Edmund

[JV]

They get color smearing instead of the usual aliasing effects.

Edmund

Color smearing was an issue with LR 2-3 years ago, I am not sure whether it still is, other raw converters like Iridient worked fine.

[eronald]

Color smearing was an issue with LR 2-3 years ago, I am not sure whether it still is, other raw converters like Iridient worked fine.

yeah, well nobody is going to get past the sampling theorem - you'll still get aliasing effects if you have high spatial frequencies in your scene.  It's not that Xtrans or whatever they call it is better or worse than straight Bayer, it's just different. IMHO. Some people may find they like the Xtrans issues better than the Bayer ones, and besides Fuji knows a lot about color and probably have very nice CFAs and good profiles.

Edmund

[chez]

i'm surprised so many people didn't know that Sony made the sensors for fuji.

yeah, x-trans has a different colour filter array...so?

i would be surprised if fuji didn't continue with sony sensors for their MF bodies in future.

Yep with MF being such a small market, does not seem to make much business sense to spend all that research and development money on your own sensor.

[Theodoros]

Yep with MF being such a small market, does not seem to make much business sense to spend all that research and development money on your own sensor.

MF is a small market because of the "traditional" makers that have kept the prices high all that time and were "trading" S/H equipment that never saw the market again, thus restricting its marketing base... This doesn't mean that it will stay that way... If a maker makes a reasonable offering of high quality, people won't say "it's MF, I won't buy it!" They'll treat it just like a camera and according to their needs, its value and its price... People don't buy Ferraris not because they don't want one... They don't buy them because they can't afford one... IMO there is no reason why MF market has shrunk from the film days, other than that the price ratio difference changed from the film days... and there was no reason for that to happen... "more expensive" doesn't necessarily means "crazy price"...

[JV]

I would be interesting to know what the market share of Pentax is nowadays.

The 645D is available at $3,399 and the 645Z at $7K. 

I would assume that Pentax by now must have a market share that is as big as Phase, Hasselblad and Leica together...

[Theodoros]

I would be interesting to know what the market share of Pentax is nowadays.

The 645D is available at $3,399 and the 645Z at $7K. 

I would assume that Pentax by now must have a market share that is as big as Phase, Hasselblad and Leica together...

It's not that big, but its big enough and growing... It could be as big and even bigger if Pentax had addressed the problems the original (from the film days) design was suffering, but they didn't.... One thing is for sure... that being that Pentax added customers to the MF market much more than "stealing" customers from the rest...

[Theodoros]

yeah, difference is where the various color filters are placed.  I don't recall why it's supposed to be advantageous, always thought with all of the greens basically next to each other it would be harder to interpolate the original color.

Actually it's easier to interpolate the original color because each third line has as many greens, as blues and reds...

[Miyata610]

I don't want a Ferrari.

[drevil]

theodoros are you on a personal war here?

none of us know if fuji is testing in house sensors or sony sensors.
none of us know for sure how many cameras pentax is selling.

my personal take, it would save fuji alot of money to simply take the sony option, the sensors exist already and dont need to be researched first hand.
although competition is always good.

even canon mentioned that "if sensors of others are better, we would consider them in our cameras", of course this was alot of bla bla because canon clearly lost the pole position for some time and seems to losing ground every year.

just lean back and enjoy the show, i am looking forward to what fuji may offer in the future regarding MF

[eronald]

Actually Pentax is or was selling well, my dealer told me.

We seem to have a number of satisfied customers on the forum.

I don't want to use a Pentax, but I haven't heard any buyer complain.

My guess is Pentax would be happy to be able to do a product refresh.

Edmund

theodoros are you on a personal war here?

none of us know if fuji is testing in house sensors or sony sensors.
none of us know for sure how many cameras pentax is selling.

my personal take, it would save fuji alot of money to simply take the sony option, the sensors exist already and dont need to be researched first hand.
although competition is always good.

even canon mentioned that "if sensors of others are better, we would consider them in our cameras", of course this was alot of bla bla because canon clearly lost the pole position for some time and seems to losing ground every year.

just lean back and enjoy the show, i am looking forward to what fuji may offer in the future regarding MF

[synn]

Color smearing was an issue with LR 2-3 years ago, I am not sure whether it still is, other raw converters like Iridient worked fine.

