June 25, 2018, 04:09:25 PM

Author Topic: Sony Releases 0.5-type OLED Microdisplay with Top-of-Class UXGA Resolution  (Read 1182 times)

Canon Rumors

  • Administrator
  • Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS
  • *****
  • Posts: 6662
    • Canon Rumors

Tokyo, Japan—Sony Corporation today announced the upcoming release of the ECX339A OLED Microdisplay featuring UXGA (1600 x 1200 resolution), the highest in class for a 0.5-type. This product achieves the world’s smallest pixel pitch of 6.3μm by leveraging Sony’s OLED display technology and miniaturization technology, enabling a resolution 1.6x higher than the previous model. By employing a new drive circuit design that operates on half the voltage of the previous model, the new product achieves the same level of low-power operation as its predecessor but with much higher resolution. When paired with Sony’s original driving system, a frame rate up to 240 fps is supported—double that of previous product.

















Model nameSample shipment dateMass-production shipment date (planned)Sample price (excluding tax)
ECX339A 0.5-type OLED MicrodisplayJanuary 2018November 201850,000 JPY

Enhancing the resolution on microdisplays has traditionally presented problems such as deteriorating image quality due to decreased pixel pitch and inferior viewing angle properties. The new product features optimized transistors layout and process to address uneven characteristics and loss of withstand voltage, the issues associated with transistor miniaturization. The Sony original variation compensation circuit also enhances picture quality. Additionally, the color filter is deposited directly on the silicon substrate, reducing its distance from the light emitting layer, and the filter’s color array has been modified. This helps to secure the viewing angle properties while achieving high resolution.


OLED Microdisplays are widely used in digital camera electronic viewfinders (EVF) for their superior high contrast, high color gamut, and high-speed responsiveness. Sony, having achieved this high resolution and high frame rate, now offers even more realistic image display and accurate capture of subjects for use in high-end cameras that demand extremely high image quality.


Going forward, Sony expects this high-definition OLED Microdisplay to be employed in a diverse range of fields and applications such as AR (augmented reality) and VR (virtual reality) head-mounted displays.

*1Compared with the Sony OLED Microdisplay ECX337A (0.5-type QVGA (1280×960)).

*2
Driving method of dual vertical line simultaneously (“Dual-line progressive” driving technique)





Main Features


1.High-resolution UXGA in a 0.5-type

The new product has achieved the world’s smallest pixel pitch of 6.3μm by leveraging Sony’s proprietary OLED display technology and miniaturization technology, and has superior resolution 1.6x higher than the previous model*1. Generally, transistor miniaturization results in characteristic variation and reduced withstand voltage. This product uses a Sony original compensation circuit and optimized layouts and process for each individual transistor to address these adverse effects. Furthermore, the color filter is deposited directly on the silicon substrate, reducing its distance from the light emitting layer, and the filter’s color array has been modified to secure the viewing angle properties while achieving high resolution.





2.High-speed frame rate

A new drive circuit design supports a high frame rate of up to 240 fps*2, nearly double that of its predecessor*1. This has made it possible to capture fast-moving subjects in the viewfinder with higher accuracy, so users will not miss a photo opportunity, delivering a more comfortable shooting experience. In head-mounted display devices, this will help to improve image delay issue for items superimposed on real-world vision of AR and to avoid motion sickness during usage of these kinds of devices.


3.Low power consumption

By employing newly-designed peripheral circuits that operate on half the voltage of previous model*1, the new product delivers the same low-power operation as its predecessor when operating at the same frame rate, despite the nearly 1.6x increase in the number of pixels.


Key Specifications















































NameECX339A
Display Size0.5 type (12.6 mm Diagonal length)
ResolutionUXGA(1600×RGB×1200)
Pixel pitch6.3μm
Max. frame rate120 fps (progressive) / 240 fps (dual-line progressive)
Power consumption (200cd/m2)310 mW @ 60 fps (progressive) / 120 fps (dual-line progressive)
Video interfaceLVDS/Sub-LVDS
Max. luminance1,000cd/m2
Contrast100,000:1 or higher
Color gamut (u’v’)sRGB ratio: 110%

 


canonrumors.com

canon rumors FORUM


Mt Spokane Photography

  • CR GEEK
  • ***************
  • Posts: 14246
Where is Sony ranked in the small OLED display business? I can't find them at all.  It sounds like they have one good technology aspect, but they still use LG displays in their products.  Have they managed to defeat the problems with OLED burn-in and fade?  I'd guess not.

