August 20, 2014, 03:29:28 PM

Author Topic: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor  (Read 14497 times)

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3938
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #30 on: May 23, 2013, 02:06:35 PM »
well MTF diagrams  gives you good information about the lens you are picking, so does this curves about problems with 3 layers of filter, there are other constructions  , read earlier answer
IF there had  been only minor problem with a Foveon or similar construction you can be sure there had been  sensors  out on the market since  years back
And Foveon is not the first with a construction like this.They are the first to do a commercial product

Got any diagrams on how those problems are/should be solved?
I think that scientific method is the best, except when people start using it religiously, like "... this is the only way, now and forever, amen" or "... my book says X, so your book is wrong, because my religion is the right one".
Perhaps one of the reasons why Foveon is not very popular, is that it requires more in-camera processing power, which results in slow shooting speed and short battery life.

I would say the biggest reason Foveon doesn't sell is they are stuck in Sigma cameras. Sigma is NOT known for producing a high quality camera body, nor is it know for high quality or high end DSLR features and functionality. Their menu system is a joke. Foveon has some EXCELLENT strengths, and for types of photography that do not require high ISO (i.e. landscapes), it is an excellent design. The problem is that Sigma owns it, and they just plain and simply don't make a very good camera. Personally, I find that to be a sad state of affairs. I think Sigma purchased Foveon thinking the sensor itself would bring in the sales.

I think the Foveon+Sigma story is an excellent example of how camera BODY and its functionality overall is significantly more important than just the sensor.
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 5D III | Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: SBIG STT-8300M | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #30 on: May 23, 2013, 02:06:35 PM »

ecka

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 605
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #31 on: May 23, 2013, 02:27:01 PM »
well MTF diagrams  gives you good information about the lens you are picking, so does this curves about problems with 3 layers of filter, there are other constructions  , read earlier answer
IF there had  been only minor problem with a Foveon or similar construction you can be sure there had been  sensors  out on the market since  years back
And Foveon is not the first with a construction like this.They are the first to do a commercial product

Got any diagrams on how those problems are/should be solved?
I think that scientific method is the best, except when people start using it religiously, like "... this is the only way, now and forever, amen" or "... my book says X, so your book is wrong, because my religion is the right one".
Perhaps one of the reasons why Foveon is not very popular, is that it requires more in-camera processing power, which results in slow shooting speed and short battery life.

I would say the biggest reason Foveon doesn't sell is they are stuck in Sigma cameras. Sigma is NOT known for producing a high quality camera body, nor is it know for high quality or high end DSLR features and functionality. Their menu system is a joke. Foveon has some EXCELLENT strengths, and for types of photography that do not require high ISO (i.e. landscapes), it is an excellent design. The problem is that Sigma owns it, and they just plain and simply don't make a very good camera. Personally, I find that to be a sad state of affairs. I think Sigma purchased Foveon thinking the sensor itself would bring in the sales.

I think the Foveon+Sigma story is an excellent example of how camera BODY and its functionality overall is significantly more important than just the sensor.

Yes. I agree.
The lack of third party RAW processing software support doesn't help as well.
FF + primes !

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #32 on: May 23, 2013, 04:22:51 PM »

I think the Foveon+Sigma story is an excellent example of how camera BODY and its functionality overall is significantly more important than just the sensor.

That might be true, but then that's why I like to purchase the sensor in Sigma's smaller and less costly DP series body (or I should say "camera").  Certainly the initial price of the SD-1 was absurd, and a bit of a fiasco...and the current SD Merrill is still not enough camera for the money.

And certainly Sigma makes very few lenses that are capable of making full use of the Merrill sensor's resolution.  Perhaps the new 35mm f/1.4, and a couple of their superteles...Again, that's why I like to purchase the DP series camera, because their lenses can and do impart the full resolution onto the sensor.

But I thought this discussion was really more about the sensor itself, rather than a convenient opportunity to slam Sigma for producing less than competitive DSLR's...So it's kind of sad that it has suddenly gone in that direction.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2013, 04:30:50 PM by CarlTN »

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #33 on: May 23, 2013, 04:26:50 PM »
Yes. I agree.
The lack of third party RAW processing software support doesn't help as well.

