Where are Canons innovation?

[jrista]

I think Nikon could probably fabricate their own sensors. They used to in years past. Their management thought it would be more profitable to stop investing money in their own fabrication, and buy their sensors and the like third party. I don't think that decision really changed the fundamentals for Nikon.

I think they could too, but it takes time to ramp up to speed, plus, who actually owns the design for the sensor???

What happens if a Chinese company decides to get into DSLR's and gets their financial hands on Sony? Poof! They now have sensors and a fabrication facility... and with this, away goes the Nikon supply.

A lot of camera components are fairly easy to manufacture and there are numerous facilities around the world that you can contract out to fairly easily, but the two killers are large sensors (lots of competition for p/s fabrication) and large optical elements. That's probably why Canon keeps it's fluorite lens facility "close to home"

And back to the topic about where are Canon's innovations... you have to look at lenses... fluorite glass, nano-coatings, lightweight materials, focusing motors and algorithms, diffractive optics, and slip-in teleconverters. You can't tell the difference between a series one and a series two "big white" by looking at them from the outside, but pick them up and use them.... lighter, faster and better focusing, stellar image quality... it had to come from somewhere.

And going back to camera bodies, look at the Digic chips.... go back to the not so distant past and pick up a 5D2 with it's Digic4 processor. Then we went to dual Digic4 (2X faster), the Digic5 (6X faster), then Digic5+ (17X faster), and the 1DX with dual Digic5+ (34X faster). With 34 times the computing power of a 5D2, you can bet that there has been a lot of work and innovation on the processing algorithms, and what is to come? Digic 6 is out in p/s cameras and I would not be surprised to see dual Digic6 in the rumoured 7D2... will it have the computing power to track and focus on that bird in flight, recognizing which part of the image is the bird and which part to ignore?

All good points, and I agree with all of them.

I actually find it a bit sad that Nikon is the company they are. I actually kind of wish they were a bit more conservative, and able to put up more of a fight against Canon and Sony. Over the long term, I actually wonder if Nikon will still be here in ten years as the second major photography company, or whether Sony will have taken over. All things being equal, I still consider Nikon equipment to be superior to Sony, and losing them as a major competitor would actually be a huge negative for Canon users...it would eliminate a key competitor, and that would only mean Canon's conservative nature (which is currently their strength) would assert itself with a vengeance (which would still be good for Canon, but might actually end up being bad for the consumer and professional in the long run.)

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Nikon doesn't make a fraction of the revenue Canon does on their photography division. That doesn't bode well for future Nikon innovation. As it stands, the bulk of the innovation in Nikon's most recent camera bodies came from other companies, like Sony. That is a precarious position to be in...relying on other companies so much. If any one of them faltered or failed, Nikon could be dragged right down with them.

This is a point so important that it is staggering! There are not a lot of companies out there producing large quantities of imaging sensors that could go into DSLR's... What happens if Sony fails, or at the least, gets rid of the portion of it's business that makes the sensors for Nikon? Hopefully, someone will buy that division and the production will continue, but if it doesn't, Nikon will be out of business until someone else can set up a production line and get up to speed... a process that will take years....

I have thought about the what's if's for the end result of this evil alliance. Sony being sony, they like to start things and forget about them. Will sony be ready when nikon needs them? Or, given that sony doesn't seem to care to much, would they sell the same sensor tech to other brands? Is the deal with sony/nikon exclusive? that would be interesting to know (if I shot on nikon, I'd want to know!!!)

another outcome, Sony gets the bug to dip further into the SLR world (is the A7 and A7r a prelude?), so they decide to gimp the sensors for nikons next round of bodies and put the real nice ones in theirs?

Or, sony could just be like a crack dealer and up the price for the next round of sensors!

On the positive side of it for nikon, maybe the deal with sony is a temp measure. They did not have the R&D power to match canon's sensors in MP's, so in comes sony. sony makes the sensors for 1 cycle of updates, which gives nikon time and R&D $$$ to build something of their own again?

