Patent: A Few More Image Sensor Patents from Canon

[Orangutan]

Why do people react to anything negative towards Canon like their momma is being dissed? LoL

There are very few of those, maybe none. Here's the deal:

The complainers say that Canon is not keeping up in low ISO IQ. I agree.

The complainers say that Canon is not keeping up in mirrorless development. I agree.

Here's where I disagree with the vocal complainers: I don't assume everyone else shares the same values I do.

What I find annoying (and childish) is the complainers who assume that their expectations are representative of the vast majority of serious photographers, while ignoring the data that provides the best test of that assertion. Market data does not tell us what camera is objectively best (if such a thing exists) but it does tell us what camera people are willing to pay for.

The second important point the complainers overlook is this: if Canon sensors are so bad, then Nikon, Sony and the others should have eaten Canon's lunch a couple years ago. The fact that they have not must mean that Nikon, Sony, et. al. stink so bad that even a gloriously superior sensor can't rescue their sales. The problem is not that Canon sensors are inferior at low ISO (they are), it's that other brands are inferior in all else...or so it would appear from a look at sales data.

 

[Etienne]

Sony is innovating at a blazing pace. Canon has been much more conservative.

Translation: Sony is burning R&D money fast, and still can't figure out how to make a consistently profitable product line, as Canon has.

To reiterate yet again, while I would be happy to see improved sensor tech in Canon products, the market does not yet appear to demand it.

Well, I hope canon isn't as smug as you.

 

[MrToes]

What if Canon catch's up in the sensor tech war. Then the competition comes out with something even better than the "New Canon Sensors" a week or month later? :'(

It's going to be a never ending sensor tech war until a real new quantum phase light sensor comes out!

 

[jrista]

Some of these are pretty old. One dates back to 2011, another to 2013.

It is interesting that Canon has been working on light field technology. I wonder if they will employ that.

The multi-exposure patent I wash hoping would be a way to improve DR. Sounds like it's more about avoiding various blurring that can occur during long low light exposures. Still interesting, though.

About freakin time Canon received some new patents for sensor technology, though. Wonder if there will be more.

 

[privatebydesign]

<p><a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_rumours.html" target="_blank">Northlight Images</a> has posted 3 more patents and a simple breakdown of each.</p>
<p>From Northlight:</p>
<ul>
<li>Patent shows more tricks you can do with split pixels for AF [<a href="http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?PageNum=0&docid=09204067">USPTO</a>]</li>
<li>Patent about dividing longer exposures into shorter ones and adding them together [<a href="http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=09204055">USPTO</a>]</li>
<li>Patent about moving the sensor micro lens array forwards/backwards to match up with main lens [<a href="http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=09201289">USPTO</a>]</li>
</ul>
<p>We all expect the next generation of full frame Canon sensors to be a big leap forward in performance. In our opinion, Canon has no other choice.</p>

Your last sentence might upset some peeps here ;D

That is because it hasn't stood up to historical record or comparative sales numbers. Don't get me wrong, I would welcome improvements and will happily take them when they get here, but to say "Canon has no other choice" is patently untrue.

It's hard to dump $30 - 40K worth of L lenses for $5-7K body with better sensor....Otherwise, we wouldn't have this discussion today.

I would agree with Admin "Canon has no other choice". Glass is important, so is sensor.

Why would you need to "dump $30 - 40K worth of L lenses"? I paid around $12,675 for my lenses, ranging from a six month old 11-24 to a ten plus year old 24-70 f2.8 L (all bought brand new), if I had to sell them all I'd get around $10,000 at today's eBay prices. That is a depreciation of 20% that includes some non L's and older designs, if you have $40k worth of lenses you have superteles and they hold their value much better, my 300 f2.8 IS has lost a few hundred dollars in ten years! All my lenses have been depreciated back as tax write offs (apart from the 11-24 so far) and owe me literally zero.

