October 25, 2014, 04:49:49 AM

Author Topic: 6D Sensor... why?  (Read 13773 times)

Gothmoth

  • Guest
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #30 on: September 18, 2012, 04:48:59 AM »
high MP fullframe sensors... high compared to what?  ;)
Compared to the 30+ MP senors from Sony.

so a canon 22 MP sensor is a high MP sensor compared to sonys 30+ pixel sensor.. no that makes sense.  :D
 

Quote
You missed the last part of my post where I suggested is might be the same sensor die as the 5D MkIII, but with a greater number of pixels failing to make the grade. These would then be averaged together as a single pixel. If you do that across a sensor you get very respectable performance but with a lower total MP count.

not possible because of the pixel pitch.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #30 on: September 18, 2012, 04:48:59 AM »

UrbanVoyeur

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
  • To see and be seen.
    • View Profile
    • UrbanVoyeur.com
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #31 on: September 18, 2012, 08:23:16 AM »
so a canon 22 MP sensor is a high MP sensor compared to sonys 30+ pixel sensor.. no that makes sense.  :D
Sorry for my poor communication skills. I am NOT saying that at all. 

I think that Canon has trouble producing high MP FF sensors (30-40 MP) and that yet another FF camera (6D) in the 20 MP range is evidence. I think the Canon yields from the 30-40 MP die that are usable at full resolution are extremely low.  If they could produce a higher than 20 MP FF sensor at this price point would. So far it is too expensive to market the Canon 30-40 MP sensor. Sony appears to have overcome this problem, as seen in the new Nikon and Sony FF's.

Quote
You missed the last part of my post where I suggested is might be the same sensor die as the 5D MkIII, but with a greater number of pixels failing to make the grade. These would then be averaged together as a single pixel. If you do that across a sensor you get very respectable performance but with a lower total MP count.
not possible because of the pixel pitch.

Then perhaps it is from their 30-40 MP sensor die. I don' think Canon would go through the trouble of developing an new interim 20 MP die when they are so close with the 30-40 MP die. It makes more sense to use those rejects.

Octavian

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 41
    • View Profile
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #32 on: September 18, 2012, 10:54:19 AM »
Just wait, Canon is going to shock all of us and give us a sensor with ZERO banding in this 6d. That can be its big selling point. I think that is the SINGLE biggest thing canon can do to improve their sensors.

+1

And add to that and correct me if im wrong but as someone stated that the low light image quality might not be as good as a MkIII, HOWEVER in general doesn't a larger pixel size aid in low light capability? this may well yet be a good sensor indeed but why they cut it a bit is odd?
« Last Edit: September 18, 2012, 10:58:10 AM by Octavian »

BXL

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #33 on: September 18, 2012, 11:01:22 AM »
Maybe it's a complete different sensor because the 6D aims at a different market segment? Lower MP, hopefully lower noise at low and high ISO as well? The 6D aims imo at landscape and available light photography and in both areas everyone would welcome lower noise.

Landscape photographers are looking forward to exceptionally good-looking images at low ISO levels. They also don't need a very sophisticated AF (but would like to have GPS). Another area is architecture photography - again high quality images at low ISO levels and no AF since T/S-E lenses don't have AF. The other area is AL photography, there you want low noise at high ISO levels and for AL the most important AF point is the center cross point.

IMO the 6D targets a very specific market and if they developed a new sensor to reduce noise, this DSLR could be spot on for that kind of photography.
450D | EF 50 f/1.8 | EF 100 f/2 | 17-50mm f/2.8 VC

Gothmoth

  • Guest
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #34 on: September 18, 2012, 12:01:01 PM »
Landscape photographers are looking forward to exceptionally good-looking images at low ISO levels. They also don't need a very sophisticated AF (but would like to have GPS). Another area is architecture photography - again high quality images at low ISO levels and no AF since T/S-E lenses don't have AF.

but they also want DETAILS.. as much as they can get.. that´s why i still shot MF sometimes.

that is why the D800 looks so good when your a landscape photographer... 20 MP for 2099$ don´t cut the cake.