Who knows really. But I can't help but believe that partnering with sony was a dangerous move for nikon

 

[sanj]

I was just wondering about where Canons innovation has gone? Sure, they put a touch screen on a dslr, but that is not really innovative. We´ve had this on smart phones for a long time (yes, they are caneras as well), but that is about it. WiFi? They have offered WiFi for a long time as well, but as an add on feature. Integrating it is more of an evolution, the same as with the touch screen.

The reason I ask this question, "where are the innovation" is because I recently bought my wife a Sony NEX-6, anf my poor 550D looked really really ancient next to it!! Dont get me wrong, I do enjoy shooting my canon, and I have solid lenses, but it really was a huge gap between the Canon and the Sony.

I do think that Canon produces very good, solid performing cameras, no doubt. The 5D3 and the 1DX really dont have true competition. They are not the best at everything, but as a whole, perhaps the best tools avaliable for the professionals. However, I´m not a professional, though quite enthustiastic
Where is Canons equivalent to the Sony A7/R or the Nikon DF? Where is the downloadable apps for the Camera, motion sensors etc.? The EOS M? Never tried it, but from what I understand, a good, solid performer (after the FW update), but not very innovative.

The thing is, the people at Canon are not stupid, I am sure they have all the technology in the world to make super innovative cameras (yes, even fix the DR-problem that really isn´t a problem), but why dont they show us, or just give us some hints? Where are Canon at the CES?

I am not the type that want the latest and greatest technology at the moment it is released. But, I am gonna upgrade my equipment in a couple of years. Hopefully I can stick to Canon and not feel I´m buying an old relic.

First off, check patent filings. Canon innovated almost 3200 times last year. Thats a lot of innovation, and from a patent count standpoint, Canon actually innovated more than Sony, and a hell of a lot more than Nikon.

Second, adding a touch screen to a camera could be considered innovative. They did not innovate touch screens, but they have produced some innovative ways of accessing and managing camera settings and configuration.

Third, are you seriously forgetting all the innovations Canon has included in their most recent cameras? The 1D X alone is PACKED with innovation, several in the AF system, several more in their metering system, the way their meter and AF system is linked with a dedicated processor is innovative, they innovated with their new shutter and mirror assembly that broke the 12fps barrier, they innovated Dual Pixel AF.

Don't forget, photography is as much about the lens as it is about the sensor and the camera. Canon has even more innovations packed into their newest lenses, and they have a whole host of additional lens releases slated for 2014.

I think your being naive if you think that simply responding to your competitors is innovative. On the contrary, being a copy-cat "me too!" company is actually about the farthest thing from innovative as you can get. Nikon is actually not a very innovative company. Nikon is a company of alliances...they ally themselves with counterbodies like Sony, then buy and sometimes share their own technology in order to produce a product. Nikon does not have a cohesive approach to producing cameras...just look at their camera model naming scheme, and the only thing you'll see is schizophrenia. Nikon camera names are chaotic, confusing, and even potentially conflicting. Nikon, since they don't innovate critical technology, has some extra time to produce fancy little tidbits such as 24karat gold plated cameras, the Nikon Df, and a whole host of other random, one-off, and frequently quirky little devices that...for a SHORT time...make fans rave, but over the long run do NOTHING to make them a better company.

Canon, on the other hand, is most assuredly innovative. Canon, given their track record, doesn't give a flying rat's ass about "the competition." Canon rarely produces cameras that "directly" compete with anything their primary competition has to offer...which is why we don't often see things like a Canon SomethingD with 36mp, or a full frame mirrorless to "directly compete with" the Sony A7r. We probably WON'T see such things either. Canon is not a copycat "me too!" company. They are an innovative company. Canon, as it stands, is actually a company that really seems to listen to their customers, is diligent about filtering the noise from the critical customer demands, careful and conservative in their development, testing, and refinement of their products, and will deliver when they believe they have found a product that TRULY answers THEIR, CANON'S, CUSTOMER DEMANDS. Whatever Canon releases in the coming years, I highly doubt anything but the 1D X will have any "direct" competition from either Sony or Nikon. Whatever Canon releases, it will rather pointedly service Canon customer needs.

