Canon 7D Mark II - Finally using Canon's newer fab?

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If they went to a new fab then why on earth would they not have implemented any of their column ADC or dual ISO read out patents?

Maybe it's just from the CFA filter having been made even more color blind.

They are very conservative... this might be a case of step one - get the photodiodes/microlenses/support circuitry transferred over to the new fabrication run, and step 2 being to implement the A/D on chip. Don't forget that they are currently using A/D chips from a third party and that might complicate the move as they have no experience designing them... it could be a licencing of the design problem... or countless other reasons. It will come, but with Canon expect it to take time and when it does arrive, to be good.

Perhaps, but I still tend to doubt that.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If they went to a new fab then why on earth would they not have implemented any of their column ADC or dual ISO read out patents?

Maybe it's just from the CFA filter having been made even more color blind.

Highly, highly doubtful it has anything to do with the CFA. The CFA "color blindness" might have a minor impact on color noise, but overall the primary source of read noise is the off-die stuff.

But this didn't improve the late stage read noise at all. The 59% rating would be on photon shot noise, not read noise.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I don't think sensor QE tells us much. Consider the following Nikon camera models:

Camera QE
D3 90%
D3X 42%
D3s 57%
D4 52%
D4s 52%
D610 51%
D800 56%
D810 47%

90% with the D3?! That can't be true...

But otherwise, a nice improvement!

Yeah, something is wrong with those numbers, at least the D3 one for sure.

 

[jrista]

If they went to a new fab then why on earth would they not have implemented any of their column ADC or dual ISO read out patents?

Maybe it's just from the CFA filter having been made even more color blind.

They are very conservative... this might be a case of step one - get the photodiodes/microlenses/support circuitry transferred over to the new fabrication run, and step 2 being to implement the A/D on chip. Don't forget that they are currently using A/D chips from a third party and that might complicate the move as they have no experience designing them... it could be a licencing of the design problem... or countless other reasons. It will come, but with Canon expect it to take time and when it does arrive, to be good.

Perhaps, but I still tend to doubt that.

I doubt the bit about licensing the ADC. Canon already has their own patents from in-house R&D that describe how to do dual-scale on-die CP-ADC. They patented the technology, they own it, and one has to figure they've prototyped it as well. I think they implemented it on the 120mp APS-H...given the frame rate, and the wording of one of the press releases about that sensor, I honestly cannot think they achieved those results in any other way than some kind of on-die hyper-parallel ADC.


I think it seems logical that Canon would still take it a step at a time. It would probably be more complex to move to a new fab and start cranking out a brand new design. Moving an existing design onto the new fab without changing it, then refining it later to take advantage of the new fab's increased capabilities, seems logical to me.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

That's nothing: we should all be still using Nikon D70s, QE two hundred and something percent !

Pfft. D2Xs is 476%.

http://www.sensorgen.info/NikonD2Xs.html

Hmm the site seems to be riddled with typos or is not being very clear at all what they now mean by QE since many of the numbers are beyond patently absurd.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Regarding Sensorgen.info data, he regenerated it all recently. After the site went down, a lot more data was brought over. I think there is a bug in whatever code brings the data over, because some sensors have wild read noise values and several hundred percent Q.E. I don't believe any of those numbers are valid...I think they are flukes generated by a buggy algorithm.

There's evidence to support this.

http://www.sensorgen.info/NikonD2X.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20140715194150/http://www.sensorgen.info/NikonD2X.html

Yeah now 23% makes a lot more sense.
The new site is totally messed up and lots of the data seems to be nearly random.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Maybe it's just from the CFA filter having been made even more color blind.

The low color measurement on DxOmark does seem to indicate they may have picked up a little QE from a looser CFA.

I don't think one has to do with the other. I've been told in the past that the QE modeling approach makes it effectively ignore the CFA.

Agreed. I believe the Q.E. is referring to the actual response of the silicon itself (that's usually how sensor manufacturers report it...as the silicon's response to light). That is the Q.E. of incident photons that make it all the way to the sensor.


So, to be clear, that means that even if you had a 100% response in the silicon itself (at 565nm, green light...the Q.E. is usually for green light), you could still increase overall light gathered by improving your filtering, or by eliminating filtering and going with MCS, or by improving microlens design, or by using ISOCELL in a BSI design, etc. Anything that increases the incident photon count at the photodiode will still increase overall efficiency...for whatever Q.E. you have.

well if they screen out the entire CFA effects then the 59% level seems even less believable

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

If they went to a new fab then why on earth would they not have implemented any of their column ADC or dual ISO read out patents?