Are you saying you can't process the foveon's RAW images with third party software?  Because myself and most others who used it, did so with no trouble.  I have not heard of a lack of support for the new Merrill sensor, if that is what you're saying.  So that's news to me.  You're saying Lightroom 4 cannot open Merrill RAW files?

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3938
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #34 on: May 23, 2013, 06:58:21 PM »

I think the Foveon+Sigma story is an excellent example of how camera BODY and its functionality overall is significantly more important than just the sensor.


That might be true, but then that's why I like to purchase the sensor in Sigma's smaller and less costly DP series body (or I should say "camera").  Certainly the initial price of the SD-1 was absurd, and a bit of a fiasco...and the current SD Merrill is still not enough camera for the money.

And certainly Sigma makes very few lenses that are capable of making full use of the Merrill sensor's resolution.  Perhaps the new 35mm f/1.4, and a couple of their superteles...Again, that's why I like to purchase the DP series camera, because their lenses can and do impart the full resolution onto the sensor.

But I thought this discussion was really more about the sensor itself, rather than a convenient opportunity to slam Sigma for producing less than competitive DSLR's...So it's kind of sad that it has suddenly gone in that direction.


Please, don't assume you know my intent, and don't put words in my mouth. I was not being opportunistic or gleeful about the option to slam Sigma, I was simply stating a fact. The FACT is, they produce an inferior DSLR. It isn't a slam, I am not sadistically getting a rise for bringing the point up. It's just a fact (even according to DPReview, the SD-1 is a real mixed bag, and has some very glaring flaws, quirky dial functionality, etc.) I know certain people like them, but numbers speak loudly, and if Sigma's cameras were better, the numbers would speak to that. The people I know who own Sigma DSLRs own them for the sole purpose of having Foveon. Few ever really bring up the body features or functionality unless the discussion takes a turn for the worse, and they enter full blown defensive mode. Interestingly, but not really surprisingly, nearly every single person I know who owns a Sigma DSLR with a Foveon is a landscape photographer, with one who does portraiture.

In the current flow of discussion, a point was made about why Sigma's Foveon isn't selling because the technology is inferior for one reason or another. I simply wanted to point out that it is less likely that the technology is inferior in general (it most certainly has its strengths, and it excels where it is strong), but Sigma isn't really the company that can bring Foveon to full bear on the market against giants like Nikon, Canon, and Sony. The truly SAD thing is that it is Sigma who owns Foveon, and that they can't seem to execute it's success. Again...I'm not opportunistically trying to bash Sigma here...its just an empirical fact (something based on years of observing Sigma fumble around with their priceless Foveon football, and never really making it, nor the camera bodies that house it, into the end zone...to my own dismay, I might add.)
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 5D III | Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: SBIG STT-8300M | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

TheBadger

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #35 on: May 23, 2013, 11:23:30 PM »
Are these the big pixel cameras from Canon everyone is talking about? Or were they referring to the MPs?
"Qui audet adipiscitur"

ecka

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 605
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #36 on: May 24, 2013, 12:18:55 AM »
Yes. I agree.
The lack of third party RAW processing software support doesn't help as well.

Are you saying you can't process the foveon's RAW images with third party software?  Because myself and most others who used it, did so with no trouble.  I have not heard of a lack of support for the new Merrill sensor, if that is what you're saying.  So that's news to me.  You're saying Lightroom 4 cannot open Merrill RAW files?

Yes. I was talking about Merrill RAW files, Adobe has no support for them yet. However, previous generations of Foveon RAW are supported.
FF + primes !

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #36 on: May 24, 2013, 12:18:55 AM »

M.ST

  • Guest
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #37 on: May 24, 2013, 01:48:00 AM »
Each pixel of the new Canon prototype sensor can capture all the colors.

This is made possible by the physical fact that long-wave (infrared) light penetrates deeper into Silicon than shortwave blue light.

Red light penetrates most deeply into Silicon, green light penetrates only up to the middle and blue light reaches just below the surface of the Silicon.

With the sensor informations the camera system can calculate, which color the pixel see.

The sensor filter is no rasterized like the Bayer pattern. You don´t need a anti-aliasing filter that blur the image. And you don´t need to sharpen the picture to get an usable image. The full performance of the attached lens is available in the image after taking the picture.