Canon hasn't stopped innovating. They just aren't rushing. (Oh, and they have no reason to "hype" by dropping pointless little rumorbombs all over the place to get peoples hopes up about technology that isn't ready yet.)

I am not denying that Canon is not innovating, they are, how else would they be market leader! They have an enormous R&D department, not only for photography, but also medical imaging (I use large Canon x-ray detectors at work, they are very good!). However they dont listen too much at customers. How many years did it take for them to implement Auto ISO in M-mode? Oh, and only in the 1DX, which cost way too much for most people. Do they even have spot metering linked to the chosen focus point? Fokus peaking? Zebra? Intervallometer? No!! They dont listen too much. They are a business, and in it to make money, and that they do well. Canon make a camera, not to be as good as it can be, but to fit a gap in the market. Reasonable, but not exciting. As you put it, "Canon, given their track record, doesn't give a flying rat's ass about "the competition." This is very arrogant, and is sure gonna cost them customers. We saw a little about this in the 50D -> 60D, more or less gimping the camera. In the 70D, they redeemd themself.

Comparing the old 550D with the rather new nex-6 is not fair, but how did the rebel series develop? Sensor, pretty much the same from 550D to 700D (minor tweaks). 550D -> 600D, added wireless flash control. 600D -> 650D, touch screen and articulated screen, also upped the AF (?), 650D -> 700D Changed the knob to go all the way around... Small steps, carefull evolution, nothing big. Though, they are entry level cameras, they could have done more, not keeping at a minimum all the time. But then again, as tools they are good, steady cameras. No denying!

As Neuroanatomist asked earlier, if I really find the Nikon DF innovative? Well, no, not innovative in the common sense, but it is a very bold move! Not regarding the Leicas (rangefinders), it is probably the second FF mirrorless camera with ICL (Sony A7/R as the first). Anyway, they are early on. It also has no video, which is bold, and it is ugly as hell! Would Canon launch this? No, they wouldn´t. But they also wouldn´t launch something like the Nikon 1 AW 1.

Dont get me wrong, I do like my canon dslr, and as several people has pointed out, they are very very good at lenses. My 70-200 F4L IS is absolutely fantastic!!! In a couple of years, when I´m gonna change camera, I probably will stick with canon. My only reason to jump to Sony is to be able to share accessories/lenses with my wifes nex.

Shit my head is in the gutter. I so misread that.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

The problem with the Df is not that it's an intriguing and interesting little camera. Nikon has no problem with intriguing and interesting. Like I said, 24karat Gold Plated Lizard Skin DSLR. The problem with the Df, is Nikon didn't put in the proper effort. It doesn't sell not because it's got a "retro" design. It doesn't sell because it probably has one of THE WORST control designs on the face of the planet. Stacked dials? Seriously? That's about the most useless control mechanism I can think of. Nikon rushed the Df to market. Again, probably because they felt they had to, in order to attract more interest in a niche line, because...well a) that's what they do, and b) they are having a hard time selling things like the D800 (it's total sales volume is a fraction of the 5D III.)

If Canon put their mind to releasing a retro-styled DSLR, I would bet good money that not only would they do it, they would do it right, do it on their own time table, and when it finally hit the shelves, it would sell well. Why? Because it wouldn't be impossible to control, and people would know that it had that Canon guarantee of quality behind it. It would have been thoroughly and properly tested and field vetted before it hit the streets. It would have Canon's superb and superior customer service backing it up.

Will Canon do it? Well, probably not. I'm sure some people are demanding it, but again...Canon responds to the most critical demands first and foremost, and they only have so much money to spend on R&D.