Maybe it's just from the CFA filter having been made even more color blind.

They are very conservative... this might be a case of step one - get the photodiodes/microlenses/support circuitry transferred over to the new fabrication run, and step 2 being to implement the A/D on chip. Don't forget that they are currently using A/D chips from a third party and that might complicate the move as they have no experience designing them... it could be a licencing of the design problem... or countless other reasons. It will come, but with Canon expect it to take time and when it does arrive, to be good.

Perhaps, but I still tend to doubt that.

I doubt the bit about licensing the ADC. Canon already has their own patents from in-house R&D that describe how to do dual-scale on-die CP-ADC. They patented the technology, they own it, and one has to figure they've prototyped it as well. I think they implemented it on the 120mp APS-H...given the frame rate, and the wording of one of the press releases about that sensor, I honestly cannot think they achieved those results in any other way than some kind of on-die hyper-parallel ADC.


I think it seems logical that Canon would still take it a step at a time. It would probably be more complex to move to a new fab and start cranking out a brand new design. Moving an existing design onto the new fab without changing it, then refining it later to take advantage of the new fab's increased capabilities, seems logical to me.

Seems foolish to me. A new fab costs tons of money and if they are using the newer but already existing copper pipe fab they are pushing some small sensors off of that and why do all of that if they get only a small benefit out of it? The fact that they are conservative would make that less likely I'd think. Since they are making a big switch and not even having much to show. I think if they really went to a new process, they'd take full advantage.

Although maybe their patents and designs turned out to be a mess and they had to go to an old design last second? (rumors of 20MP vs 24MP sensor, etc.)

Who knows. it seems doubtful to me. but of course i can't be sure.

 

[jrista]

If they went to a new fab then why on earth would they not have implemented any of their column ADC or dual ISO read out patents?

Maybe it's just from the CFA filter having been made even more color blind.

They are very conservative... this might be a case of step one - get the photodiodes/microlenses/support circuitry transferred over to the new fabrication run, and step 2 being to implement the A/D on chip. Don't forget that they are currently using A/D chips from a third party and that might complicate the move as they have no experience designing them... it could be a licencing of the design problem... or countless other reasons. It will come, but with Canon expect it to take time and when it does arrive, to be good.

Perhaps, but I still tend to doubt that.

I doubt the bit about licensing the ADC. Canon already has their own patents from in-house R&D that describe how to do dual-scale on-die CP-ADC. They patented the technology, they own it, and one has to figure they've prototyped it as well. I think they implemented it on the 120mp APS-H...given the frame rate, and the wording of one of the press releases about that sensor, I honestly cannot think they achieved those results in any other way than some kind of on-die hyper-parallel ADC.


I think it seems logical that Canon would still take it a step at a time. It would probably be more complex to move to a new fab and start cranking out a brand new design. Moving an existing design onto the new fab without changing it, then refining it later to take advantage of the new fab's increased capabilities, seems logical to me.

Seems foolish to me. A new fab costs tons of money and if they are using the newer but already existing copper pipe fab they are pushing some small sensors off of that and why do all of that if they get only a small benefit out of it? The fact that they are conservative would make that less likely I'd think. Since they are making a big switch and not even having much to show. I think if they really went to a new process, they'd take full advantage.

Although maybe their patents and designs turned out to be a mess and they had to go to an old design last second? (rumors of 20MP vs 24MP sensor, etc.)

Who knows. it seems doubtful to me. but of course i can't be sure.

It depends on what they are doing. I'm basing my opinion off of Don's idea that Canon is doing two winddowns. The first is winding down production of smaller form factor sensors as that market collapses, which is opening up space on their newer 300mm fabs. The second winddown is of the old 200mm fab, in an effort to close it out (it's archaic, makes sense.)


Also, if Canon really is moving towards layered sensors, then moving the 7D II over to the new fab is just to get it off the old fab (it's a camera that will likely be around for at least three years...would be stupid to start manufacturing a new camera's sensors on an old fab you want to close down when all the existing products being manufactured on it reach EOL). I suspect that, if Canon really does move on the layered sensor stuff, then the newer fab would primarily be used to manufacture that stuff. If Canon is indeed going to be announcing something awesome early next year, then that would mean they are already producing "new technology" sensors on the new fab, and not simply "wasting" it on a 7D II with old tech.

 

[Lee Jay]

well if they screen out the entire CFA effects then the 59% level seems even less believable

Other way around. It could be 59% at the silicon, but the whole thing would be 59% minus whatever the CFA absorbs.