July 29, 2014, 06:12:54 PM

Author Topic: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?  (Read 6409 times)

SDsc0rch

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #15 on: December 25, 2012, 05:12:25 PM »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #15 on: December 25, 2012, 05:12:25 PM »

well_dunno

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 356
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #16 on: December 25, 2012, 05:23:29 PM »
As per the rumors, Capture One has a beta version that supports Fuji's X-trans sensor. That Capture One was working on it I had heard but not that there was a beta version being tested - so says a fujirumors reader:

http://www.fujirumors.com/feedback-capture-one-beta-x-trans-potential-unlocked-2/

Cheers!

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 8272
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #17 on: December 25, 2012, 06:01:59 PM »
here's a bigger question... WHY even have these "bayer" filters - sensors made of an array that detect single colors that require "interpolation" (and thus a bunch-o-math that eats up cpu processing power)

imagine an array made of sensors that can detect "all" colors

problem solved!

(non-scientist here - but not afraid to ask "why not?!")
Invent one and wealth will be yours.  For now, sensors only detect luminance (brightness)  Thats why the Bayer type filter is used, it allows a color image to be constructed from a B&W image.

ScottyP

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 521
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #18 on: December 25, 2012, 06:10:55 PM »
Your theory that others have not used different patterns is contradicted by the facts.  Do a little research before making such claims.
 
There are many Bayer type patterns patented by Kodak.  The alternate patterns have not worked out to be popular. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
Fujifilm is the new kid on the block to try alternate color filters, others who tried them did not find success.
 
There was the CYGM pattern used by Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Kodak in the late 1990's.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYGM_filter
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1999/9/7/sony3megapixel
The CYGM filter is far less common than the Bayer filter. CCDs that use it include the 3 megapixel Sony ICX252AK and ICS252AKF (which sampled in October 1999[1]).
Cameras that use it include several Canon models of the 1999-2000 period, such as the Canon PowerShot S10,[2] the original Canon Digital IXUS (June 2000),[3] though subsequent IXUS models used the Bayer filter, and the Canon G1; the Kodak DCS 620x and DCS 720x DSLRs, and several Nikon Coolpix models.[4]
 
Sony introduced the Cybershot DSC-F828  with a RGBE pattern in 2004.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2003/7/15/sonyrgbeccd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGBE_filter
 
Fuji has at least two alternate patterns that they have patented, but how much is sales hype and how much is performance related is yet to be seen.  There will be advantages and disadvantages.


Maybe I was too sweeping in my generality, but note I asked why only Fuji is currently pushing a non-bayer pattern as "the next great thing" and the camera magazines seem willing to trumpet it as a new thing also.

The history of pixel designs you describe is all factually correct, but you name old/discontinued/minor/failed cameras, and also patents that have been filed, but not new products with fresh R&D dollars and fresh advertizing dollars behind it.  Other than Fuji (and Foveon in a radically different sense) at this particular moment. What I thought would make for an interesting discussion is whether Canon could take the idea of a simple non-bayer pixel pattern and eliminating the AA filter for a major camera sensor line, (not just for a special limited edition version of an existing camera where they leave the AA filter off).

Is there enough potential to a more complex/more "random" pixel pattern for Canon to make something of it?
Canon 6D; Canon Lenses: EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II; EF 24-105 f/4 L; EF 85 f/1.8; EF-S 17-55 f/2.8; Canon 1.4x Mk. III T.C.; Sigma Lens: 35mm f/1.4 "Art"

PVS

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #19 on: December 25, 2012, 06:30:59 PM »
Sony recently released pattern for sensor with photosites aligned in honeycomb grid.
So, besides Foveon and Xtrans there's always more to come.

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 8272
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #20 on: December 25, 2012, 06:58:28 PM »
Your theory that others have not used different patterns is contradicted by the facts.  Do a little research before making such claims.
 
There are many Bayer type patterns patented by Kodak.  The alternate patterns have not worked out to be popular. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
Fujifilm is the new kid on the block to try alternate color filters, others who tried them did not find success.
 