Cons: All are talking about High-ISO-Images. You get outstanding low-light images, but over ISO 1600 (maybe ISO 3200) the sensor with the Bayer pattern beats the new prototype sensor.

Why make the new sensor design sense?

You get sharp images, fine details, perfect realistic colors and no moire.

The question is, what you want to shoot. The new sensor is very good, but not good for all. If Canon put the new sensor on the market they have also products with the normal sensor design on the market.

It´s a little bit like AF-systems. the phase-AF is faster but the contrast-AF has a bigger hitrate. I see that the future of the AF-systems is a combination of both passive AF-systems.


 

jrista

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3938
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #38 on: May 24, 2013, 11:39:56 AM »
Each pixel of the new Canon prototype sensor can capture all the colors.

This is made possible by the physical fact that long-wave (infrared) light penetrates deeper into Silicon than shortwave blue light.

Red light penetrates most deeply into Silicon, green light penetrates only up to the middle and blue light reaches just below the surface of the Silicon.

With the sensor informations the camera system can calculate, which color the pixel see.

The sensor filter is no rasterized like the Bayer pattern. You don´t need a anti-aliasing filter that blur the image. And you don´t need to sharpen the picture to get an usable image. The full performance of the attached lens is available in the image after taking the picture.


Not quite accurate. "Full performance" is a non-linear factor when it comes to lenses. A high quality lens, such as one of Canon or Nikon's super telephoto lenses, offers maximum resolution at their maximum aperture. With say a 600mm f/4 lens, at f/4, the maximum potential spatial resolution is 173 lp/mm. Currently, no sensor on earth offers comparable spatial resolution. The highest resolution DSLR sensors, Canon's 18mp APS-C and Sony's 24mp APS-C, offer (with the most optimistic measure) 116 lp/mm and 129 lp/mm. Neither of those sensors bring out the "full performance" of any lens, especially not top of the line professional gear.

Why make the new sensor design sense?

You get sharp images, fine details, perfect realistic colors and no moire.


All of these facts, except the "fine details" one, are true. Simple fact of the matter is, with three sensels at every pixel, you have a lot more raw data points to process in any given read than with a bayer type sensor. That affects how fast you can read, which limits how how far you can push spatial resolution with a foveon design. Currently, the fastest DSLR's process at ~500mb/s. A 36.3mp Foveon would need 200mb/s just to read out ONE SINGLE FRAME in a SINGLE SECOND! You DO get full color information at every pixel, but there are bayer sensors capable of resolving nearly as good color information, just as sharply, with FAR more fine detail.

This is one of the fundamental drawbacks of foveon-style sensors. They are sensel dense, but not pixel dense. From a spatial resolution standpoint, foveon is about 2/3rds LESS capable of resolving fine colored detail than a the top bayer sensors (factoring in the spotty spatial resolution of the red and blue channels). From a purely luminance standpoint, Foveon is about half as good or worse than the best bayer sensors.

The argument for Foveon is often made in the form of: "You can always scale Foveon up and get just as good IQ as a bayer". To some degree, this is true...with the exception of the spatial resolution (fine detail) factor. However the inverse is most definitely true: "You can always scale bayer down and get just as good or better IQ than Foveon."

The question is, what you want to shoot. The new sensor is very good, but not good for all. If Canon put the new sensor on the market they have also products with the normal sensor design on the market.


I would agree with this...assuming Canon ever puts the sensor on the market. I think MCS designs will probably ultimately take over in the long run. Increasing SNR will be critical to achieving higher and higher usable ISO settings, and I think any sensor design that relies on the filtration of light will eventually fall in favor of designs that maximize how much light is used, eliminating the need to filter at all.

It´s a little bit like AF-systems. the phase-AF is faster but the contrast-AF has a bigger hitrate. I see that the future of the AF-systems is a combination of both passive AF-systems.