The cost of changing system is trivial when compared to the images you will be able to take with the ground breaking new equipment by Sony/Nikon/blah blah.

 

[unfocused]

Why do people react to anything negative towards Canon like their momma is being dissed? LoL

There are very few of those, maybe none. Here's the deal:

The complainers say that Canon is not keeping up in low ISO IQ. I agree.

The complainers say that Canon is not keeping up in mirrorless development. I agree.

Here's where I disagree with the vocal complainers: I don't assume everyone else shares the same values I do.

What I find annoying (and childish) is the complainers who assume that their expectations are representative of the vast majority of serious photographers, while ignoring the data that provides the best test of that assertion. Market data does not tell us what camera is objectively best (if such a thing exists) but it does tell us what camera people are willing to pay for.

The second important point the complainers overlook is this: if Canon sensors are so bad, then Nikon, Sony and the others should have eaten Canon's lunch a couple years ago. The fact that they have not must mean that Nikon, Sony, et. al. stink so bad that even a gloriously superior sensor can't rescue their sales. The problem is not that Canon sensors are inferior at low ISO (they are), it's that other brands are inferior in all else...or so it would appear from a look at sales data.

Well said. I would add that I am not rooting for or against Canon. I just don't suffer fools gladly and many of the anti-canon comments tend to be just plain foolish. To say for example that Canon "has to" do 'A' or 'B' or even 'C' is simply ignorant. The only thing Canon has to do is maintain its market share (although I'm sure they would like to grow the market and increase their share - every company wants that.)

But it's ignorant to pretend that the path to that growth is through winning some imagined race for the newest or best technology. Most of the people on this forum are gear heads who are constantly chasing the newest technology. They in no way reflect the typical amateur or professional customer. I expect that Canon knows a lot more about their customers and about what they "must do" to maintain market share and possibly grow the market.

I've not seen any of the "pro-Canon" contributors get upset about any complaints that anyone might have about Canon Products. It's the silly "canon is doomed" commenters that seem to take everything personally, especially when confronted with the fact that their complaints are not reflected in sales.

 

[K-amps]

That is because it hasn't stood up to historical record or comparative sales numbers. Don't get me wrong, I would welcome improvements and will happily take them when they get here, but to say "Canon has no other choice" is patently untrue.

One is reminded of the one who despite several warnings, jumps off a 100 story building, and all the while as he descends, he retorts back, see I am just fine...

Thud...!

 

[Jack Douglas]

Why do people react to anything negative towards Canon like their momma is being dissed? LoL

There are very few of those, maybe none. Here's the deal:

The complainers say that Canon is not keeping up in low ISO IQ. I agree.

The complainers say that Canon is not keeping up in mirrorless development. I agree.

Here's where I disagree with the vocal complainers: I don't assume everyone else shares the same values I do.

What I find annoying (and childish) is the complainers who assume that their expectations are representative of the vast majority of serious photographers, while ignoring the data that provides the best test of that assertion. Market data does not tell us what camera is objectively best (if such a thing exists) but it does tell us what camera people are willing to pay for.

The second important point the complainers overlook is this: if Canon sensors are so bad, then Nikon, Sony and the others should have eaten Canon's lunch a couple years ago. The fact that they have not must mean that Nikon, Sony, et. al. stink so bad that even a gloriously superior sensor can't rescue their sales. The problem is not that Canon sensors are inferior at low ISO (they are), it's that other brands are inferior in all else...or so it would appear from a look at sales data.

Well said. I would add that I am not rooting for or against Canon. I just don't suffer fools gladly and many of the anti-canon comments tend to be just plain foolish. To say for example that Canon "has to" do 'A' or 'B' or even 'C' is simply ignorant. The only thing Canon has to do is maintain its market share (although I'm sure they would like to grow the market and increase their share - every company wants that.)

But it's ignorant to pretend that the path to that growth is through winning some imagined race for the newest or best technology. Most of the people on this forum are gear heads who are constantly chasing the newest technology. They in no way reflect the typical amateur or professional customer. I expect that Canon knows a lot more about their customers and about what they "must do" to maintain market share and possibly grow the market.