Bosman

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 879
    • View Profile
    • Bosman Photography
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #35 on: September 18, 2012, 01:19:26 PM »
They had to design a new sensor, using a 4 yrs old sensor would get them flamed from here to eternity. The new sensor has to be the strongest part of this camera for it to work. As you can see if the body can be this small with gps and all the other crap they stuffed in there, putting it in a d series is plenty doable. That will only happen if Sony or Nikon do it in their flagship cameras. Canon follows far more than it leads.
Bosman Photography www.bosmanphotography.com, Fast Photo Pro www.fastphotopro.com
Follow Bosman Photography on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Bosman.Photography
Sports Photography  Follow Fast Photo Pro on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Fast.Photo.Pr

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1521
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #36 on: September 18, 2012, 01:32:50 PM »
They had to design a new sensor, using a 4 yrs old sensor would get them flamed from here to eternity. The new sensor has to be the strongest part of this camera for it to work. As you can see if the body can be this small with gps and all the other crap they stuffed in there, putting it in a d series is plenty doable. That will only happen if Sony or Nikon do it in their flagship cameras. Canon follows far more than it leads.

The tech is basically the same as 4 years ago. the 5dii and 5diii RAW files show similar levels of noise, the magic happens in Digic 5+ and the jpeg rendition, thats where the 5d3 surpasses the 5dii. The sensor has not changed much.  With the 6D they have probably juggled a few variables form the 5d's and with a larger pixel pitch, we can expect better RAW noise performance than both the 5D's... this will not be due to new technology, rather via tried and tested trade-offs of MP vs Noise.
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
Sigma 24-105mm F4 ART; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 85mm L F/1.2 Mk. II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #36 on: September 18, 2012, 01:32:50 PM »

Bosman

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 879
    • View Profile
    • Bosman Photography
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #37 on: September 18, 2012, 01:45:27 PM »
They had to design a new sensor, using a 4 yrs old sensor would get them flamed from here to eternity. The new sensor has to be the strongest part of this camera for it to work. As you can see if the body can be this small with gps and all the other crap they stuffed in there, putting it in a d series is plenty doable. That will only happen if Sony or Nikon do it in their flagship cameras. Canon follows far more than it leads.

The tech is basically the same as 4 years ago. the 5dii and 5diii RAW files show similar levels of noise, the magic happens in Digic 5+ and the jpeg rendition, thats where the 5d3 surpasses the 5dii. The sensor has not changed much.  With the 6D they have probably juggled a few variables form the 5d's and with a larger pixel pitch, we can expect better RAW noise performance than both the 5D's... this will not be due to new technology, rather via tried and tested trade-offs of MP vs Noise.
I agree, the gapless lens tech on the sensor is prob the only improvement to the actual sensor but the digic processors and in camera software are what has made the bigest impact.
Bosman Photography www.bosmanphotography.com, Fast Photo Pro www.fastphotopro.com
Follow Bosman Photography on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Bosman.Photography
Sports Photography  Follow Fast Photo Pro on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Fast.Photo.Pr

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1521
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #38 on: September 18, 2012, 01:48:06 PM »
They had to design a new sensor, using a 4 yrs old sensor would get them flamed from here to eternity. The new sensor has to be the strongest part of this camera for it to work. As you can see if the body can be this small with gps and all the other crap they stuffed in there, putting it in a d series is plenty doable. That will only happen if Sony or Nikon do it in their flagship cameras. Canon follows far more than it leads.

The tech is basically the same as 4 years ago. the 5dii and 5diii RAW files show similar levels of noise, the magic happens in Digic 5+ and the jpeg rendition, thats where the 5d3 surpasses the 5dii. The sensor has not changed much.  With the 6D they have probably juggled a few variables form the 5d's and with a larger pixel pitch, we can expect better RAW noise performance than both the 5D's... this will not be due to new technology, rather via tried and tested trade-offs of MP vs Noise.
I agree, the gapless lens tech on the sensor is prob the only improvement to the actual sensor but the digic processors and in camera software are what has made the bigest impact.

