Would you rather have the best sensor or the sharpest lens?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,


It seems that Canon has different priorities. According to DxO-mark, the Nikon cameras using on chip converters gained a lot in DR, why development in DR was little at Canon. DR is the factor mostly negatively affected by reducing pixel size.

Canon already has the 7D. Would that sensor be upscaled to FF it would offer 46 MP. So Canon could do it.

My guess may be that Canon has slightly different focus than Nikon, geared more to high ISO, where they are very good. I guess that landscape shooters using tripod at base ISO are a minority.

Best regards
Erik


"So, back to the rumors of Canon allegedly readying a high resolution competitor to the Nikon D800 [3]. Will Canon finally move off that 0.5 µm generation? It is worth noting that September 2012 marked the 10 year anniversary of Canon’s announcement of the world’s first CMOS FF sensor, the EOS 1Ds. While Chipworks didn’t analyze that camera, every Canon FF sensor analyzed since has used the same 0.5 µm design rules. It is a credit to Canon that it has remained competitive by continuing to optimize its pixels fabricated in a relatively mature process.

Canon does have a 0.18 µm generation CIS wafer fab process, featuring a specialized Cu back end of line (BEOL) including light pipes (shown below). It is possible to speculate that Canon may be preparing to refresh its FF CIS line to supply devices for a new FF camera system. Samsung and Panasonic currently use Cu fabs to produce APS-C and micro 4/3 CIS devices. It seems that Canon is destined to do so for APS-C and perhaps ultimately FF. Part III of this series will discuss CMOSIS/STMicroelectronics’ combined effort to produce FF CIS using sub 0.18 µm design rules for the first time.

Aside from the pixel process, there are also design considerations for Canon. Of the Canon DSLRs analyzed, the imaging chip has remained analog, with Analog Devices’ analog front end (AFE) chips handling A/D conversion en route to the Digic-branded ISPs. Perhaps the column-parallel ADCs favored by others can’t be implemented using 0.5 µm design rules, but more likely Canon is satisfied with its system design and performance.  In the spirit of speculation, if Canon does migrate to a more advanced node for fabrication, could the transition coincide with a major overhaul of the CIS and system design?"

Canon does have a 0.18 µm generation CIS wafer fab process, featuring a specialized Cu back end of line (BEOL) including light pipes . It is possible to speculate that Canon may be preparing to refresh its FF CIS line to supply devices for a new FF camera system.

http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/10/24/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/

[risedal]

Erik
the sensor from Canon is almost good as from Sony/Toshiba. Canon are little bit after in real QE  with 50% compare to the best Toshiba 65%  Sony 56%.
The problem starts when Canon reads out the signal from the sensor , here Canon have long analog signal path way.And this shows at base iso with high read out noise, pattern noise banding and therefore 11-11,7 stops DR compared to others like Sony with 14 stops and even little more.

To use the latest APS line and make a 24x36mm sensor with the same structure as the 18Mp sensor in 7d  will  be expensive, and time consuming because APS line will be occupied,  Canon has no steppers, lenses to expose a 24x36mm area in one time with smaller geometry as its needs for a new sensor tech as Sony, Toshiba, Panasonic  with for example  column wise ADC on-board the chip. Canon can stitch sensors but also that is time consuming and costly
Canon has neither the whole  assembly in house, the turn themeselves to Fujitsu
Compared to Sony who has 5-7 lines and down to 90nm  (and even smaller) Canon has two older lines

[Fritzer]

Hi,

I would choose a good lens with the best sensor over the best lens with a lesser sensor. Why? Because I don't think there is a lot of difference between lenses, at least stopped down to f/8, where I shoot. A sensor with higher resolution will take sharpening better, produce less artifacts.

On the other hand, if I was shooting high ISO, free hand and so on I would try to find a lens that is sharp at maximum aperture and a camera with very good AF.

Very good point .

Sensor first, always ; with film, you always wanted to have good lenses, and that hasn't changed much - but with digital, a decrease in sensor quality and size can't be made up as easily as using a less grainy film .
Also, sharpness and resolution depends a lot more on sensor quality than it ever depended on choice of film .