I've not seen any of the "pro-Canon" contributors get upset about any complaints that anyone might have about Canon Products. It's the silly "canon is doomed" commenters that seem to take everything personally, especially when confronted with the fact that their complaints are not reflected in sales.

True, and yet we keep on reading/participating - human nature I guess.

Jack

 

[privatebydesign]

That is because it hasn't stood up to historical record or comparative sales numbers. Don't get me wrong, I would welcome improvements and will happily take them when they get here, but to say "Canon has no other choice" is patently untrue.

One is reminded of the one who despite several warnings, jumps off a 100 story building, and all the while as he descends, he retorts back, see I am just fine...

Thud...!

Similarly we are all too often reminded of people who believe if they repeat a falsehood enough times, loudly enough, it will become a fact.

If Canon was ignoring the fact that the camera market has, as has often happened in the past, gone through a technological transitional phase to a more mature state and that sales numbers falloff is expected at that stage of the product cycle, I could understand a point the naysayers continually make. But the facts are that the Canon market share really isn't decreasing and their profits per unit are increasing, and they are diversifying and looking to consolidate with compatible purchases. Canon sales have not been severely impacted by the fact that their sensors are not the best at low iso DR, and lets not forget that Canon produce one of the best selling mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras in the world.

They are not ignoring the market, none of your dire warnings will change those facts.

 

[CanonGuy]

Sony is innovating at a blazing pace. Canon has been much more conservative.

Translation: Sony is burning R&D money fast, and still can't figure out how to make a consistently profitable product line, as Canon has.

To reiterate yet again, while I would be happy to see improved sensor tech in Canon products, the market does not yet appear to demand it.

I bought 5D, 5D ii, 6D and 5D iii. Wedding season is over now and I'll buy a new body around February next year. It is NOT going to be a Canon body FOR SURE. Few of my friends have done same already. I can't switch entirely because of my extensive lens collection. But the new body paired with a 35 and 50 art will be doing excellent. I don't want to name it, but I have rented the body and trust me, it's a leap ahead from Canon in many Regards and let me be more creative by doing few things which canon body is incapable of.

Let canon sit on their lazy back and take pride in their AF, speedlite etc but slip the main thing of a body, sensor lol... They have a long way to go before selling another body to me. And probably lens too!

 

[Cochese]

We all expect the next generation of full frame Canon sensors to be a big leap forward in performance. In our opinion, Canon has no other choice.</p>
[/html]

Presumably those who run Canon Rumors are buyers and supporters of Canon. And yet, with baloney statements such as this, you do more to hurt Canon than you can possibly do intentionally. Compare the pics from today's Canon cameras to Sony or Nikon. Chances are in 99% of cases, you won't be able to tell the difference. (Or quite possibly, you will like the results from Canon better, as I did when I bought the Sony A7 II to potentially replace my Canon 6D). The differences between cameras is minute and the differences between generations is minute, too. If you can't see this, or understand this, you lose all credibility.

I'm looking at the RAW image here and I can see the problem. You're stuck looking at final output.
You can't see the difference because you're seeing haze.

Here's what you're failing to understand. The RAW output on that A7 or D800/810 (amongst other products) are superior in almost every way. I'm 100% a Canon person. I can't imagine using anything else. However, I often help other people edit their photos and the quality of shadow recovery and highlight recovery is so far beyond what you can do with a 5DMIII or even a 1DX, it's just plain sad. I accept those difference because I prefer Canon's lens selection, ergonomics, and interface.

If you're looking at the final .JPG, you're going to see minimal difference in output of quality images. After all, we put out quality images with the 50D, and that system is so antiquated going back to it is painful.

