December 03, 2016, 01:24:00 PM

Author Topic: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]  (Read 24828 times)

Maximilian

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1575
  • The dark side - I've been there
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #75 on: April 30, 2014, 02:40:44 AM »
Is it April Fool's Day? No!
Too much contradictions in it.
Especially the FF mirrorless.  ::)
Why roll your eyes at that comment of all comments when Canon's very own chart showed an empty spot for an upcoming FF high-end mirrorless??? I mean Canon's very own slide clearly had a spot in it for that very thing.
As far as I understood tech discussion until now, the EOS-M system and mount is not capable of handling FF sensors in a proper way. The discussion in this thread showed, that maybe the former information is wrong. And therefore also my rolling eyes were wrong. I am always willing to learn something new.
If it is not wrong, so EOS-M really can NOT be pushed to FF and if this “Canon's very own slide” is showing the opinion of Canons strategists, then I even more ::) ::) ::) because Canon made a wrong step with EOS-M being just an non compatible consumer product (to a potential FF mirrorless high-end).
If it possible to push EOS-M to FF mirrorless – especially into the high-end, I will be one of the first interested people, if they can make EVF and AF performance close to or better to what I see today for example at the Oly OMD-M1.
Until I can see the proof of these speculations here – with a lot of implemented hope – I will stay skeptical.   
sometimes you have to close your eyes to see properly.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #75 on: April 30, 2014, 02:40:44 AM »

AvTvM

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2281
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #76 on: April 30, 2014, 04:45:18 AM »
What is so difficult here?

  • APS-C and 135/"FF" are two separate worlds, separated by the difference in image circle
  • Both systems require their own native lens set
  • There is no need for a unified aps-c and FF lens mount, ff lenses can be used via simple glassless extension tube adapters, as long as the flange distance of the APS-C system is shorter than for the FF system
  • Canon EF-M is a highly functional APS-C mount for mirrorless cameras with short flange distance
  • EF-M allows for low-end and high-end APS-C cameras and lenses - including f/0.95 lenses if so desired.
  • Canon will have to add a new native lens mount for mirrorless ff cameras with short flange distance
  • In the end there will be a range of mirrorless APS-C cameras (EOS-M) and mirrorless FF cameras (EOS-?)
  • There will be one native set of lenses for APS-C (EF-M) and one for FF (EF-?)
  • On mirrorless Canon APS-C cameras (EOS-M), EF-M lenses work natively while EF, EF-S and new EF-? lenses will work via adapter
  • On FF mirrorless canon cameras, new EF-? Lenses will work natively and EF-lenses as well as other FF-lenses with long enough flange distance will work via a simple adapter

DSLRs will be phased out, first the APS-C models along with EF-S lenses and after some extended transition period also FF-sensored DSLRs and EF lenses.

Everything is perfectly clear and fine.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2014, 05:43:11 AM by AvTvM »

traveller

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 713
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #77 on: April 30, 2014, 05:09:40 AM »

Surface area of FF => 864mm^2
32429/864=47.41

If they can only get 20 FF sensors out of that, they have about 58% losses. 

This is an 8 year old white paper and nobody mentioned these mistakes before?

That's very interesting if indeed that does translate to about 58% full frame sensor losses per wafer, even if it was 8 years ago.

I made a mistake (maybe Canon has a job offer ;-)), corrected it in my last post. It should be

Surface area of FF => 864mm^2
32429/864=37.5

If they can only get 20 FF sensors out of that, they have about 47% losses.

It isn't exactly 47% loss. It's 64% of the area is actually used to print FF sensors. If this diagram is any indication, then they actually ETCH exactly 24FF, or 80APSC on a single 200mm wafer:



The actual losses would be out these numbers...so accounting for defects and whatnot, actual FF yield would have to be less than 24, and actual APS-C yield would have to be less than 80. Assuming they actually get 20 FF out of 24, the loss is 16.7%.

That assumes that the article was clear about the size of wafer used to produce APS-C sensors...which it is not. Since a 300mm wafer can handle about 212 APS-C sensors, and since the article states that around 200 APS-C sensors are made from each wafer, it makes sense that Canon is manufacturing APS-C sensors on 300mm wafers, rather than 200mm wafers. Either way, they clearly have a higher yield off smaller sensors.