I agree about stacked knobs and what about the 1/2 stop shutter dial....hullo? The Df is a nice looking camera, but that's exactly who Nikon have gone for...looks over substance. It's an ok camera but it's UI is severaly limited. Most selections have to be made in the menu system which kind of misses the point with a retro styled camera. I suspect that a lot of buyers who are attracted to this camera want to "look" like a photographer over actually "being" a photographer. It's the strength of the images which count and not what the box looks like.
I have an old Canon A1 and AE1 program. I bought them new a long time ago...do I use these at weddings to give the impression I'm a real photographer? Certainly not! I'm hired fro my skill and reputation and not for the camera in my hands...lets fact it, anyone with deep pockets can buy a pro camera but that doesn't make them a professional.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Auto Micro adjust patent....sound like innovation to me

 

[Pitbullo]

Auto Micro adjust patent....sound like innovation to me

Lol yeah! I saw this announcement earlier and thought, there it is!
Good to see they have taken a pretty basic function, and tries to improve on it as well. Hopefully they will implement focus adjustment in more models, not just 70D and upwards. I really really miss it in my little 550D.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Auto Micro adjust patent....sound like innovation to me

Lol yeah! I saw this announcement earlier and thought, there it is!
Good to see they have taken a pretty basic function, and tries to improve on it as well. Hopefully they will implement focus adjustment in more models, not just 70D and upwards. I really really miss it in my little 550D.

I remember when the 40D came out with live view, I was showing a friend of mine who is a professional landscape photographer...at first he was sceptical but pretty soon he saw the benefit. It's a shame it too Canon so long to bring out a 5DII with that feature. At the time a lot of Nikon fanboys were running the feature down. But the ability to compose, meter, check DOF and lens flare so easily is a serious benefit to landscape work. Nikon's implementation of Live view has been patchy and not a fully though out as Canon's...which always makes me laugh when I hear people say the 8D00 is better than the 5DIII for landscape work. Sure, more resolution...but what of the rest of the camera?
Canon's live view now has dual pixel AF, a built in spirit level and has been improved over a number of years. I looked over a D7000 a few months back and it looks like Nikon have gone backwards with theirs.

Then there's the micro adjustment, again it's getting better over time. My 5DII allowed me to adjust each lens, but my 5DIII allows me to adjust zoom lenses at each end of their focal scales...nice. It's looking like a 5D4 might do all this automatically! Very nice!

 

[rs]

Where is the downloadable apps for the Camera

http://www.canon.co.uk/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/Digital_SLR/eos_remote.aspx

Where is Canons equivalent to the Sony A7/R or the Nikon DF?

I hope you're not suggesting the Df is innovative? If so, Morgan make the most innovative cars in existence. There's nothing like a modern engine nailed into a chassis made of timber

Sony throw a lot of ideas out there, mostly random. Some stick. Others don't. Some are terrible decisions for their more established user base. For instance, the Sony QX10/100 are fairly random. Buying out Konica Minolta's camera business was a good move, it got them some serious recognition overnight. Now they don't make a single DSLR to go with those great lenses. And there's every indication that the A mount is dead because it appears like all new Sony cameras will have either a crop or FF version of the E mount.

If Sony have an idea, they do it. That includes innovation, and abandoning professional user bases. Canon seem to take a much more considered approach, and as a result pro's can rely on the kit to be dependable - from the reliability point of view, and from the future proofing point of view.

Cheaper Canon DSLR's borrow many of the pro like features and dependability of the pro cameras. For instance, the NEX cameras couldn't be used effectively in challenging conditions such as when its too cold to not wear gloves. Plenty of tech thrown at them to entertain the masses, but really nothing much that actually contributes to it being a better tool for the job.

Canon have given us the first viable FF digital camera. Dual pixel PDAF. More patents than any other photographic company. And their apparent commitment to the mount coupled with their market leading sales puts us all in a comfortable position when it comes to investing more in the system. I'm guessing the value of all those KM/Sony A mount lenses are right on the edge of a cliff...

If I'd spent all my camera/lens money on the Sony A mount system, I'd be in a very difficult place right now.