After editing through my business partner's D800 files and comparing the RAW edits, it's almost laughable how much usable detail you can pull from the shadows. And even when you can pull a lot of detail from shadows on Canon's camera, you end up with very unpleasing noise patterns on the 5DMIII. It's just banding. Canon's 7D MII has actually solved that issue to a degree (my current goto camera).

But believe me when I say that photographers with open eyes can see the difference and they are switching systems.
I continually point photographers to Canon cameras. Though, only beginners. People who want to get into photography. The t2i or t3i on up are perfect options on the cheap (often sub $400US). But for serious photographers looking to upgrade to the next level and they have the money, it's pretty much been the D800 or D810. I can't lie to my friends.

I hope Canon's 5DMIV and 1DX MII comes out swinging and crushes the competition. Because even the 5DS R pales though I love those files. So much data that downsizing them barely hurts printability.

 

[K-amps]

They are not ignoring the market, none of your dire warnings will change those facts.

They may not be ignoring the market, but the market is losing patience due to their lack of adjusting to what the market expects in terms of new sensor technology turnover. How long do you think can Canon keep milking their current sensor tech and it not have an impact. Speaking to a few Retail stores, they can see a shift,.... in that their 5D's are undersold to the A7r ii's by an average margin of 5 to 1. If that's not an ominous sign, I am not sure what is in this segment. I really don't care about Rebel sales, I am not in that market.

Canon losing out in the is not good for me or for you because I don't want to get stuck with Sony/Nikon ergonomics and lose out on Canon AF and wonderful glass.... Making excuses for their corporate inertia is not good for them. It merely enables them to keep the status quo... someone needs to light a fire under them, and sadly its not going to be people on this forum...

 

[K-amps]

We all expect the next generation of full frame Canon sensors to be a big leap forward in performance. In our opinion, Canon has no other choice.</p>
[/html]

Presumably those who run Canon Rumors are buyers and supporters of Canon. And yet, with baloney statements such as this, you do more to hurt Canon than you can possibly do intentionally. Compare the pics from today's Canon cameras to Sony or Nikon. Chances are in 99% of cases, you won't be able to tell the difference. (Or quite possibly, you will like the results from Canon better, as I did when I bought the Sony A7 II to potentially replace my Canon 6D). The differences between cameras is minute and the differences between generations is minute, too. If you can't see this, or understand this, you lose all credibility.

I'm looking at the RAW image here and I can see the problem. You're stuck looking at final output.
You can't see the difference because you're seeing haze.

Here's what you're failing to understand. The RAW output on that A7 or D800/810 (amongst other products) are superior in almost every way. I'm 100% a Canon person. I can't imagine using anything else. However, I often help other people edit their photos and the quality of shadow recovery and highlight recovery is so far beyond what you can do with a 5DMIII or even a 1DX, it's just plain sad. I accept those difference because I prefer Canon's lens selection, ergonomics, and interface.

If you're looking at the final .JPG, you're going to see minimal difference in output of quality images. After all, we put out quality images with the 50D, and that system is so antiquated going back to it is painful.

After editing through my business partner's D800 files and comparing the RAW edits, it's almost laughable how much usable detail you can pull from the shadows. And even when you can pull a lot of detail from shadows on Canon's camera, you end up with very unpleasing noise patterns on the 5DMIII. It's just banding. Canon's 7D MII has actually solved that issue to a degree (my current goto camera).

But believe me when I say that photographers with open eyes can see the difference and they are switching systems.
I continually point photographers to Canon cameras. Though, only beginners. People who want to get into photography. The t2i or t3i on up are perfect options on the cheap (often sub $400US). But for serious photographers looking to upgrade to the next level and they have the money, it's pretty much been the D800 or D810. I can't lie to my friends.

I hope Canon's 5DMIV and 1DX MII comes out swinging and crushes the competition. Because even the 5DS R pales though I love those files. So much data that downsizing them barely hurts printability.

