If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1213308645.html
For the moment only small sensors, but it should not be a problem to also make larger sensors. For your information, back-illuminated sensors are about three times as sensitive as standard front-illuminated sensors. I'd guess we can expect a new crop DSLRs with a base ISO of 600 and extending comfortably up to ISO 5000 or 10000 (i.e. 1600 x 3 and 3200 x 3). -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
Alfred Molon wrote:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1213308645.html For the moment only small sensors, but it should not be a problem to also make larger sensors. For your information, back-illuminated sensors are about three times as sensitive as standard front-illuminated sensors. I'd guess we can expect a new crop DSLRs with a base ISO of 600 and extending comfortably up to ISO 5000 or 10000 (i.e. 1600 x 3 and 3200 x 3). I'd expect that it's probably currently intended for very small sensors with very high pixel density - efficiency gains would probably be much less as photosite size increases. They mention a 1.7um square pixel size. At 6mp, that extrapolates to a sensor about 40 x 26mm, a "1/3.6" perhaps. For comparison, current dslrs have sensels roughly in the range of 25-70 um square, so it might be premature to assume that efficiency gains to the extent you suggest may be possible. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 00:01:21 +1200, frederick wrote:
They mention a 1.7um square pixel size. At 6mp, that extrapolates to a sensor about 40 x 26mm, a "1/3.6" perhaps. Typo? A 1/3.6" sensor's dimensions are about 3mm x 4mm. Your 40mm x 26mm sensor would be slightly larger than Full Frame (FX). |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
ASAAR wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 00:01:21 +1200, frederick wrote: They mention a 1.7um square pixel size. At 6mp, that extrapolates to a sensor about 40 x 26mm, a "1/3.6" perhaps. Typo? A 1/3.6" sensor's dimensions are about 3mm x 4mm. Your 40mm x 26mm sensor would be slightly larger than Full Frame (FX). Yes - please call it a typo. It sounds better than dumb error ;-0. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
frederick wrote:
ASAAR wrote: On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 00:01:21 +1200, frederick wrote: They mention a 1.7um square pixel size. At 6mp, that extrapolates to a sensor about 40 x 26mm, a "1/3.6" perhaps. Typo? A 1/3.6" sensor's dimensions are about 3mm x 4mm. Your 40mm x 26mm sensor would be slightly larger than Full Frame (FX). Yes - please call it a typo. It sounds better than dumb error ;-0. It is 5mp, not 6mp so 2592 x 1944 * 1.7 = 4.4 x 3.3 Unsure of working with microns, I checked: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...l.size.matter/ "small sensor, 2.3 micron pixel pitch, Canon S70 point and shoot consumer camera is compared to that from a large sensor, 8.2 micron pixel pitch, Canon 1D Mark II DSLR" So 1.7 microns is a very small pixel. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote: http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1213308645.html This is the key sentence: "The newly developed CMOS image sensor achieves a signal-to-noise ratio of +8dB(+6dB sensitivity, -2dB noise) in comparison to existing Sony CMOS image sensors of the same pixel size." This is good news for cell phones and cheap cameras but, if ever applied, won't have such an impressive impact on large sensors. -- I will not see your reply if you use Google. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
In article 1213444424.544337@ftpsrv1, frederick says...
I'd expect that it's probably currently intended for very small sensors with very high pixel density - efficiency gains would probably be much less as photosite size increases. Why would you think so, or do you have any data about spectral efficiencies of DSLR sensors? -- Alfred Molon ------------------------------ Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
Alfred Molon wrote:
In article 1213444424.544337@ftpsrv1, frederick says... I'd expect that it's probably currently intended for very small sensors with very high pixel density - efficiency gains would probably be much less as photosite size increases. Why would you think so, or do you have any data about spectral efficiencies of DSLR sensors? From the diagrams, it looks like they are combating components getting in the way on very tightly packed pixels. That's just my non-expert guess, maybe way off. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
Paul Furman wrote:
frederick wrote: ASAAR wrote: On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 00:01:21 +1200, frederick wrote: They mention a 1.7um square pixel size. At 6mp, that extrapolates to a sensor about 40 x 26mm, a "1/3.6" perhaps. Typo? A 1/3.6" sensor's dimensions are about 3mm x 4mm. Your 40mm x 26mm sensor would be slightly larger than Full Frame (FX). Yes - please call it a typo. It sounds better than dumb error ;-0. It is 5mp, not 6mp so 2592 x 1944 * 1.7 = 4.4 x 3.3 Unsure of working with microns, I checked: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...l.size.matter/ "small sensor, 2.3 micron pixel pitch, Canon S70 point and shoot consumer camera is compared to that from a large sensor, 8.2 micron pixel pitch, Canon 1D Mark II DSLR" So 1.7 microns is a very small pixel. I took 1.7um square as meaning 1.7 square um. Reason for that is that press releases are written by people in marketing departments. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
frederick wrote:
Paul Furman wrote: frederick wrote: ASAAR wrote: On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 00:01:21 +1200, frederick wrote: They mention a 1.7um square pixel size. At 6mp, that extrapolates to a sensor about 40 x 26mm, a "1/3.6" perhaps. Typo? A 1/3.6" sensor's dimensions are about 3mm x 4mm. Your 40mm x 26mm sensor would be slightly larger than Full Frame (FX). Yes - please call it a typo. It sounds better than dumb error ;-0. It is 5mp, not 6mp so 2592 x 1944 * 1.7 = 4.4 x 3.3 Unsure of working with microns, I checked: http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...l.size.matter/ "small sensor, 2.3 micron pixel pitch, Canon S70 point and shoot consumer camera is compared to that from a large sensor, 8.2 micron pixel pitch, Canon 1D Mark II DSLR" So 1.7 microns is a very small pixel. I took 1.7um square as meaning 1.7 square um. Ah! but still... The square root of 1.7 is an even smaller 1.3 so a 3.4mm x 2.5mm sensor. Reason for that is that press releases are written by people in marketing departments. Or targeted to commercial cell phone designers. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pixel per pixel, which DSLR produces the best image? | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 11 | March 8th 07 06:13 AM |
lens vs. image sensors in digital photgraphy | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 219 | December 24th 06 12:42 PM |
Vertical capacitors for image sensors | Alfred Molon | Digital Photography | 18 | June 8th 06 03:13 PM |
CNN - Bad image sensors by Sony to be replaced ?? | Joey | Digital Photography | 2 | October 29th 05 01:03 PM |
dynamic range of digital image sensors | Mr.Adams | Digital Photography | 0 | April 5th 05 11:23 AM |