Canon to use a Sony image sensor in an upcoming APS-C ILC body? [CR1]

raptor3x

EOS Rebel SL2
Jan 26, 2012
509
9
State College, PA
whumber.com
#62
That makes no sense. Sensors and regular chips are very different. It could be because point and shoot business is almost dead, though most of those sensors weren’t built by Canon. Also, no matter what, the camera business, for everyone, is tottering. Even Sony is making fewer sensors.
I'm not talking about them making regular chips, there was a press release a few days ago that they're starting to offer foundry services to make image sensors for outside customers.
 
Jun 28, 2012
252
1
#63
Bad idea. Despite that Canon slow walked the onboard amplifier, which is why their chips have been behind, that era is over. Canon has an excellent semiconductor manufacturing structure. They’ve been doing it for decades. Having them go to Sony for everything eliminates any chance they could advance further. They make a whopping number of video sensors, including some of the worlds most advanced.

I’d like to see them apply some of the technology they’ve been showing at the Canon shows here in NYC every two years, or so.

Just don’t forget that Canon is much larger and more diversified than Nikon is, and that Sony makes almost all of its profits from the Playstation, games, accessories and network, not from their hardware sales.
I assume you are claiming Canon has moved the VGA on-chip? I had suspect this looking at some of the tear-downs recently. It looks like the ADC(s) is still off-off chip but they have moved them to the main PCB (they used to be parked right on the back of the sensor PCB). These also appear to be bigger ADC packages which I presume do not contain an AFE.

Do you have any references to discussions of this?
 

raptor3x

EOS Rebel SL2
Jan 26, 2012
509
9
State College, PA
whumber.com
#65
I assume you are claiming Canon has moved the VGA on-chip? I had suspect this looking at some of the tear-downs recently. It looks like the ADC(s) is still off-off chip but they have moved them to the main PCB (they used to be parked right on the back of the sensor PCB).
That's very unlikely that they would move them so much farther away as that opens you up to much more electronic noise. The lack of ADCs on the back of the chip, along with Canon explicitly saying they were moving the ADCs on chip in an IR interview and the sudden increase in dynamic range strongly point toward the ADCs being on chip in current Canon bodies.
 
Jun 28, 2012
252
1
#66
That's very unlikely that they would move them so much farther away as that opens you up to much more electronic noise. The lack of ADCs on the back of the chip, along with Canon explicitly saying they were moving the ADCs on chip in an IR interview and the sudden increase in dynamic range strongly point toward the ADCs being on chip in current Canon bodies.
OK, can you provide a link to a statement (actually from Canon) that they put the ADC's on chip. I thought that as well and made that argument. however, if you look at the teardown of the 5DIV and some of the shots of the 80D MB there is what appears to be a multi-channel ADC chip between the DiGiC part and the sensor. I know that they DID improve the DR starting with that generation but they could have done that by reducing the effective noise figure ahead of the ADC as well. Looking at Bill Claff's results, the DR curves look like the 5DIII generation just moved up a stop.

This all said, I looked at the M5 which is supposed to resemble the 80D and the recent teardown of the EOS R which is supposed to be similar to the 5DIV and I don't think I see a similar ADC chip. If the amps are on board, they can tolerate more noise since the signal levels coming down from the sensor would be louder.
 

raptor3x

EOS Rebel SL2
Jan 26, 2012
509
9
State College, PA
whumber.com
#67
OK, can you provide a link to a statement (actually from Canon) that they put the ADC's on chip. I thought that as well and made that argument. however, if you look at the teardown of the 5DIV and some of the shots of the 80D MB there is what appears to be a multi-channel ADC chip between the DiGiC part and the sensor. I know that they DID improve the DR starting with that generation but they could have done that by reducing the effective noise figure ahead of the ADC as well. Looking at Bill Claff's results, the DR curves look like the 5DIII generation just moved up a stop.

This all said, I looked at the M5 which is supposed to resemble the 80D and the recent teardown of the EOS R which is supposed to be similar to the 5DIV and I don't think I see a similar ADC chip. If the amps are on board, they can tolerate more noise since the signal levels coming down from the sensor would be louder.
Here's the Imaging-Resource interview with Masaya Maeda.

IR Interview with Masaya Maeda said:
DE: This is actually a very technical question. I’m not sure if it’s one that you would be free to answer or not, but with sensor technology some have pointed to the analog-to-digital conversion implementations being very critical for image quality and dynamic range. Can you tell us whether Canon currently uses on-chip or off-chip A/D converters?

MM: Right now, we use both on-chip and off-chip, but recently I made the decision going forward to concentrate on the on-chip.

DE: Mm-hmm. Yes.

MM: The intent is to increase the performance. In terms of cost, this may be a little negative, but in terms of the direction to take, this will make us more competitive.
DE: So the net cost, the combined cost of the sensor and separate A/D is less than a sensor with A/D on it. Ah, I didn’t realize that!
 
Likes: pj1974

3kramd5

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,655
165
#69
Yes, I remember seeing that one. I wonder if that was after the 80D and 5DIV. Both iof those appear to have external ADC's. Not sure about the "R" and M5.
What do they use for audio from the mic input? An integrated solution? If not, there would still be an ADC even if the image sensor has its on die.
 