+1

Sadly, protectionism and bullying people, to not have an opinion in this matter, is quite the flavor of the day... I really do hope Canon comes out swinging... heck I will even consider moving up to a 1 series body if they can give it the best sensor in the market... that's the Canon I adopted. The Mkt. Leaders.... not sure who is at the helm of their sensor design these days. You look at Dual Pixel AF and you can see potential for so many other technologies... but they keep limiting themselves... The market needs to be vocal about what they want...

 

[YuengLinger]

<p><a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_rumours.html" target="_blank">Northlight Images</a> has posted 3 more patents and a simple breakdown of each.</p>
<p>From Northlight:</p>
<ul>
<li>Patent shows more tricks you can do with split pixels for AF [<a href="http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?PageNum=0&docid=09204067">USPTO</a>]</li>
<li>Patent about dividing longer exposures into shorter ones and adding them together [<a href="http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=09204055">USPTO</a>]</li>
<li>Patent about moving the sensor micro lens array forwards/backwards to match up with main lens [<a href="http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=09201289">USPTO</a>]</li>
</ul>
<p>We all expect the next generation of full frame Canon sensors to be a big leap forward in performance. In our opinion, Canon has no other choice.</p>

Your last sentence might upset some peeps here ;D

That is because it hasn't stood up to historical record or comparative sales numbers. Don't get me wrong, I would welcome improvements and will happily take them when they get here, but to say "Canon has no other choice" is patently untrue.

Rright. I could choose to put our life savings into next week's lottery, but that would be a FOOLISH CHOICE.

If Canon is at a performance peak with the current generation, troubled times ahead, and maybe time for collaboration.

 

[Orangutan]

protectionism and bullying people, to not have an opinion in this matter

What "protectionism?" What "bullying?" No one has said you're not entitled to hold your opinion! On the other hand, I and others are equally entitled to hold the opinion that you're mistaken. No insults have been thrown, just a little sarcasm to draw attention to errors.

Here's how the conversation went:

1. CR Guy made a prediction based on no data (that "Canon has no other choice" but to make a big leap forward on sensors. He provided no support for that.

2. Several people, including me, agreed that we would love to see better sensors, but noted that, to the contrary, previous evidence showed that Canon was very good at determining which technological improvements would be required to remain profitable.

3. A few chimed in to make more unfounded predictions, and claim to feel bullied.


A few observations for those of you who are of the opinion that Canon is doomed.

* It is not bullying to remind you that your opinion is unsupported by fact

* The analogies to lotteries and falling are very poor: Canon has a long track record of making the exact changes that need to be made to remain profitable.

* A few here treat Canon's failure to produce a better sensor as a an infidelity, but it's just a business decision.

* The fact that Canon hasn't put better sensors in their products doesn't mean they can't; it may mean only that they're keeping profit margin higher by using existing tech.

* CanonGuy: there's nothing wrong with buying another brand to serve a need that's unmet by Canon. Go for it and enjoy!

 

[Orangutan]

True, and yet we keep on reading/participating - human nature I guess.

Jack

Just trying to spread a little critical thinking and empiricism. Evidence shows it doesn't work (or I'm not any good at it) maybe I should stop.

 

[Orangutan]

Some of these are pretty old. One dates back to 2011, another to 2013.

As you well know, filing a patent can happen for more than one reason: it may be prep for a new product, or it may be a defensive patent to keep someone else from gumming up the market.

It is interesting that Canon has been working on light field technology. I wonder if they will employ that.

Light field is interesting, but from what little I know it kills resolution. Ever since LF came out I've wondered if it could be adapted as an autofocus tool.

The multi-exposure patent I wash hoping would be a way to improve DR. Sounds like it's more about avoiding various blurring that can occur during long low light exposures. Still interesting, though.

They keep working on many ideas, some of them get into our gear.

About freakin time Canon received some new patents for sensor technology, though. Wonder if there will be more.

I would love to have better low ISO DR and shadow noise characteristics, but Canon will follow the profits, not the glamour.

Cheers!