 

[sdsr]

I am not denying that Canon is not innovating, they are, how else would they be market leader! They have an enormous R&D department, not only for photography, but also medical imaging (I use large Canon x-ray detectors at work, they are very good!). However they dont listen too much at customers. How many years did it take for them to implement Auto ISO in M-mode? Oh, and only in the 1DX, which cost way too much for most people. Do they even have spot metering linked to the chosen focus point? Fokus peaking? Zebra? Intervallometer? No!! They dont listen too much. They are a business, and in it to make money, and that they do well. Canon make a camera, not to be as good as it can be, but to fit a gap in the market. Reasonable, but not exciting. As you put it, "Canon, given their track record, doesn't give a flying rat's ass about "the competition." This is very arrogant, and is sure gonna cost them customers. We saw a little about this in the 50D -> 60D, more or less gimping the camera. In the 70D, they redeemd themself.

Comparing the old 550D with the rather new nex-6 is not fair, but how did the rebel series develop? Sensor, pretty much the same from 550D to 700D (minor tweaks). 550D -> 600D, added wireless flash control. 600D -> 650D, touch screen and articulated screen, also upped the AF (?), 650D -> 700D Changed the knob to go all the way around... Small steps, carefull evolution, nothing big. Though, they are entry level cameras, they could have done more, not keeping at a minimum all the time. But then again, as tools they are good, steady cameras. No denying!

You seem to be relying in part on a few questionable assumptions. First, the fact that Canon doesn't make some change that you or a handful of contributors to internet forums want doesn't mean they don't listen - maybe they're listening to those with other priorities. Second, how many significant innovations result from listening to customers? Who asked for focus peaking (which doesn't work very well anyway) and zebra? They might be nice features, but surely they're simply another example of supply creating demand (but not much, apparently). As for the marginal variations from one Rebel to the next, that's true of most entry-level cameras, isn't it? They're the cameras they sell the most, and companies seem to think (and perhaps they're right, otherwise why bother?) they need to keep issuing new ones every year to keep consumers interested. Frustrating for those suffering from Gear Acquisition Syndrome, perhaps, but otherwise hardly important.

To the extent that Canon appears cautious (as you concede, they obviously don't lack innovation in what are arguably the most important areas), perhaps it's with good reason. Much of the innovation you describe involves mirrorless cameras. I happen to like that technology a lot (as implemented by some companies, at any rate), but there's no denying that aside from parts of Asia the overwhelming majority of camera-buyers aren't interested, and they are evidently the consumers Canon are listening to. What's more, lots of these innovations are rather limited in practical effect. With Fuji, for instance, who appear to be constantly responding to customer requests with firmware updates, you get an innovative sensor with very low noise but images that seldom look really sharp, an AF system that may finally be fast but still isn't accurate enough, and RAW files that are hard to manipulate with even the best software (DxO doesn't even try, perhaps with good reason). Sony A7/7r? Putting superb FF sensors in a small body is an innovation of sorts, and they handle very nicely (though not as well as Olympus OM-Ds), but their main virtue, and the only reason why I bought a 7R, is more than a tad anachronistic: you can now easily use legacy manual lenses (plus most other lenses) on a FF digital camera (if only it had IBIS...). And it's just as well, because as we all know there are hardly any native lenses for them, and, aside from the (quite decent) kit zoom, they're expensive. So far, despite their superb image quality, it's hard to consider them as more than an appealing adjunct to a better developed system such as are provided by Canon and Nikon dslrs or, if you don't need/want FF, Micro 4/3. (One professional's adventures in trying to make the A7/r his main kit are the subject of many entries in his blog, which is well worth reading if you don't know it: http://soundimageplus.blogspot.com/)

Of course, those who really want innovation should get one of these:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/new-hasselblad-lunar-titanium-version/

Who else can sell you what's essentially a Sony Nex with a mediocre kit lens in the ugliest casing yet invented
for a mere 7200 Euros, pre-tax?

 

[3kramd5]

Nikon doesn't make a fraction of the revenue Canon does on their photography division. That doesn't bode well for future Nikon innovation. As it stands, the bulk of the innovation in Nikon's most recent camera bodies came from other companies, like Sony. That is a precarious position to be in...relying on other companies so much. If any one of them faltered or failed, Nikon could be dragged right down with them.