Agreed. with the 5d3's larger MP, noise would have been worse, so the gapless microlenses made up for that difference and it ended up being a wash.

I would have liked Canon to offer a "E" version...
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
Sigma 24-105mm F4 ART; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 85mm L F/1.2 Mk. II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3937
    • View Profile
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #39 on: September 18, 2012, 02:28:21 PM »
high MP fullframe sensors... high compared to what?  ;)
Compared to the 30+ MP senors from Sony.

so they decided to put money in R&D to produce yet another FF sensor instead of using the 5D MK2 sensor?
if it is a new developed sensor and not some camouflaged 5D MK2 sensor.

You missed the last part of my post where I suggested is might be the same sensor die as the 5D MkIII, but with a greater number of pixels failing to make the grade. These would then be averaged together as a single pixel. If you do that across a sensor you get very respectable performance but with a lower total MP count.


That wouldn't work out, you'd just have a ton more hot pixels and I've never heard of a manufacturer calling poorly made 22MP sensors that have 2 million dead pixels a 20MP sensor. And just think, they list the image dimensions, how do you get that change with random dead pixels here and there throughout?

It does seem weird, since you'd think just re-using 5D3 sensor would be more efficient. But I can't imagine they would do something that would cost them money so you'd think it would somehow have to be some sort of masking off or less masking off of another sensor or maybe they found a way to somehow pump these ones out more cheaply because something about them makes them noticeably less expensive to make than say the 5D3 or 1DX sensor.

Or maybe they did have a low ISO DR breakthrough but what on earth were they thinking to be so slow to get they needed that and not get that tech in the 5D3 and 1DX? Those user bases will raise a storm, if just a few months later a low end FF has a sensor that blows the ones they have away. It would at least give one a lot of faith about the 5D4 though. Something would seem to have been supremely poorly thought out and planned in Canon management.


LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3937
    • View Profile
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #40 on: September 18, 2012, 02:31:29 PM »
20MP vs 21MP vs 22MP pixel pitch will have ZERO noticeable difference on SNR....
I'm picky and pixel peepy as heck and there is no way I'd be able to tell if the same exact tech was used on a 20MP a 21MP and a 22MP sensor, not remotely.

(And did the D800 not prove a thing? 36MP and very, very good high ISO.)

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1521
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #41 on: September 18, 2012, 03:05:24 PM »
20MP vs 21MP vs 22MP pixel pitch will have ZERO noticeable difference on SNR....
I'm picky and pixel peepy as heck and there is no way I'd be able to tell if the same exact tech was used on a 20MP a 21MP and a 22MP sensor, not remotely.

(And did the D800 not prove a thing? 36MP and very, very good high ISO.)

You are even more hardcore than I am...  :P
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
Sigma 24-105mm F4 ART; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 85mm L F/1.2 Mk. II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1521
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #42 on: September 18, 2012, 03:06:22 PM »
high MP fullframe sensors... high compared to what?  ;)
Compared to the 30+ MP senors from Sony.

so they decided to put money in R&D to produce yet another FF sensor instead of using the 5D MK2 sensor?
if it is a new developed sensor and not some camouflaged 5D MK2 sensor.

You missed the last part of my post where I suggested is might be the same sensor die as the 5D MkIII, but with a greater number of pixels failing to make the grade. These would then be averaged together as a single pixel. If you do that across a sensor you get very respectable performance but with a lower total MP count.


That wouldn't work out, you'd just have a ton more hot pixels and I've never heard of a manufacturer calling poorly made 22MP sensors that have 2 million dead pixels a 20MP sensor. And just think, they list the image dimensions, how do you get that change with random dead pixels here and there throughout?

It does seem weird, since you'd think just re-using 5D3 sensor would be more efficient. But I can't imagine they would do something that would cost them money so you'd think it would somehow have to be some sort of masking off or less masking off of another sensor or maybe they found a way to somehow pump these ones out more cheaply because something about them makes them noticeably less expensive to make than say the 5D3 or 1DX sensor.

