Canon files a patent for Foveon-type sensor

[feppe]

Here. Since it was filed in December of 2009, the sensor itself has been in development for at least two years. Anyone know what the R&D cycle for these kinds of things is, ie. when can we expect announcements?

[uaiomex]

I bet Sony is working too on their own foveon-type sensor technology too. So far, this is the only sound new technology that promises better IQ besides increasing pixels. I think that if nothing else different and better is cooking now, the foveon-type sensor is the future of sensors. It just needs more money for development and application. If the biggies are interested now and not before, maybe it was because the technology was ahead of its time and now is ready, who knows.
Eduardo

Here. Since it was filed in December of 2009, the sensor itself has been in development for at least two years. Anyone know what the R&D cycle for these kinds of things is, ie. when can we expect announcements?

[Peter McLennan]

I dunno.  Sony's brand new F65 Digital Cinema camera still uses a Bayer pattern sensor.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Here. Since it was filed in December of 2009, the sensor itself has been in development for at least two years. Anyone know what the R&D cycle for these kinds of things is, ie. when can we expect announcements?

Canon has been one of the world's highest number of patents generating companies for many years in a row. That doesn't mean that all patents actually make it to become real products. Patents are used to protect one's research investments, and to block competition. There is no benefit for Canon to prematurely kill their own lucrative business based on relatively mature technology, because that's where the money comes in.

Canon follows the markting path of slow evolutionary technology improvements, not revolutionary ones. Therefore, don't hold your breath ...

Cheers,
Bart

[feppe]

I dunno.  Sony's brand new F65 Digital Cinema camera still uses a Bayer pattern sensor.

Sony can still be developing other sensors - Eduardo might be right.