IHS Markit’s data shows that combined global sales of LCD and OLED displays that are 9 inches or smaller in size raked in $13 billion in sales during the January-March 2017 period. Compared to last year, this was a 35 percent growth.
Samsung Display remained in the lead in this market as it posted sales of $3.5 billion during this period and thus accounted for 27.2 percent of the global market. The combined sales of flexible OLED products accounted for $1.1 billion, doubling year-over-year on the back of the Galaxy S8’s release.
Japan Display followed in second place with 17.8 percent. LG Display and China-based BOE Technology Group came in third and fourth place respectively.


LG Display to supply OLED Displays for Sony Smartphones
February 03, 2018
http://www.oled-a.org/lg-display-to-supply-oled-display-for-sony-smartphones_feb-03-2018.html

RobbieHat

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 17
Based on this engadget article it appears this display is intended to be used for the latest Sony high end mirrorless release and is speculated to show up later this year.  Given how far and fast EVFs are progressing and the advantages over mirrored cameras and viewfinders this could be a real game changer if Canon can't keep up.  It will threaten their mirrorless offering as DOA if everyone else in the industry adopts the Sony displays (Fuji, Nikon, Leica. Panasonic, Sony, etc.).  You will now have a large % of the mirrorless market adopting a superior spec for display and processor and Canon standing alone trying to do their own thing. 

This is like many technology gadget introductions in the market.  A7r and its brethren had many great features upon introduction (breakthrough advances in DR, highly customizable menus, in-camera stabilization, etc., etc.).  However the early introductions looked to be more alpha products (pun intended) as opposed to fully tried and true professional gear.  As each subsequent introduction/replacement occurred the improvements in the overall product were less revolutionary and more maturing and evolving a good product into a great one.  We are now on generation 3 of the alpha camera system and I think they will likely have it right.  Look no further than Apple to know that by generation 3 their products really begin to hum.

If they are successful in this evolution, then they will have a market differentiation for the next 10 years of so until others (specifically Canon) catch up. Some would argue that they have and are leveraging this differentiation for the past 3 years or so. 

Design in general and product design in particular is changing dramatically based on the pace of technological and manufacturing innovation.  The philosophy is now more fast fail and continuous innovation/implementation as opposed to elongated product cycles with major releases every 3-4 years.  Look no further than the auto industry, software industry, personal tech, etc. to see how this is turning most product sets on their heads. 

Canon still wants to design in the old waterfall approach of slowly developing, integrating, testing and releasing products with lots of slices to differentiate product sets from each other (1dx, 5d, 5dsr, 7d, etc.).  This cycle is now proving to be too long and by the time their envision an innovation and build it into a product the competition has stolen the idea or heard about it, tried it in three generations and neutralized the differentiation. 

Why do I go on about this?  I have been a dedicated Canon shooter for 20+ years (40 years if you go back to my first camera in middle school).  I have a crap load of investment in Canon glass and overall gear.  Believe me, I have drunk the Koolaid.  As I sit on the sidelines and watch Sony (and by default their proxies of Nikon and Fuji) release yet another innovative product and position to release one that will undermine all of the reasons I still own Canon, I am getting pretty frustrated.  I will likely add the next generation of the Sony A7R body to test it against my 5DSR for quality and capability.  I will probably adapt my Canon glass due to the incredible investment I have in that place.  If I like the body and take a risk on some of the glass to get the full benefits of the Sony system, I will slowly migrate away from Canon at least for my portrait and landscape photography. 

The one place Canon still has an advantage is in the sports/wildlife segment.  Their weatherproofing and excellent lenses keep me in their camp.  If Sony were to capture this space and introduce quality lenses at the long end of the spectrum I would abandon Canon once and for all. 