I posted several examples in the forum to get decent output from the Fuji files in C1P. There are no real smearing issues once you process them right in C1P.

LR output is still a hot mess.

[Theodoros]

My guess is Pentax would be happy to be able to do a product refresh.

Well, it may be late now to do so.... The original (film) Pentax 645 had two crucial handicaps with respect to competition at the days: 1. They had the longest mounting distance by far 2.There was no interchangeable film backs...

With the digital version of the camera, they decided to keep the old mount and use a much smaller image area than what the lens mounting distance is capable to serve (the lens mounting distance of the P645 is enough to serve a 6x6 image area). I think they would be much better off if they had gone for a much shorter mounting distance with the introduction of the digital body and just use adapters to attract the old customers/owners of lenses. I'm sure if Fuji will ever enter the MF market, it will be a much more modern approach...

IMO, Fuji won't be using the Sony sensor (filter converted or not) if they do enter the MF market for four good reasons:

1. They are among the older image sensor makers (with revolutionary sensors at the times) in the world and thus they would like to differentiate them selves from competition.
2. Unlike their mass production production products, they are traditionally known to be innovative when it comes to MF products.
3. It will be a good chance for them to enter the professional video market with a hybrid product as to support their cinema lenses further (especially now that the best cinema camera in the world - the Alexa 65 - is using their lenses...
4. It would be a good chance for them to sell the sensor to other makers that would like to differentiate themselves from the "Sony sensor domination" and thus to minimize the financial risk.

I think that Mr. Takashi is very careful with his end words : "We have a good history in the medium format market, and I think we would be successful again. We have the technology to make a very modern and high quality camera, but right now we are only investigating." ...he said.

[yashima]

Actually Fuji had a really interesting sensor in the Fuji S5 Pro, beautiful rendering, high DR even for today's standard. It's a shame that they never followed that up.

[Theodoros]

Actually Fuji had a really interesting sensor in the Fuji S5 Pro, beautiful rendering, high DR even for today's standard. It's a shame that they never followed that up.

Sure... but don't forget that S5 costed 50% higher than a D200 did (practically the same camera but with different sensor) and additionally the CCD sensor offered very good LV mode... (which nobody noticed at the times)... Well... marketing! One must note though that the "mistake" was that the sensor was of APS-c size... IMO, the big mistake was that one doesn't enter the market with a revolutionary sensor in a (size) category that is "damned" by definition within "experts of photography"... That isn't to say that the product failed... to the contradict, there many "swearing" by it even today...

NOTE: The S-5 pro was considered to be the (by far) "DR KING" a decade ago and it was an APS-c sensor CCD camera that could shoot "safely" up to 1000 ISO and additionally offered usable (on screen) LV... Octagonal pixels! ...(they are "crazy" those Fuji guys...  ) had six of them!

[BJL]

Actually Fuji had a really interesting sensor in the Fuji S5 Pro, beautiful rendering, high DR even for today's standard. It's a shame that they never followed that up.

Yes, Fujifilm did some interesting things with its "SuperCCD" technology, but was hampered by things like its dependence on Nikon for bodies and lenses, and AFAIK, has not developed any of its own CMOS sensor technology other than exotic color filter arrays . . . It seems to have decided that its core competencies are better suited to designing interesting bodies and lenses and CFAs, while leaving the core sensor technology to electonics companies like Sony.

[uaiomex]

But wouldn't this far mounting flange be a real advantage in digital?
Even Rodenstock hottest lenses have some retrofocus these days and some people are expecting for them to increase it even more.
Eduardo

Well, it may be late now to do so.... The original (film) Pentax 645 had two crucial handicaps with respect to competition at the days: 1. They had the longest mounting distance by far 2.There was no interchangeable film backs...

With the digital version of the camera, they decided to keep the old mount and use a much smaller image area than what the lens mounting distance is capable to serve (the lens mounting distance of the P645 is enough to serve a 6x6 image area). I think they would be much better off if they had gone for a much shorter mounting distance with the introduction of the digital body and just use adapters to attract the old customers/owners of lenses. I'm sure if Fuji will ever enter the MF market, it will be a much more modern approach...