 

[infared]

I agree with the sentiment that "CANON" has to break some serious ground with the sensor tech on its new camera bodies to be competitive with the latest tech. No doubt....but, I do not feel that "I" do. I was an early adopter of the 5DIII, (camera body $3500 body only. OUCH!).
Call me stupid, but I am still very happy with it's performance. I just made a print for a customer 40x60" shot at 2500 ISO. They were WOWED and paid happily!
I am an old surfer so I will use the term that I am "duck-diving" (while paddling out through the waves, one puts the nose of his board down and goes under like a duck, letting the superfluous energy of the oncoming wave go over my head and not hit me as I make my way to the take-off zone where I can catch another beauty). Right now that is how I am approaching all the chatter with the Sony-Nikon sensor noise, etc. I have been concentrating on my image-making skills, lenses (just picked up the Sigma 20 mm Art this week, yum!), and some newer software programs. When I put my work out there to non-photo geeks no one has asked me what sensor I used. Not a one. They just interact with the photography. The goods are good.
I am keeping my eye on what develops for sure, but I am not letting it ruin "my ride". In the end...it's all about balance anyway.

 

[Orangutan]

I agree with the sentiment that "CANON" has to break some serious ground with the sensor tech on its new camera bodies to be competitive with the latest tech. No doubt....but, I do not feel that "I" do. I was an early adopter of the 5DIII, (camera body $3500 body only. OUCH!).
Call me stupid, but I am still very happy with it's performance. I just made a print for a customer 40x60" shot at 2500 ISO. They were WOWED!
I am an old surfer so I will use the term that I am "duck-diving" (while paddling out through the waves, one puts the nose of his board down and goes under like a duck, letting the superfluous energy of the oncoming wave go over my head and not hit me as I make my way to the take-off zone where I can catch another beauty). Right now that is how I am approaching all the chatter with the Sony-Nikon sensor noise, etc. I have been concentrating on my image-making skills, lenses (just picked up the Sigma 20 mm Art this week, yum!), and some newer software programs. When I put my work out there to non-photo geeks no one has asked me what sensor I used. They just interact with the photography. The goods are good.
I am keeping my eye on what develops for sure, but I am not letting it ruin "my ride".

+10

Good attitude, find the gear that works for you and enjoy it!

 

[infared]

I agree with the sentiment that "CANON" has to break some serious ground with the sensor tech on its new camera bodies to be competitive with the latest tech. No doubt....but, I do not feel that "I" do. I was an early adopter of the 5DIII, (camera body $3500 body only. OUCH!).
Call me stupid, but I am still very happy with it's performance. I just made a print for a customer 40x60" shot at 2500 ISO. They were WOWED!
I am an old surfer so I will use the term that I am "duck-diving" (while paddling out through the waves, one puts the nose of his board down and goes under like a duck, letting the superfluous energy of the oncoming wave go over my head and not hit me as I make my way to the take-off zone where I can catch another beauty). Right now that is how I am approaching all the chatter with the Sony-Nikon sensor noise, etc. I have been concentrating on my image-making skills, lenses (just picked up the Sigma 20 mm Art this week, yum!), and some newer software programs. When I put my work out there to non-photo geeks no one has asked me what sensor I used. They just interact with the photography. The goods are good.
I am keeping my eye on what develops for sure, but I am not letting it ruin "my ride".

+10

Good attitude, find the gear that works for you and enjoy it!

I will admit that my quiver of EOS-Mount lenses (ten) will keep me "duck-diving" for now...but I am certainly not going to run out and buy a Sony-of-My-Owny. Yes.. The sensor is better....and so is the sensor and capture size on the 5DIII R & S...(too much rez for me, to crunch files, etc. I just do not need it), but in my world the IMAGE is king....it's just a nice plus at this point (as it ALWAYS has been) to have improved tech behind a solid image. It's not a MUST....not by a long shot. Right now I would rather expand my imaging capabilties in other ways that are more important to my imaging growth. ;D