I hate to say this and many will argue I am a troll, that I can leave this forum and join the Sony Rumors forum, blah, blah, blah.  That is not my point.  I really want to like and have patiently waited for Canon to catch up and surpass Sony in key areas.  Unfortunately, I am not sure I can see a light at the end of the tunnel or gold at the end of the rainbow. 

Bob

https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/29/sony-mirrorless-camera-evf/

5D Mark III

stevelee

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 568
Meanwhile the rumor is that Apple will go to OLED displays for all of their new phone designs. Currently just the iPhone X uses that. I don't do color-critical stuff with my phone, so the display on my iPhone 6S looks fine to me. I have been impressed by the OLED TVs I've seen in stores, and maybe by the time my 9-year-old Sony gives out, 4K OLED TVs will be more affordable, and I will go into overkill mode.

Still, I don't know that any level of quality display would make me want to give up an OVF.

unfocused

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4167
    • Mark Gordon Communications
...Given how far and fast EVFs are progressing and the advantages over mirrored cameras and viewfinders this could be a real game changer if Canon can't keep up.  It will threaten their mirrorless offering as DOA if everyone else in the industry adopts the Sony displays (Fuji, Nikon, Leica. Panasonic, Sony, etc.)...You will now have a large % of the mirrorless market adopting a superior spec for display and processor and Canon standing alone trying to do their own thing. 

...If they are successful in this evolution, then they will have a market differentiation for the next 10 years of so until others (specifically Canon) catch up...

...The philosophy is now more fast fail and continuous innovation/implementation as opposed to elongated product cycles with major releases every 3-4 years.  Look no further than the auto industry, software industry, personal tech, etc. to see how this is turning most product sets on their heads... 

Canon still wants to design in the old waterfall approach of slowly developing, integrating, testing and releasing products...This cycle is now proving to be too long and by the time their envision an innovation and build it into a product the competition has stolen the idea or heard about it, tried it in three generations and neutralized the differentiation. 

Why do I go on about this? ...As I sit on the sidelines and watch Sony (and by default their proxies of Nikon and Fuji) release yet another innovative product and position to release one that will undermine all of the reasons I still own Canon, I am getting pretty frustrated.

...I really want to like and have patiently waited for Canon to catch up and surpass Sony in key areas.  Unfortunately, I am not sure I can see a light at the end of the tunnel or gold at the end of the rainbow. 

I don't doubt your sincerity, but I do wonder, when I read posts like this, what exactly the problem is.

I wonder what "innovation" people feel they are missing out on and how they think that will make a major difference in their photography.

It may be an unfair criticism, but I can't shake the feeling that much of criticism has to do with the fear that someone else may have a camera with more "things" on it to brag about. I can understand if someone feels that Canon is behind on technologies that can affect the quality of an image: reliable fast autofocus, noise control, dynamic range, frames per second come to mind to me.

But, I don't understand people who feel that removing a mirror from a camera is so critical that it will make the difference between the success and failure of a camera manufacturer. If I want excellent resolution in a viewfinder, there is nothing better than a mirror.

I also wonder how people can think that Canon is so unavoidably slow or unable to adapt to changing conditions. This is a company that clawed its way to the top of a highly competitive industry against much more highly regarded competitors and it has held that top position for decades. This is a company that is constantly investing in new technologies and innovating in dozens of industries. Why would anyone think they can't keep up with competitors?

Talys

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1666
  • Canon 6DII
...Given how far and fast EVFs are progressing and the advantages over mirrored cameras and viewfinders this could be a real game changer if Canon can't keep up.  It will threaten their mirrorless offering as DOA if everyone else in the industry adopts the Sony displays (Fuji, Nikon, Leica. Panasonic, Sony, etc.)...You will now have a large % of the mirrorless market adopting a superior spec for display and processor and Canon standing alone trying to do their own thing. 

...If they are successful in this evolution, then they will have a market differentiation for the next 10 years of so until others (specifically Canon) catch up...

...The philosophy is now more fast fail and continuous innovation/implementation as opposed to elongated product cycles with major releases every 3-4 years.  Look no further than the auto industry, software industry, personal tech, etc. to see how this is turning most product sets on their heads... 

