Is there a Sony 24x36mm sensor?

[BJL]

In the What's New section, Michael says

And let's not forget the other elephant in the room, Sony. They will soon be putting their full frame chip technology into a new flagship A series camera built upon the solid technology acquired recently from Konica Minolta.

Does Sony have such sensor technology? It seems from Nikon's press release and Rob Galbraith's discussion that Nikon has designed the sensor for the D3 itself, as it did with the LBCAST sensor of the D2H.

The D300 does seem to use the recently announced Sony sensor: I suppose that for the more price sensitive higher volume market sectors, improved economies of scale favor technology sharing and outsourcing, but when you are aiming for the top of the heap, you want some exclusive technological advantages.


P.S. Some production numbers I have seen

- 2,000/mo for both the 1Ds and 1DsMkII: I have not seen a number for the 1Ds MkIII, but with the same price, it is probably similar
- 4,000/mo for the 1D MkII (again, probably similar for the 1D MkIII)
The above two give a hint as to why Nikon has targeted the market of the 1D rather than the 1Ds, at least for now.
- 8,000 or 10,000/mo for the 5D, at least initially.
- 12,000/mo ongoing for the D3 (Source: Rob Galbraith's article)
- 60,000/mo for the D300 (Rob Galbraith again), and about 500,000/mo current total DSLR sales --- just to remind people that all these "larger than APS-C" format DSLRs are a very small slice of the DSLR market.

[michael]

The details are a bit murky, but my understanding is that the Nikon sensor is fabricated by Sony, though it may have been designed by Nikon. Nikon doesn't have their own fab. Look for the same or a similar sensor in the forthcoming Sony full frame camera, likely as a consequence of cross licensing.

As for the camera stats, one thing to keep in mind is margin. High value items may have smaller sales volumes, but they're where the margins are. Also where the marketing prestige is, which drives sales of lower end products.

Michael

[BernardLanguillier]

The details are a bit murky, but my understanding is that the Nikon sensor is fabricated by Sony, though it may have been designed by Nikon. Nikon doesn't have their own fab. Look for the same or a similar sensor in the forthcoming Sony full frame camera, likely as a consequence of cross licensing.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135321\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Michael,

It might indeed be manufactured by Sony, but I am not sure that it will become available for them or other manufacturers any time soon.

Remember than the D2x sensor was apparently also manufactured by Sony, but was never made available to any other manufacturer.

I'd be very surprised if Nikon made available easily to others what appears to be a key differentiator of the D3. They philosophy has always been to go for commonalized cheap sensors for the mass market to benefit from economies of scale:

- 6MP Sony sensor: D70, D70s, D50, D50
- 10MP Sony sensor: D40x, D80 and D200,

but to use exclusive stuff for their flagship models (D1x, D2x and now probably D3).

Regards,
Bernard

[michael]

Understood. But Sony has a full frame camera coming, and I would seriously doubt that it diverges too widely from the characteristics of the Nikon sensor. Time will tell.

Michael

[BJL]

... High value items may have smaller sales volumes, but they're where the margins are. Also where the marketing prestige is, which drives sales of lower end products.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135321\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree that prestige lines can help lower level products, and perhaps this is one reason why Canon and Nikon so much outsell Pentax and Sony in the sub-$1000 DSLR main-stream, even when Nikon at least is using the same sensors as in similarly priced and spec'd Sony and Pentax cameras, and even though amongst the lenses likely to be bought by buyers of such cameras, the lens systems are not very different. "But I _might_ upgrade to a $5,000 body and some $8,000 lenses" seems to work!

Olympus acknowledges this in the leaked slideshow on its forthcoming flagship model (if the document is really from Olympus, which I am fairly sure it is), and even gives it a name, the "top down effect":

"Let’s promote and enjoy top down effect to E-410 & E-510 and accessory sales."

Olympus and Sony might not plan to make much direct profit on their forthcoming flagship bodies and exotic lenses, but to benefit more through the halo effect on their bread-and-butter products.


But I have still not seen solid evidence that the new Sony "pro" model will be in 24x36 format. (Sorry, 23.9x36!)

[Ken R]

Makes sense that Sony comes out with a full frame body for around $2000 and become an affordable full frame solution that baits in new customers who will need to buy the $$ Sony glass. Any more expensive than that and most will choose the Canon 5D or the 5Dmk2 when it becomes available or even the D3. Chances are the Sony will be a semi pro model much more consumer oriented and hence mass market than the D3 and obviously the 1DsMk3. At any rate we should see the 1Ds mk3 price reduced once more full frame competition is available, specially if there are some 16mp models in the mix. 21mp is just too far from 12mp marketing wise to become a real threat to lower the price of the new 1Ds.

