The paper you shared around last year had a novel solution for this, that they didn't have years ago. Maybe the paper you shared is actually true, and they do have a solution that gives you global shutter while maintaining (or increasing!) dynamic range.
Has Canon developed a new 21mp sensor for the Canon EOS R system? [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
The paper you shared around last year had a novel solution for this, that they didn't have years ago. Maybe the paper you shared is actually true, and they do have a solution that gives you global shutter while maintaining (or increasing!) dynamic range.
You make it sound like a trade-off, but the jist of this announcement is that they have a solution that give you not only global shutter, but also increased, not decreased, DR.
The Canon paper on a new type of sensor talked about 100% of the added DR being on the high side. Yes, it'd be earth-shatteringly great if it could be improved on the low side, but I don't think we've ever seen an improvement of more than, like, what, a stop a year max? and not every year either. So either you're getting what you want because this announcement is basically that Canon is increasing sensitivity more in one year than the entire industry has managed in a quarter century, or, a bit more boring, but that the extra 8-9 stops over the R5 is mostly or all on the high side.
depends on what you mean be a "c" .. a Sony "c' .. no, but a 5c (which in canon's terms is a video camera) they may.
There's no credible rumor that this is coming out for the RF mount. CanonWatch .. "theorized" that it was, the rumor was just that they created this sensor.
Sony's global shutter sensors are far more advanced than Canon's. The two aren't even on the same planet right now. Canon doesn't even have the facilities to mass-produce a stacked sensor such as what Sony is doing. While Canon has impressively caught up to stills performance, Sony's experience and R&D into stacked sensor design has given them a huge lead in this area. The impressive part is that Canon has had to work much harder to improve their sensors because their fabrication capability has fallen behind.
Canon's high DR sensors are all around video related applications. End stop. Every patent. Usually it's about automotive applications these days.
There's nothing out there that suggests these patents (or tech) will every be used for stills cameras.
Everyone's racing away with this, but no one stated this was going into an EOS R camera. No. One. CW guessed that maybe it may, but it was just a guess.
Last edited:
You seem to argue 1) Canon can't make them and 2) Canon is making them only for the video cameras :-D I don't think both arguments will prove to be correct.
BTW I've worked in Japanese engineering since like 1992, and there are often cases where firms don't make the parts they design or even the goods they design. The microprocessor company ARM for instance subcontracts all of its manufacture out. iPhones famously are made by FoxConn in China. Unix workstations I worked on the operating system of shipped with three name tags from one production run. In a later job I was a purchasing agent for Toshiba, Hitachi, and Sony buying Motorola PAL's they needed for their own goods. Despite these firms making PAL's themselves, and being competitors with Motorola, they couldn't make the high-end PAL's so my team at Omron basically acted as a purchasing agent, hiding from Motorola the fact that the ultimate customer was their big competitors. I don't see any reason why it's utterly and totally out of the question Canon might do something similar.
If Canon lacks production capability for something they've published papers on and now are rumored to be manufactured, then either 1) they're building capability you don't know about, or 2) they're not making it themselves. Neither possibility would shatter my world.
You seem to insist that the video and stills worlds have absolutely no overlap, and that's simply not true now if it ever was completely true in the past.
Cameras are clearly used for both, ranging from the iPhone up to the R5.
You're arguing basically that users of a camera that is stills capable, just absolutely, positively, under no circumstances whatsoever that could ever be imagined in the history of the universe, might want a global shutter or more DR or auto ND.
I'm not predicting all sensors from the two worlds will merge.
But as a stills shooter, I can see advantages in global shutter, and 20 stops dynamic range at times, and even if not suitable for all possibly imaginable subjects, and in-camera ND ability.
I'd totally buy that camera.
So, if this sensor does end up being used in a film camera, they'll make at least one sale. And it sounds like I won't be the only one.
Something else to consider is that it might simply be a special model, at least to gauge reaction. While it might be too expensive to engineer an entire camera around this sensor, it may make quite a bit of sense to make a special model of the R1 or what have you. Just as they used to make the EOS-1 and EOS-1RS (with pellicle mirror), or later the EOS-1D and EOS-1Ds, they might make two or even three versions of the R1. Again they might make a slow hi-res version and fast lo-res version, but also a slow hi-DR version. If the sensor's seeing use in cine cameras, then they basically have done the R&D for free. And if the body's seeing use in normal-sensor cameras, they've got the body for free. There will be some work making a model with this sensor, but perhaps little enough to either make a profit, or at least use it as a halo model.
I think people put too much stock in the stacked sensor design. Canon proved there are other ways to skin that cat, even if they are not as efficient. As far as guessing Canon might bring a tech they've been selling for years, I don't think it was ever a big stretch to see this coming. I personally threw it on my wish list for the R1 months ago when the expected drop was 2022-23. Same as the uber mega pixel 5Ds style sensor and camera pending. Some of this stuff is very obvious when you look at the past development trends.
Last edited:
You seem to think that capacitors are somehow a fixed size. They're not. Size probably varies fairly directly with charge-holding capacity. They can probably, very approximately, make two capacitors each with half the capacity of a big one, in about the size of the big one.
Granted these half-size capacitors would have half the total capacity, and lose one stop of top-end dynamic range.
But hello, the design makes up for that by letting you do the equivalent of a simultaneous HDR shot to gain ten more stops.
I just can't figure out why you're slagging members off with insults like "ridiculous."
Sure things will move. But you may not realize how short a microsecond is. Even really fast things may not move an entire pixel in a microsend.