Canon still wants to design in the old waterfall approach of slowly developing, integrating, testing and releasing products...This cycle is now proving to be too long and by the time their envision an innovation and build it into a product the competition has stolen the idea or heard about it, tried it in three generations and neutralized the differentiation. 

Why do I go on about this? ...As I sit on the sidelines and watch Sony (and by default their proxies of Nikon and Fuji) release yet another innovative product and position to release one that will undermine all of the reasons I still own Canon, I am getting pretty frustrated.

...I really want to like and have patiently waited for Canon to catch up and surpass Sony in key areas.  Unfortunately, I am not sure I can see a light at the end of the tunnel or gold at the end of the rainbow. 

I don't doubt your sincerity, but I do wonder, when I read posts like this, what exactly the problem is.

I wonder what "innovation" people feel they are missing out on and how they think that will make a major difference in their photography.

It may be an unfair criticism, but I can't shake the feeling that much of criticism has to do with the fear that someone else may have a camera with more "things" on it to brag about. I can understand if someone feels that Canon is behind on technologies that can affect the quality of an image: reliable fast autofocus, noise control, dynamic range, frames per second come to mind to me.

But, I don't understand people who feel that removing a mirror from a camera is so critical that it will make the difference between the success and failure of a camera manufacturer. If I want excellent resolution in a viewfinder, there is nothing better than a mirror.

I also wonder how people can think that Canon is so unavoidably slow or unable to adapt to changing conditions. This is a company that clawed its way to the top of a highly competitive industry against much more highly regarded competitors and it has held that top position for decades. This is a company that is constantly investing in new technologies and innovating in dozens of industries. Why would anyone think they can't keep up with competitors?

Meanwhile, in the real world, the $750 M50 has a better way, way better EVF than Sony's last-generation flagship, the A7RII.  It's almost as good as Sony's A7III EVF (which is a step down from A9/A7R3), in a body that's nearly a third the price of that.

But hey, if the blurry zoom-up image says its better and it has more micro-nano-milli-pixels, Sony must be innovative... RIGHT??

I will continue to chuckle at all sentences that start with, "Given how far and fast EVFs are progressing..." when an EVF can fool me into thinking that it's an OVF, because after all, the gold standard to recreating what you should see is what you actually see :)


Meanwhile the rumor is that Apple will go to OLED displays for all of their new phone designs. Currently just the iPhone X uses that. I don't do color-critical stuff with my phone, so the display on my iPhone 6S looks fine to me. I have been impressed by the OLED TVs I've seen in stores, and maybe by the time my 9-year-old Sony gives out, 4K OLED TVs will be more affordable, and I will go into overkill mode.

Still, I don't know that any level of quality display would make me want to give up an OVF.

One potential disadvantage to OLED in a viewfinder is that OLEDs change characteristics as they are used.  It matters less in a phone, but potentially more in a viewfinder, if you're someone that looks through the viewfinder a lot.  OLED EVFs might be a disadvantage in the context of a pro camera where someone is using the EVF many hours a day every day -- I don't know; we'd have to hear from the manufacturers.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2018, 12:28:32 PM by Talys »

RobbieHat

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 17
I don't doubt your sincerity, but I do wonder, when I read posts like this, what exactly the problem is.

I wonder what "innovation" people feel they are missing out on and how they think that will make a major difference in their photography.

It may be an unfair criticism, but I can't shake the feeling that much of criticism has to do with the fear that someone else may have a camera with more "things" on it to brag about. I can understand if someone feels that Canon is behind on technologies that can affect the quality of an image: reliable fast autofocus, noise control, dynamic range, frames per second come to mind to me.

But, I don't understand people who feel that removing a mirror from a camera is so critical that it will make the difference between the success and failure of a camera manufacturer. If I want excellent resolution in a viewfinder, there is nothing better than a mirror.