So, in the end we should have a lower priced 12mp full frame Sony, the higher priced semi pro 5D, the D3 (slightly more $$ fullf rame but prof. model, kinda goes against the 1Dmk3) which is basically the most affordable fully professional full frame DSLR and naturally the 1Ds will sit at the top $$$.

[Kevin W Smith]

The D3's sensor might be built by Sony, but it's a Nikon design, so unless they're complete fools, it'll remain unique to the D3. I don't think Nikon's dumb enough to license their design to a potential competitor, even though said competitor manufactures their sensors.

You also have to factor in that Nikon has a newly developed post-capture image processor that may or may not affect it's raw file output too (the aren't saying), while Sony has a different design.

BTW, in another forum (PDN) someone did a test of converting a raw file with the same software the same way of the same scene from both a D200, which uses a Sony designed CCD sensor, to a 5D, which uses a Canon designed and manufactured CMOS sensor.

When he posted the results it was clear that Canon is doing some processing after the sensor while Nikon was not. The Canon raw file clearly had some edge contrast  sharpening applied to the raw file that the Nikon raw didn't have.

Point being, the notion that a raw file is always an un-processed result of the sensor output is no longer true. Canon is already doing it, Nikon might start doing it, and who knows about Sony.

[michael]

My point is more speculative than based on insider knowledge (though maybe a bit of that too). But, it is a way of life in Japanese business for companies to cross license their technologies and patents, even to competitors. And when their is actual cross manufacturing (many people would have their fanboy socks knocked off if they knew who really made their favourite camera or lens) then nothing of this sort would surprise me.

Michael

[eronald]

My point is more speculative than based on insider knowledge (though maybe a bit of that too). But, it is a way of life in Japanese business for companies to cross license their technologies and patents, even to competitors. And when their is actual cross manufacturing (many people would have their fanboy socks knocked off if they knew who really made their favourite camera or lens) then nothing of this sort would surprise me.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135586\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Camera companies survived very well when their cameras were using the same Kodak or Fuji film and the same labs. Why shouldn't they be able to survive equally well if the sensors come out of a common pool ?

Edmund

[BJL]

Camera companies survived very well when their cameras were using the same Kodak or Fuji film and the same labs. Why shouldn't they be able to survive equally well if the sensors come out of a common pool ?

Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135591\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree that this is the dominant model in the DSLR world, with Sony in particular providing almost "commodity" sensors for about half of all DSLR's. That clearly benefits Sony as it can sell far more sensors through Nikon mount bodies than through its own Minolta mount bodies. Likewise it benefits DMF to share two sensor makers.

But Nikon as a sensor maker is in a position more like Canon: it can expect to make far more sensor sales through bodies for its own system than through the far smaller Minolta mount system, so sharing its sensors with Sony would add relatively little to its economies of scale, while giving up some body and lens sales.

By the way, I believe that there are plenty of options for outsourcing chip fabrication including 24x36mm sensors; Nikon probably has alternatives to Sony. (Fab. of the sensors for the Kodak 14/n, SLR/n and SLR/c were outsourced to two different foundries.)


Then again, Sony's lens system is rather poorly equipped to compete at the "advanced amateur" or "professional" level with its current 16x24 format, due to the still very small range of DT lenses and thus weak wide angle options.  So maybe 24x36 makes more sense for a high end Sony DSLR.

[Kevin W Smith]

My point is more speculative than based on insider knowledge (though maybe a bit of that too). But, it is a way of life in Japanese business for companies to cross license their technologies and patents, even to competitors. And when their is actual cross manufacturing (many people would have their fanboy socks knocked off if they knew who really made their favourite camera or lens) then nothing of this sort would surprise me.

Good point. Toyota and Ford both buy their hybrid drivetrains from Aisan, a third party manufacturer. However, Ford wasn't able to make their software to work as well as Toyota's, so they licensed it from them.

But no two agreements are alike, so it remains unknown if Sony made a similar deal with Nikon. And if even if it does include Nikon's chip design, does it also include Nikon's image processor? We'll never know either way.

[craigwashburn]

Good point. Toyota and Ford both buy their hybrid drivetrains from Aisan, a third party manufacturer. However, Ford wasn't able to make their software to work as well as Toyota's, so they licensed it from them.

But no two agreements are alike, so it remains unknown if Sony made a similar deal with Nikon. And if even if it does include Nikon's chip design, does it also include Nikon's image processor? We'll never know either way.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=135795\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Further complicating things is that Sony's chip fab uses Nikon chip-making equipment (which is actually Nikon corp's cash cow).   I would not be surprised that Nikon gives Sony a good deal on this equipment, in return for good deals on chip product produced by it for them.