So the conclusion of this thread seems to be that (if this rumour has any truth in it) Canon are moving their full frame production to 300mm wafers? Could this also be an opportunity for them to move to a newer process generation?

zim

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1462
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #78 on: April 30, 2014, 08:07:18 AM »

Surface area of FF => 864mm^2
32429/864=47.41

If they can only get 20 FF sensors out of that, they have about 58% losses. 

This is an 8 year old white paper and nobody mentioned these mistakes before?

That's very interesting if indeed that does translate to about 58% full frame sensor losses per wafer, even if it was 8 years ago.

I made a mistake (maybe Canon has a job offer ;-)), corrected it in my last post. It should be

Surface area of FF => 864mm^2
32429/864=37.5

If they can only get 20 FF sensors out of that, they have about 47% losses.

It isn't exactly 47% loss. It's 64% of the area is actually used to print FF sensors. If this diagram is any indication, then they actually ETCH exactly 24FF, or 80APSC on a single 200mm wafer:



The actual losses would be out these numbers...so accounting for defects and whatnot, actual FF yield would have to be less than 24, and actual APS-C yield would have to be less than 80. Assuming they actually get 20 FF out of 24, the loss is 16.7%.

That assumes that the article was clear about the size of wafer used to produce APS-C sensors...which it is not. Since a 300mm wafer can handle about 212 APS-C sensors, and since the article states that around 200 APS-C sensors are made from each wafer, it makes sense that Canon is manufacturing APS-C sensors on 300mm wafers, rather than 200mm wafers. Either way, they clearly have a higher yield off smaller sensors.


Why do the etchings always have to go in the same direction?
I guess it's how are they cut out? what do they use, a saw  ;D

Regards

PJSOFT

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 3
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #79 on: April 30, 2014, 11:16:17 AM »
Not sure this can even be answered yet but if Canon came out with a full frame EOS-M version, would they need to change to a new lens mount as well? Could the EF-M still be used?

EF- M mount can't be used for FF unfortunately. Too small. Likely they'd create a mirrorless camera with the regular EF mount instead.

That's correct, unless they will develop another version of EF adapter with built-in speed-booster glasses.

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #80 on: April 30, 2014, 01:17:50 PM »
Why do the etchings always have to go in the same direction?
I guess it's how are they cut out? what do they use, a saw  ;D

Well, there is no specific reason why they couldn't etch some additional sensors in the perpendicular direction, but it would be costly. The way sensor fabrication works is by etching the silicon with extreme UV light via a template. The template is oriented in a single direction. The wafer is moved underneath the light beam so that multiple sensors can be etched. Etching of a single sensor is a multi-step process, with various steps involving masking, etching, dissolution of masks, more etching, doping and layering of new materials, masking, etching, etc. This stuff has to be precise to the level of a few nanometers at most, so it is entirely automated. Rotating the wafer to etch additional sensors in a different direction introduces a source of error that could hurt yield.


mkabi

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 486
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #81 on: April 30, 2014, 01:53:49 PM »
What is so difficult here?

  • APS-C and 135/"FF" are two separate worlds, separated by the difference in image circle
  • Both systems require their own native lens set
  • There is no need for a unified aps-c and FF lens mount, ff lenses can be used via simple glassless extension tube adapters, as long as the flange distance of the APS-C system is shorter than for the FF system
  • Canon EF-M is a highly functional APS-C mount for mirrorless cameras with short flange distance
  • EF-M allows for low-end and high-end APS-C cameras and lenses - including f/0.95 lenses if so desired.
  • Canon will have to add a new native lens mount for mirrorless ff cameras with short flange distance
  • In the end there will be a range of mirrorless APS-C cameras (EOS-M) and mirrorless FF cameras (EOS-?)
  • There will be one native set of lenses for APS-C (EF-M) and one for FF (EF-?)
  • On mirrorless Canon APS-C cameras (EOS-M), EF-M lenses work natively while EF, EF-S and new EF-? lenses will work via adapter
  • On FF mirrorless canon cameras, new EF-? Lenses will work natively and EF-lenses as well as other FF-lenses with long enough flange distance will work via a simple adapter

DSLRs will be phased out, first the APS-C models along with EF-S lenses and after some extended transition period also FF-sensored DSLRs and EF lenses.

Everything is perfectly clear and fine.