I also wonder how people can think that Canon is so unavoidably slow or unable to adapt to changing conditions. This is a company that clawed its way to the top of a highly competitive industry against much more highly regarded competitors and it has held that top position for decades. This is a company that is constantly investing in new technologies and innovating in dozens of industries. Why would anyone think they can't keep up with competitors?
[/quote]

A fair point and there might be a bit of keeping up with the Jones that color my opinion.  In terms of what really matters, however, there is advancement in the combination of DR, noise handling, EVF, dual pixel capability and MP that are starting to separate Sony from Canon in meaningful ways for me as a landscape photographer.  I shoot next to many other photographers that are now using Sony or Nikon and are producing better, cleaner results for landscape and more importantly astrophotography then my Canon 5DSR.  I still appreciate the resolution bump from the extra MPs in ideal conditions, but I find that I have to leverage all sorts of tricks to compensate for other issues with my camera (bracketing, blending, etc.).  In addition, there are many scenes where this is not an option due to movement in the image (seascapes, rivers, etc.). 

Does this all add up to unusable images for me?  Certainly not.  Does it mean I have to spend a lot more time in LR and PS and even then don't always get the same image quality?  Typically. 

The issue is not the mirror (Nikon D850 is even better) but the overall capability of the camera combined with the glass.  If I moved to Nikon it would require a wholesale swap of all my equipment.  With Sony, I can start with a body and a lens or two and adapt my other glass until Sony (or Sigma or other) catch up in the lens category. 

To you point of Canon innovation, I hope and pray they will continue to offer and exceed technology that other competitors don't have.  I have been impressed with their historical performance (thus my nearly 40 years of using their cameras) but past performance does not guarantee future results.  Especially in today's technology cycle and with major disruption occurring in every technology platform we use. 

I will probably wait until early next year to see what Canon has to offer, but won't be patient much beyond that.  If they introduce poor first generation (mirrorless), disappointing second generation (5 DSR) or skip or handicap third generation (7d MIII) bodies I will start making the move.  I will assess at that point what body I will add and for what purpose, but it would mean the lose of a long time customer for Canon that has spent considerable amounts of money on their systems for decades.  That would be a major disappointment. 
5D Mark III

canon rumors FORUM


Talys

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1666
  • Canon 6DII
The issue is not the mirror (Nikon D850 is even better) but the overall capability of the camera combined with the glass.  If I moved to Nikon it would require a wholesale swap of all my equipment.  With Sony, I can start with a body and a lens or two and adapt my other glass until Sony (or Sigma or other) catch up in the lens category. 

If autofocus matters to you in any meaningful way, this is a myth.  The try-try-try-hunt-miss-hunt-try-try-try that happens in everyday shooting is so mind-bogglingly annoying (because I miss great, easy shots) that I would rather go back to my T2i than to use adapted L lenses.

Don't take my word for it; spend a day with adapted lens before you go that route.  As for sensor envy, I get it.  It's cool how on the Nikon/Sony I can squeeze a little more out of near-blacks and near-whites with less effort.  But the world isn't a perfect place, and both Nikon and Sony cameras force me to make other (and different) compromises, which to me would often be worse.

What we're presented with are 3 systems that have strengths and weaknesses in different areas, and over years, those strengths change.  It's whatever you're happiest shooting with that you should commit to.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2018, 12:44:35 PM by Talys »

RobbieHat

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 17

Meanwhile, in the real world, the $750 M50 has a better way, way better EVF than Sony's last-generation flagship, the A7RII.  It's almost as good as Sony's A7III EVF (which is a step down from A9/A7R3), in a body that's nearly a third the price of that.

But hey, if the blurry zoom-up image says its better and it has more micro-nano-milli-pixels, Sony must be innovative... RIGHT??

I will continue to chuckle at all sentences that start with, "Given how far and fast EVFs are progressing..." when an EVF can fool me into thinking that it's an OVF, because after all, the gold standard to recreating what you should see is what you actually see :)


If I could cherry pick all the best features of all the Canon bodies into one then I would agree with your argument.  Problem is, Sony is combining more of these features into more of their bodies at the same time.  EVF, focusing (coverage and eye auto), DR, noise handling, speed, video, etc., etc.  Canon would need to combine the features of 3-4 bodies (1dMII, 5DSR, M50, 5DMIV) to make a compelling and differentiated camera at this point.  I don't see that happening, but maybe I will be surprised! 
« Last Edit: May 29, 2018, 12:42:36 PM by RobbieHat »
5D Mark III

RobbieHat

  • PowerShot G7 X Mark II
  • **
  • Posts: 17


If autofocus matters to you in any meaningful way, this is a myth.  The try-try-try-hunt-miss-hunt-try-try-try that happens in everyday shooting is so mind-bogglingly annoying (because I miss great, easy shots) that I would rather go back to my T2i than to use adapted L lenses.
[/quote]

That would be why I would only use that body for landscape and astrophotography.  I exclusively manually focus those images already so it wouldn't be a lose.  Also why I would probably add at least 1-2 wider native lenses from Sony now that their offerings in the 24-70 and 70-200 space are comparable in quality. 