Jun 28, 2012
252
1
#70
What do they use for audio from the mic input? An integrated solution? If not, there would still be an ADC even if the image sensor has its on die.
In this case the thing is connected to the sensor board. Here is the sensor PCB. Note the blue ribbon cable that comes off the sensor board (middle left) and folds down to the bottom left.

back-800x535.jpg


This cable connects to the main board as shown below:

back1-800x505.jpg


The signals on this cable feed over to the Analog Devices part above and to the left of the ribbon connector attachment connector.

These signals don't appear to be going to the AV connectors on the edge of the camera (although, I also at first thought that).
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D Mark IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,655
165
#71
In this case the thing is connected to the sensor board. Here is the sensor PCB. Note the blue ribbon cable that comes off the sensor board (middle left) and folds down to the bottom left.

View attachment 181553

This cable connects to the main board as shown below:

View attachment 181554

The signals on this cable feed over to the Analog Devices part above and to the left of the ribbon connector attachment connector.

These signals don't appear to be going to the AV connectors on the edge of the camera (although, I also at first thought that).
Thanks. The second image is too blurry for me to read the PN, but I’ll take your word it’s an ADC.

Boy is that blue flex cable an ugly run...
 
Jun 28, 2012
252
1
#72
Thanks. The second image is too blurry for me to read the PN, but I’ll take your word it’s an ADC.

Boy is that blue flex cable an ugly run...
Agreed. It could be a few things but the one thing that you can see clearly is the Analog Devices logo. The PN may be a problem anyway since the parts may have a special PN just for Canon. Semiconductor companies often times play games with part numbering. For example they may have a catalog part at a given price, they may offer that same part (possibly with a different pinout and some features killed or not tested) to someone like Canon (in large volume, at a significantly lower price) but mark it differently. That "different" PN may not appear in any catalog. FWIW: I come from the semiconductor business (now retired). That part bears a resemblance to a 10 channel part that AD makes.
 
Sep 1, 2016
14
34
#74
This is an embarrassing post from CR guy. I guess not enough people are leaking stories so we have to fill with this nonsense.

Canon is on record as talking proudly as being an "end to end" imaging company, who make everything from their sensors through to printers. They've just had an event in Europe showcasing their sensors, that they're trying to sell to other companies as the best. Further, they're aggressively going after Sony in the mirrorless space.

So yeah, I don't see that happening, ever.
 
Jul 31, 2018
297
110
#75
@David Hull and @3kram5d ...guys with your line of expertise (semi conductors/electronics) should team up with Roger Cicala at lensrentals.com .. it would give us even better tear-downs! (seriously). (y)
 
Last edited:
Jul 31, 2018
297
110
#76
Canon is on record as talking proudly as being an "end to end" imaging company, who make everything from their sensors through to printers. They've just had an event in Europe showcasing their sensors, that they're trying to sell to other companies as the best. Further, they're aggressively going after Sony in the mirrorless space.
that does not stop them from using 3rd party sensors in many/most/all (?) of their (compact/Powershot) cameras, including from Sony.

for a whoke number of reasons i personally also don't believe *this specific rumour* - Canon supposedly using an existing Sony APS-C image sensor (presumably the same part as in Fuji XT3) in an interchangable lens camera.

But *in general* it may very well happen any time.

competing "on the outside" and "celebrating rivalry" while at the same time collaborating with competitors "behind the scenes" is regular business practice not only in the consumer electronics industry. no problem with that, except the players should not consider us "end users" to be "too stupid to ever notice". :)
 
Nov 12, 2018
2
0
#78
A lot of nonsense on this thread. It is very unlikely that Canon will use Sony sensors on their ILC’s.

There is a lot of discussion on technological issues which are irrelevant. In the unlikely event that Canon will use a Sony sensor would be due to change in corporate strategy, not due to technological reasons.
 
Jun 7, 2014
213
67
#79
A lot of nonsense on this thread. It is very unlikely that Canon will use Sony sensors on their ILC’s. ...
In this Interview: Canon Q&A: Imaging chief promises EOS-M for enthusiasts, more and better APS-C lenses, and new printers “in the very near future” , Masaya Maeda said:

MM: First of all, for those cameras with interchangeable lenses, the sensors are all Canon-made sensors. However, as you say, for compact cameras we use both in house-made sensors and external vendor sensors. As to whether to use the third-party vendors’ sensors or not, naturally what we are aiming for is to make a very good camera, so if we determine that a better camera can be made using a third party-made sensor, there’s a possibility that we’ll use such sensors.

He is "Senior Managing Director and Chief Executive of Canon Inc's Image Communication Products Operations". He clearly said, that canon may use third-party-sensors in their Cameras with interchangeable lenses. So we are not talking about nonsense.
 
Nov 12, 2018
2
0
#80
The interview was made more than 3 years ago which is a long time in the past.

The interview had 2 subjects: ILC’s and digital camera/PS (fixed lens). When third party sensors were mentioned, was MM referring to ILC’s or digital cameras/PS?