Thats the same thing as switching systems... if you can't use the same lenses on future Canon bodies. Might as well switch to Sony now!
Sold my Canon DSLRs waiting on my RED Raven preorder. EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L, EF 85mm f/1.8, EF 100mm L f/2.8 Macro, Custom Cine 50mm & Custom Cine 35mm.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #81 on: April 30, 2014, 01:53:49 PM »

zim

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1462
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #82 on: April 30, 2014, 02:27:18 PM »
Why do the etchings always have to go in the same direction?
I guess it's how are they cut out? what do they use, a saw  ;D

Well, there is no specific reason why they couldn't etch some additional sensors in the perpendicular direction, but it would be costly. The way sensor fabrication works is by etching the silicon with extreme UV light via a template. The template is oriented in a single direction. The wafer is moved underneath the light beam so that multiple sensors can be etched. Etching of a single sensor is a multi-step process, with various steps involving masking, etching, dissolution of masks, more etching, doping and layering of new materials, masking, etching, etc. This stuff has to be precise to the level of a few nanometers at most, so it is entirely automated. Rotating the wafer to etch additional sensors in a different direction introduces a source of error that could hurt yield.

Fascinating, must be very impressive to watch, though I guess not actually viewable. Thanks for the enlightenment!

Regards

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #83 on: May 04, 2014, 03:02:34 PM »
Why do the etchings always have to go in the same direction?
I guess it's how are they cut out? what do they use, a saw  ;D

Well, there is no specific reason why they couldn't etch some additional sensors in the perpendicular direction, but it would be costly. The way sensor fabrication works is by etching the silicon with extreme UV light via a template. The template is oriented in a single direction. The wafer is moved underneath the light beam so that multiple sensors can be etched. Etching of a single sensor is a multi-step process, with various steps involving masking, etching, dissolution of masks, more etching, doping and layering of new materials, masking, etching, etc. This stuff has to be precise to the level of a few nanometers at most, so it is entirely automated. Rotating the wafer to etch additional sensors in a different direction introduces a source of error that could hurt yield.

Fascinating, must be very impressive to watch, though I guess not actually viewable. Thanks for the enlightenment!

Regards

As far as I know the systems used to fabricate silicon devices are not sealed. The wavers are open and accessible in most of the pictures I've seen. These things have to be done in sealed clean rooms where not even one speck of dust exists (as one speck of dust on a wafer means whatever is etched in that area of the wafer is useless). If you could find a way to get into a cleanroom at Canon, you could probably watch sensor fabrication in action. It isn't a particularly fast process, from what I understand, though.

East Wind Photography

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1402
  • EWP
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #84 on: May 05, 2014, 06:34:30 PM »
This is all fine and dandy but doesnt explain when the 7d mark ii will be available for pre-order.  Isnt that what really matters?  ;D

Don Haines

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5431
  • posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #85 on: May 05, 2014, 07:36:50 PM »
This is all fine and dandy but doesnt explain when the 7d mark ii will be available for pre-order.  Isnt that what really matters?  ;D

+1
The best camera is the one in your hands

dgatwood

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 924
  • 300D, 400D, 6D
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #86 on: May 06, 2014, 09:21:32 PM »
Why do the etchings always have to go in the same direction?
I guess it's how are they cut out? what do they use, a saw  ;D

Well, there is no specific reason why they couldn't etch some additional sensors in the perpendicular direction, but it would be costly. The way sensor fabrication works is by etching the silicon with extreme UV light via a template. The template is oriented in a single direction. The wafer is moved underneath the light beam so that multiple sensors can be etched. Etching of a single sensor is a multi-step process, with various steps involving masking, etching, dissolution of masks, more etching, doping and layering of new materials, masking, etching, etc. This stuff has to be precise to the level of a few nanometers at most, so it is entirely automated. Rotating the wafer to etch additional sensors in a different direction introduces a source of error that could hurt yield.

I was under the impression that chip vendors typically used a single mask (template) for the entire wafer, though.  If so, then the additional work to add a sensor in the other direction would be limited to modifying the mask with an additional set of clear spots for the additional chip's features, modifying the cutting program slightly, and then modifying the picker to grab that one chip and rotate it ninety degrees.

If they aren't using one mask per wafer, then I suspect they're in a world of hurt, yield-wise, because the alignment of the mask would have to be perfect twenty to eighty times per pass across a given wafer, whereas with a single mask, it only has to be perfect once per pass across the wafer.

If Canon hasn't done this already, they should probably sit down, do the math on what percentage of chips are full-frame, and then design masks to etch the full-frame sensors at the center of the wafer, and surround them with crop sensors to maximize the surface coverage.  In theory, they could also mask the DIGIC chips, lens microcontrollers, etc. in the borders, so that only a tiny bit of the silicon wafer is wasted (because I'm pretty sure the robots have to have some bare spots near the edge of the wafers so that they can safely grab them).