BTW I suck at the hole quote thing.  Sorry. 
5D Mark III

Normalnorm

  • EOS 6D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 367
While there is a lot of back and forth about DSLR vs. Mirrorless, I do believe that the momentum is swinging towards mirrorless.
As EVFs improve (and despite naysayers , are doing so) they drain away more OVF users.

This new component from Sony will be used by a lot of manufacturers who are very aware that the  subjective experience of the viewfinder will be important in the decision to buy the camera.

Anyone who has used the Leica SL EVF can attest to the joy of a superior EVF experience. I currently own a couple of Panasonics with middling EVF experience and performance and in many cases prefer them to my 5DmkIV finder.

I also think it is important to be realistic about the market.
While enthusiasts posture and pontificate about specifications, weight, speed and many other issues, the manufacturers know that their bread and butter comes from hobbyists with limited ambitions often centering on wanting to be seen carrying a "good" camera.

Faux prism humps on cameras that don't need them and lenses that have robust housings despite the modest optics are all part of that equation.

Thus the pressures of the mass market to cut costs but increase features will press for more mirrorless cameras. Especially as the buzzword of the day is "mirrorless"

Talys

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1666
  • Canon 6DII

Meanwhile, in the real world, the $750 M50 has a better way, way better EVF than Sony's last-generation flagship, the A7RII.  It's almost as good as Sony's A7III EVF (which is a step down from A9/A7R3), in a body that's nearly a third the price of that.

But hey, if the blurry zoom-up image says its better and it has more micro-nano-milli-pixels, Sony must be innovative... RIGHT??

I will continue to chuckle at all sentences that start with, "Given how far and fast EVFs are progressing..." when an EVF can fool me into thinking that it's an OVF, because after all, the gold standard to recreating what you should see is what you actually see :)


If I could cherry pick all the best features of all the Canon bodies into one then I would agree with your argument.  Problem is, Sony is combining more of these features into more of their bodies at the same time.  EVF, focusing (coverage and eye auto), DR, noise handling, speed, video, etc., etc.  Canon would need to combine the features of 3-4 bodies (1dMII, 5DSR, M50, 5DMIV) to make a compelling and differentiated camera at this point.  I don't see that happening, but maybe I will be surprised!

I don't see that happening in the short term, either, but then again, I don't really want a Canon A7R3

I hear you about cherry picking the Canon features to build a super-camera, but to be fair, you want an enthusiast mirrorless, and Canon hasn't ever built an enthusiast/semi-pro/pro mirrorless -- a mirrorless equivalent targeted to at least 80D equivalency.  It just doesn't exist.

When it does, one would expect it to have at least all of the features of the M5/M50 (duh), and most of the features of the 5DMark IV, with comparable autofocus speeds of a 5DMark IV in live view mode.  I think that's a reasonable expectation.

There are some things I think will be better than Sony.  For example, Eye AF on the Canon M50 is way better than Eye AF on the Sony A7R3.  On the M50, it just magically works if you have it enabled; on the A7R3, you must press a second "detect the eye" button to engage it.  And, obvoiusly, dual pixel autofocus is the gold standard for autofocus without a AF sensor.  I suspect ergonomics, particularly for larger lenses, will be better.

There are some things I expect to be worse than Sony.  For example, I would be genuinely surprised if there were more dynamic range.  The video capabilities on the Sony may remain superior from a casual-use 4k perspective.  The Sony will probably be a smaller camera and still be a superior full frame travel camera, as Canon will leave that for its APSC offerings.  I would be (pleasantly) surprised if Canon embraced a dual slot UHS-II/UHS-I.

canon rumors FORUM