There was the CYGM pattern used by Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Kodak in the late 1990's.
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CYGM_filter
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1999/9/7/sony3megapixel
The CYGM filter is far less common than the Bayer filter. CCDs that use it include the 3 megapixel Sony ICX252AK and ICS252AKF (which sampled in October 1999[1]).
Cameras that use it include several Canon models of the 1999-2000 period, such as the Canon PowerShot S10,[2] the original Canon Digital IXUS (June 2000),[3] though subsequent IXUS models used the Bayer filter, and the Canon G1; the Kodak DCS 620x and DCS 720x DSLRs, and several Nikon Coolpix models.[4]
 
Sony introduced the Cybershot DSC-F828  with a RGBE pattern in 2004.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2003/7/15/sonyrgbeccd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RGBE_filter
 
Fuji has at least two alternate patterns that they have patented, but how much is sales hype and how much is performance related is yet to be seen.  There will be advantages and disadvantages.


Maybe I was too sweeping in my generality, but note I asked why only Fuji is currently pushing a non-bayer pattern as "the next great thing" and the camera magazines seem willing to trumpet it as a new thing also.

The history of pixel designs you describe is all factually correct, but you name old/discontinued/minor/failed cameras, and also patents that have been filed, but not new products with fresh R&D dollars and fresh advertizing dollars behind it.  Other than Fuji (and Foveon in a radically different sense) at this particular moment. What I thought would make for an interesting discussion is whether Canon could take the idea of a simple non-bayer pixel pattern and eliminating the AA filter for a major camera sensor line, (not just for a special limited edition version of an existing camera where they leave the AA filter off).

Is there enough potential to a more complex/more "random" pixel pattern for Canon to make something of it?

 
I wasn't trying to be totally complete, thats impossible, because new patterns are indeed being worked on all the time.
 Sony has recently shown some..
http://photorumors.com/2010/08/03/sony-patents-honeycomb-image-sensor/
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/new-sony-backlit-cmos-sensor-announced-18324
 
They do all have one thing in common, they have all been flash in the pan failures, after the hype and smoke / mirrors have cleared, they quitely disappear as users find the downsides.
However, it certainly is good to see innovation, and someone may discover something thats better.
 
Canon is very conservative, and seldom sticks their neck out with new technology.  They apparently feel that they don't need to.  Thats not likely to change, they only introduce new technology when they feel that the up side outweighs the downsides.  Fuji markets to more of a niche group who will spend $$$ for the latest thing.  Its a valid business model, just not Canon's.

SDsc0rch

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #21 on: December 25, 2012, 09:38:42 PM »
Invent one and wealth will be yours.  For now, sensors only detect luminance (brightness)  Thats why the Bayer type filter is used, it allows a color image to be constructed from a B&W image.

oh.. i didn't know that

that makes sense - thx for that explanation
:)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #21 on: December 25, 2012, 09:38:42 PM »

Albi86

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #22 on: December 26, 2012, 06:53:51 AM »
Even without totally revolutioning the Bayer tech, there are ways for it to evolve.

Sigma's Foveon is the most known example. It has its downsides, true, but we should consider that it hasn't been developed by the biggest and wealthiest company out there. Invest some billions in it and it would be fine in no time.

Moreover, the biggest problem with Sigma cameras is the electronics around the sensor. Put a Foveon inside a 7D and I'm sure many people would buy that camera.

Indeed, Sigma might get the most benefits by licensing their technology more than trying to do everything on their own - something they don't have the resources to do well.

Stu_bert

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #23 on: December 30, 2012, 12:38:18 PM »
interesting snippet from Luminous landscapes 2012 review....

"...within the next 18 months one of the major sensor and camera makers is going to release an advanced multi-layer sensor which bypasses the Foveon patents....."

Any guesses? Mine would be on Sony :(
If life is all about what you do in the time that you have, then photography is about the pictures you take not the kit that took it. Still it's fun to talk about the kit, present or future :)

paul13walnut5

  • Guest
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #24 on: December 30, 2012, 01:16:47 PM »
Or Canon.  Or panasonic.

Stu_bert

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #25 on: December 31, 2012, 11:24:27 AM »
Or Canon.  Or panasonic.

We'll find out by the end of 2013 (assuming it is announced ahead of release) :)
If life is all about what you do in the time that you have, then photography is about the pictures you take not the kit that took it. Still it's fun to talk about the kit, present or future :)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Non-Bayer arrays; how is Fuji the only one to have thought of this?
« Reply #25 on: December 31, 2012, 11:24:27 AM »