Sorry, but the AF system comparison is no longer true. According to LensRentals, modern Canon equipment (newly released lenses paired with a new body like the 5D III or 1D X) is capable of producing just as high a hit rate with PD-AF as with CD-AF. PD-AF is now just as accurate as contrast methods, but considerably faster. For the types of photography that rely heavily on high speed AF lock and tracking, contrast detection will NEVER be sufficient, even when paired with phase detection. The raw performance of PD-AF with a dedicated sensor will never be surpassed, and I do not see AF-critical photographers ever choosing a camera that combines PD-AF with CD-AF.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2013, 11:42:08 AM by jrista »
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 5D III | Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: SBIG STT-8300M | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #39 on: June 20, 2013, 04:52:50 PM »

I think the Foveon+Sigma story is an excellent example of how camera BODY and its functionality overall is significantly more important than just the sensor.


That might be true, but then that's why I like to purchase the sensor in Sigma's smaller and less costly DP series body (or I should say "camera").  Certainly the initial price of the SD-1 was absurd, and a bit of a fiasco...and the current SD Merrill is still not enough camera for the money.

And certainly Sigma makes very few lenses that are capable of making full use of the Merrill sensor's resolution.  Perhaps the new 35mm f/1.4, and a couple of their superteles...Again, that's why I like to purchase the DP series camera, because their lenses can and do impart the full resolution onto the sensor.

But I thought this discussion was really more about the sensor itself, rather than a convenient opportunity to slam Sigma for producing less than competitive DSLR's...So it's kind of sad that it has suddenly gone in that direction.


Please, don't assume you know my intent, and don't put words in my mouth. I was not being opportunistic or gleeful about the option to slam Sigma, I was simply stating a fact. The FACT is, they produce an inferior DSLR. It isn't a slam, I am not sadistically getting a rise for bringing the point up. It's just a fact (even according to DPReview, the SD-1 is a real mixed bag, and has some very glaring flaws, quirky dial functionality, etc.) I know certain people like them, but numbers speak loudly, and if Sigma's cameras were better, the numbers would speak to that. The people I know who own Sigma DSLRs own them for the sole purpose of having Foveon. Few ever really bring up the body features or functionality unless the discussion takes a turn for the worse, and they enter full blown defensive mode. Interestingly, but not really surprisingly, nearly every single person I know who owns a Sigma DSLR with a Foveon is a landscape photographer, with one who does portraiture.

In the current flow of discussion, a point was made about why Sigma's Foveon isn't selling because the technology is inferior for one reason or another. I simply wanted to point out that it is less likely that the technology is inferior in general (it most certainly has its strengths, and it excels where it is strong), but Sigma isn't really the company that can bring Foveon to full bear on the market against giants like Nikon, Canon, and Sony. The truly SAD thing is that it is Sigma who owns Foveon, and that they can't seem to execute it's success. Again...I'm not opportunistically trying to bash Sigma here...its just an empirical fact (something based on years of observing Sigma fumble around with their priceless Foveon football, and never really making it, nor the camera bodies that house it, into the end zone...to my own dismay, I might add.)


I certainly agree that Sigma is not the company that can fully develop the technology.  I think I even said something to that effect already.  If not here, elsewhere.

CarlTN

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #40 on: June 20, 2013, 04:53:58 PM »
Yes. I agree.
The lack of third party RAW processing software support doesn't help as well.

Are you saying you can't process the foveon's RAW images with third party software?  Because myself and most others who used it, did so with no trouble.  I have not heard of a lack of support for the new Merrill sensor, if that is what you're saying.  So that's news to me.  You're saying Lightroom 4 cannot open Merrill RAW files?

Yes. I was talking about Merrill RAW files, Adobe has no support for them yet. However, previous generations of Foveon RAW are supported.

I wonder if LR 5 will support the Merrill RAW files from any of their bodies?

ecka

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 605
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #41 on: June 21, 2013, 04:40:23 AM »
Yes. I agree.
The lack of third party RAW processing software support doesn't help as well.

Are you saying you can't process the foveon's RAW images with third party software?  Because myself and most others who used it, did so with no trouble.  I have not heard of a lack of support for the new Merrill sensor, if that is what you're saying.  So that's news to me.  You're saying Lightroom 4 cannot open Merrill RAW files?

Yes. I was talking about Merrill RAW files, Adobe has no support for them yet. However, previous generations of Foveon RAW are supported.

I wonder if LR 5 will support the Merrill RAW files from any of their bodies?

I hope so :D
FF + primes !

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Patent: Canon Foveon Sensor
« Reply #41 on: June 21, 2013, 04:40:23 AM »