Granted, you can't do that for every combination of chips—IIRC, some silicon parts likely require significantly different doping—but for parts that are fairly similar, you should be able to do so.  At a bare minimum, I would expect that you could combine different sizes of sensors almost arbitrarily, including not only full-frame and crop sensors, but also smaller sensors for use in camera phones and point-and-shoot cameras.

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #87 on: May 06, 2014, 11:37:49 PM »
Why do the etchings always have to go in the same direction?
I guess it's how are they cut out? what do they use, a saw  ;D

Well, there is no specific reason why they couldn't etch some additional sensors in the perpendicular direction, but it would be costly. The way sensor fabrication works is by etching the silicon with extreme UV light via a template. The template is oriented in a single direction. The wafer is moved underneath the light beam so that multiple sensors can be etched. Etching of a single sensor is a multi-step process, with various steps involving masking, etching, dissolution of masks, more etching, doping and layering of new materials, masking, etching, etc. This stuff has to be precise to the level of a few nanometers at most, so it is entirely automated. Rotating the wafer to etch additional sensors in a different direction introduces a source of error that could hurt yield.

I was under the impression that chip vendors typically used a single mask (template) for the entire wafer, though.  If so, then the additional work to add a sensor in the other direction would be limited to modifying the mask with an additional set of clear spots for the additional chip's features, modifying the cutting program slightly, and then modifying the picker to grab that one chip and rotate it ninety degrees.

If they aren't using one mask per wafer, then I suspect they're in a world of hurt, yield-wise, because the alignment of the mask would have to be perfect twenty to eighty times per pass across a given wafer, whereas with a single mask, it only has to be perfect once per pass across the wafer.

If Canon hasn't done this already, they should probably sit down, do the math on what percentage of chips are full-frame, and then design masks to etch the full-frame sensors at the center of the wafer, and surround them with crop sensors to maximize the surface coverage.  In theory, they could also mask the DIGIC chips, lens microcontrollers, etc. in the borders, so that only a tiny bit of the silicon wafer is wasted (because I'm pretty sure the robots have to have some bare spots near the edge of the wafers so that they can safely grab them).

Granted, you can't do that for every combination of chips—IIRC, some silicon parts likely require significantly different doping—but for parts that are fairly similar, you should be able to do so.  At a bare minimum, I would expect that you could combine different sizes of sensors almost arbitrarily, including not only full-frame and crop sensors, but also smaller sensors for use in camera phones and point-and-shoot cameras.

If you are assuming they use a single mask in a single exposure to generate an entire wafer of sensors, then you would be incorrect. Remember that the whole point of using a mask and deep or extreme ultraviolet light wavelengths is that it allows the mask to be orders of magnitude larger than the actual CMOS device being fabricated. Were talking many thousands to millions of times larger...macro scale vs. nano scale. To make a mask large enough to expose an entire wafer at once would be....immense. Generating and focusing the light beam would be an equally immense undertaking (assuming it's even possible to bend light enough to do it.) You seem to think that making a single mask to expose the wafer in one shot is easier...if it was, I'm sure everyone would have moved to that approach decades ago. Fabbing one die at a time is how it's done in all industries, including CPUs, GPUs, etc. (which are considerably more complex devices than an image sensor, and use smaller processes as well.)

Fabricating a sensor is a multi-step, multi-layer process, per-sensor (or per-cpu, per-gpu, per-IC), not per-wafer. They design a sensor, generate the templates necessary to etch and layer the necessary materials for all of the transistors, wiring, and other components involved in that sensor, then use that template again and again to fabricate multiple sensors per wafer. For each pass, the wafer is coated with a photoresist, which when exposed by DUV or EUV light, changes it's chemical structure. Every die on the wafer is exposed one after the other with the first template, then the entire wafer is bathed in chemicals to remove the exposed photoresist, etch away the exposed silicon, and dope the remaining silicon if necessary. The rest of the photorisist for the first pass is removed, a new layer of silicon or silicon-based material is added, another layer of photoresist is added, and the wafer is sent through the stepper again. Rinse, repeat, etc.