I'll try to give you some numbers. Say it's 24MP with exactly 6000x4000 pixels. If we can really do 1ns/999ns (which adds up to 1 microsecond) slicing between our two sets of buckets, then it's a question of how fast across the frame moves in 1 microsecond. How fast would something have to be moving in order that exposures once a microsecond aren't actually connected, but rather a series of discrete dots?
To start with say our lens can resolve to about 2 pixels accuracy, just a little bit fuzzy. To get all the way across 6000 pixels, at no more than 2 pixels per microseond, would require 3000 microseconds. That's 3 thousandths of a second, or 1/333. Any faster than that and it ceases to look like a smooth continuous motion blur.
But that is freaking fast. How often do you have something in your frame that goes from not even the frame, to crossing the entire frame, to exiting the frame, in 1/300 or less of a second?
And if it's blurrier (too near or far to be in focus), point features won't be 2 pixels on the sensor but more. it could move even faster and still give the appearance of smooth continuous motion.
And that all is if the final image will be used at 6000x4000. If you're going to scale down to 1500x1000 for the web or what have you, it can be travelling yet four times faster yet.
So again, I'll totally grant that these special modes may not give precisely the expected results for all possible subjects. But I think few people are taking photos of things that are in the frame for less than 1/300 of a second. And when they do, maybe they decide they can't use this special mode for that special shot. But that's the story of our lives, man. Nothing in photography can be used for literally every shot, can it?
Last edited:
There are fundamental core reasons why stacked is better for global shutter - it's not just a "nice to have", the fact is that unless you either go BSI, or you go stacked because you only have so much silicone space. On a normal sensor for efficiency, you need all that space taken up for photodiode wells. Anything that gets in the way of that will cost you stills dynamic range performance. That's just well, physics. Sony's done several different novel solutions (and even Canon has come up with a few) but all of them are based upon stacked designs. Usually three-layer designs so you can incorporate memory. Canon's done more R&D on global shutter stacked designs than global shutter non stacked designs. To get around using stacked you have to use novel solutions such as time slicing. but it's imperfect for both video and stills. you can get around it in video by making the slices smaller and smaller, but that's still not a good solution for stills.
To get too stacked sensors, Canon first has to develop a BSI sensor. They haven't even gotten that far yet. So no, when looking a "past development trends" there's really nothing out that that suggests Canon is about to shove a global shutter sensor into what is a stills camera first and foremost.
Last edited:
It's the stop less of highlights recovery (given the same photon shot noise on the subject).
I don't see how. The piece of silicon is able to hold just that many electrons due to Pauli exclusion principle.
Are you about being creative with numbers in specs?
I've seen articles that mention the biggest deterrent to this tech (in 2017) was the inherent loss of DR, but nothing about Son'ys stacked sensor design. I imagine the stack sensor may be inherently better, but I haven't read anything that suggested it or similar tech was needed. I don't understand the tech well enough to know whether the stacked sensor poses any hindrances based on the architecture their global sensor, but I don't think that's a stretch either.
Again, this is not a theoretical sensor, they have current distributors in place for the industrial CMOS sales now. This is tech that is well down the road with a little maturation. Unfortunately, I can't find the white paper Canon published on it a few years back, but I don't think that is necessary to prove the point. Canon has been busy.
What I've learned, after five pages here, is that 21 MP is not a deal killer. More to a camera than MP.
Epiphany.
Epiphany.
GS sensor will come but it'll be expensive. so no surprises but GS sensor in R line up is questionable? people are complaining R5 is expensive so how is Canon going to price this. it most likely will end up in speciality product and high end cine line where they can ask for high price. I can see them putting this in R when competition like Sony start doing it and use GS sensor in their A9 series. Sony started doing this by using stacked sensor in A9 series and ask for a premium price. I can't see Canon using this in their 1DX equivalent R. they'll have to maintain a certain price point for this series. Canon might create a new series for R.
I have to step in here, Arm Ltd. sells designs and architecture licenses, they don't sell actual silicon. So Arm doesn't have any manufacturing to subcontract out. However, a lot of Arm licensees do use fab-less design, so they have e.g. TSMC produce the design they have licensed from Arm.
Agreed, of course. I agree Arm's not a B2C company like Canon (or at least, Canon's EF and RF lines of cameras). Still, B2B, B2C, that's not really the core of my point. My point is that ARM designs stuff they can't manufacture. Apple designs stuff they can't manufacture. My personal work history involves Sony, Fujitsu, Toshiba, Hitachi, all MAKERS of PALs, nonetheless designing quite a few PALs they didn't have the capability to make and thus outsourcing their manufacture to Motorola via my old firm Omron.
In fact you'd probably have a hard time finding a firm the size of Canon that DOES manufacture literally everything they design.
And yet while Canon's described a certain sensor in detail in papers, and we now have leaks of the coming manufacture of something fitting the papers' description... nonetheless the website owner is telling us that because he personally doesn't know that Canon has facilities to manufacture this part, therefore it is absolutely utterly impossible that the part is the part described in the paper. And insulting me for even suggesting it.
Now that has been replaced with nm.
People keep comparing Intel 10 nm, AMD 7nm, and ARM 5nm even though their architectures are so much different.
If a global shutter is coming, I'm going to have to consider purchasing new pants.
Global shutter will avoid banding when using flash, and allows much higher shutter speeds with flash.
In 2017, Canon published a research paper on that 2/3" sensor. It was published in an IEEE Journal, and titled "A 1.8e-rms Temporal Noise Over 110-dB-Dynamic Range 3.4 μm Pixel Pitch Global-Shutter CMOS Image Sensor With Dual-Gain Amplifiers SS-ADC, Light Guide Structure, and Multiple-Accumulation Shutter".
The rumors is very believable, but whether it is practical or ready for everyday use in a consumer product is another story.
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