Or maybe they did have a low ISO DR breakthrough but what on earth were they thinking to be so slow to get they needed that and not get that tech in the 5D3 and 1DX? Those user bases will raise a storm, if just a few months later a low end FF has a sensor that blows the ones they have away. It would at least give one a lot of faith about the 5D4 though. Something would seem to have been supremely poorly thought out and planned in Canon management.

He was probably thinking CPU's and yields.... Sensors / Monitors don't work that way :-)
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
Sigma 24-105mm F4 ART; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 85mm L F/1.2 Mk. II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #42 on: September 18, 2012, 03:06:22 PM »

UrbanVoyeur

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 80
  • To see and be seen.
    • View Profile
    • UrbanVoyeur.com
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #43 on: September 19, 2012, 07:57:55 AM »
You missed the last part of my post where I suggested is might be the same sensor die as the 5D MkIII, but with a greater number of pixels failing to make the grade. These would then be averaged together as a single pixel. If you do that across a sensor you get very respectable performance but with a lower total MP count.

That wouldn't work out, you'd just have a ton more hot pixels and I've never heard of a manufacturer calling poorly made 22MP sensors that have 2 million dead pixels a 20MP sensor. And just think, they list the image dimensions, how do you get that change with random dead pixels here and there throughout?

In sensor production, it is not all or nothing when it comes to pixels. Yes, there are dead pixels and hot pixels, but that's not what I'm talking about.  More common problems are noisy pixels, non-linear pixels and low ISO pixels.  Very often these can be corrected using the average value of a group of adjacent pixels, rather than rely on just that one.  Or by comparing them to nearby pixels and using an offset. Sometimes the only solution is to ignore the output. Typically, these problem pixels are not uniformly distributed - they tend to cluster, while the rest of the pixels may be perfect.

Since you can't use a sensor that is high res everywhere except the lower right corner where the problem pixels are, any solution must be applied uniformly to the whole sensors. Even if it means ignoring or averaging the output of perfectly good pixels.

Each sensor produced is tested and the response of each pixel measured. If a model of averaging, offsetting or ignoring problem pixels is found that will produce a lower resolution but perfectly performing sensor, the model is a applied and the sensor is used at the lower MP count. This is how many small, compact camera sensors are produced. I also think it is where the SLR AF sensor come from.

It is not necessary to apply the same correction model to every problem pixel on a given sensor as long as you end up with a uniform distribution of good pixel clusters. On a single sensor, there may be a mix of non-linear pixels, noisy pixels and  pixels that only respond at high or low light levels. As long as the corrections gives results in a consistent and uniform pitch, say groups of 2, 3 or 4 pixels, it can be tailored to correct each problem separately.  Various correction models can be tested mathematically to find the optimal solution - cleanest output, highest MP count. The results are stored in sensor correction array map that is ROM on the chip.

This method has limitations. Too many problem pixels in one area or across the sensor, and all correction models fail - the sensor is discarded. But is is quite possible to start with a sensor that won't pass at 24 MP but with correction, will work at 12 MP. Or start with 40 MP and get 20 MP. Not all the corrections are simple averaging, so the relationship between  the starting point and ending point is not always a factor of 2 or 3.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2012, 08:44:30 AM by UrbanVoyeur »

Marsu42

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4827
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #44 on: September 19, 2012, 08:12:47 AM »
can someone explain why the 6D has a new developed 20.2 MP sensor?

The reason imho is very, very simple: To put the specs below the 5d3 (22mp) and 5d2 (21mp). The design of the 6d is purely marketing driven (af, x-sync) - if they couldn't get away with simply recycling the 5d2 sensor and didn't want to cannibalize the 5d3 a "new development" was the only option.

I still expect to 6d to have very low banding/ read noise, but this is not only due to sensor design w/ Canon tech but has to do with the rest of the camera electronics. As for dr/iso, I'm curios to see the reviews, but I don't think it'll save the 6d from forgetfulness.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 6D Sensor... why?
« Reply #44 on: September 19, 2012, 08:12:47 AM »