There are steppers, and there are scanners. Some large CMOS (like the very large ultra-sensitive CMOS sensor Canon developed a few years ago) devices cannot even be exposed by a single beam, in order to get proper focus, the beam has to be smaller than the full size of the template...so photolithography scanners allow larger devices to be fabricated via a longer exposure by moving both the wafer and the UV reticle opposite each other during exposure. Canon manufactures both photolithography steppers and scanners, and according to their site, these devices support 200mm and 300mm wafers, and their latest devices can apparently use some techniques to image below the 90nm diffraction limit of the DUV light they use (so Canon is more than capable of fabricating sensors on a 180nm process with their own photolithography technology, and on 300mm wafers at that).

It's all automated and computerized, human hands aren't directly involved in moving the wafer or anything like that (at least not until it's done), so redirecting the beam or moving the wafer can be exceptionally precise. There has to be some negative space around each sensor anyway to allow them to be cut out of the die, but that's a very careful balance of just exactly the right amount of space...not too little as you risk damaging dies during cutting, and not too much that you waste space. The thing of it is, it all works in one orientation...while the wafer and reticule can be moved horizontally, from the things I've read about photolithography devices, there is no rotation of the wafer or template or anything like that. It moves under the template and UV beam, out to the chemical bath for etching and processing, on to have another layer of silicon deposited, back under the template, so on and so forth. It is probably possible to build a fab that could fabricate devices in multiple orientations, however I'm certain there are multiple challenges to making that possible, and it would likely increase cost exponentially (it wouldn't just be changes to the stepper or scanner...you would have to make sure the entire manufacturing pipeline was capable of dealing with devices of differing orientation...that includes the steps involved in cutting the wafer and separating out each die, packaging the die which involves either adding pins or a land grid array and the like, etc.)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #87 on: May 06, 2014, 11:37:49 PM »

dgatwood

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 924
  • 300D, 400D, 6D
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #88 on: May 07, 2014, 04:22:05 AM »
If you are assuming they use a single mask in a single exposure to generate an entire wafer of sensors, then you would be incorrect.

No, a single mask per pass (exposure) of the entire wafer.


Remember that the whole point of using a mask and deep or extreme ultraviolet light wavelengths is that it allows the mask to be orders of magnitude larger than the actual CMOS device being fabricated. Were talking many thousands to millions of times larger...macro scale vs. nano scale.

I think you're off a bit.  According to Wikipedia and other sources, masks typically use 4x magnification (even for EUVL), or on occasion, 8x or 10x.  Certainly not millions of times larger.

With that said, apparently I'm somewhat out of date.  The older chip manufacturing did typically expose an entire wafer at once, but apparently that isn't practical these days.  My bad.  Either way, my main point still remains that you can lay out arbitrary patterns of chips on the wafer.

Also, I'm not sure rotation would really be as hard as you think.  Assuming a square mask, you could readily produce a second mask with the pattern rotated 90 degrees, and use that mask when exposing the additional bits.  It shouldn't matter that part of the projected area is outside the bounds of the wafer.  Then, after you cut the wafer, it shouldn't take that much effort to rotate a few of the parts 90 degrees as they're moved from the sliced wafer to wherever the next step in manufacturing occurs.  Once you've done that, the remainder of your process can treat those parts the same as the other parts.

With that said, the more masks you build, the higher your overhead, so that approach probably wouldn't be nearly as efficient cost-wise as filling in the wasted parts of the wafer with smaller chips that you have to make anyway.

jrista

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5334
  • EOL
    • Nature Photography
Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #89 on: May 07, 2014, 01:20:38 PM »
Well the masks have certainly shrunk in size, then. Also, keep in mind, masks may not cover the whole die area. A number of years ago I was researching this stuff, and found that a lot of the time masks only cover some of the area of a die, only a few transistors or other components at a time. And they were quite large, inches in size vs. the nanometers of the things they templated (hence the reason I thought a scale factor of thousands...although I guess the size of the transistor designs on the template might only be millimeters or maybe even microns in size, vs. nanometers, even if the whole template is a few inches in size, which reduces things to a 10-100x scale factor). I guess progress keeps marching on.

I guess it would be possible to rotate the design on the template. I don't know enough about the actual lithography machines to know how that would work...could you just rotate the whole template? Or would you have to generate twice as many templates for the alternate orientation? And there is still the problem of automating everything with dies of different orientations...you have to update the entire automated pipeline if you do that. When dies are all in the same orientation, you can simplify parts of your pipeline, because you can then make certain assumptions.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2014, 01:22:55 PM by jrista »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: New Sensor Technology Coming From Canon? [CR1]
« Reply #89 on: May 07, 2014, 01:20:38 PM »