This is a point so important that it is staggering! There are not a lot of companies out there producing large quantities of imaging sensors that could go into DSLR's... What happens if Sony fails, or at the least, gets rid of the portion of it's business that makes the sensors for Nikon? Hopefully, someone will buy that division and the production will continue, but if it doesn't, Nikon will be out of business until someone else can set up a production line and get up to speed... a process that will take years....

I think Nikon could probably fabricate their own sensors. They used to in years past. Their management thought it would be more profitable to stop investing money in their own fabrication, and buy their sensors and the like third party.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but doesn't Nikon fab the D4 sensor?

 

[jrista]

Nikon doesn't make a fraction of the revenue Canon does on their photography division. That doesn't bode well for future Nikon innovation. As it stands, the bulk of the innovation in Nikon's most recent camera bodies came from other companies, like Sony. That is a precarious position to be in...relying on other companies so much. If any one of them faltered or failed, Nikon could be dragged right down with them.

This is a point so important that it is staggering! There are not a lot of companies out there producing large quantities of imaging sensors that could go into DSLR's... What happens if Sony fails, or at the least, gets rid of the portion of it's business that makes the sensors for Nikon? Hopefully, someone will buy that division and the production will continue, but if it doesn't, Nikon will be out of business until someone else can set up a production line and get up to speed... a process that will take years....

I think Nikon could probably fabricate their own sensors. They used to in years past. Their management thought it would be more profitable to stop investing money in their own fabrication, and buy their sensors and the like third party.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but doesn't Nikon fab the D4 sensor?

They designed it, or at least had a hand in its design, much like the D800 sensor. I am not sure they actually manufactured it...I thought Aptina did the actual fabrication.

 

[3kramd5]

Nikon doesn't make a fraction of the revenue Canon does on their photography division. That doesn't bode well for future Nikon innovation. As it stands, the bulk of the innovation in Nikon's most recent camera bodies came from other companies, like Sony. That is a precarious position to be in...relying on other companies so much. If any one of them faltered or failed, Nikon could be dragged right down with them.

This is a point so important that it is staggering! There are not a lot of companies out there producing large quantities of imaging sensors that could go into DSLR's... What happens if Sony fails, or at the least, gets rid of the portion of it's business that makes the sensors for Nikon? Hopefully, someone will buy that division and the production will continue, but if it doesn't, Nikon will be out of business until someone else can set up a production line and get up to speed... a process that will take years....

I think Nikon could probably fabricate their own sensors. They used to in years past. Their management thought it would be more profitable to stop investing money in their own fabrication, and buy their sensors and the like third party.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but doesn't Nikon fab the D4 sensor?

They designed it, or at least had a hand in its design, much like the D800 sensor. I am not sure they actually manufactured it...I thought Aptina did the actual fabrication.

Could be. This is what I found: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/08/22/the-sensor-inside-the-d4-is-made-by-nikon.aspx/
but it is hardly conclusive. I have worked for companies which sell circuit cards. They usually went outside for fab, but included their logo in a silkscreen layer.

Either way, it's not particularly relevant. Even if they build sensors for the D4, D3200, etc., Sony halting their line would be a huge speedbump for Nikon.

 

[jrista]

Nikon doesn't make a fraction of the revenue Canon does on their photography division. That doesn't bode well for future Nikon innovation. As it stands, the bulk of the innovation in Nikon's most recent camera bodies came from other companies, like Sony. That is a precarious position to be in...relying on other companies so much. If any one of them faltered or failed, Nikon could be dragged right down with them.

This is a point so important that it is staggering! There are not a lot of companies out there producing large quantities of imaging sensors that could go into DSLR's... What happens if Sony fails, or at the least, gets rid of the portion of it's business that makes the sensors for Nikon? Hopefully, someone will buy that division and the production will continue, but if it doesn't, Nikon will be out of business until someone else can set up a production line and get up to speed... a process that will take years....

I think Nikon could probably fabricate their own sensors. They used to in years past. Their management thought it would be more profitable to stop investing money in their own fabrication, and buy their sensors and the like third party.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but doesn't Nikon fab the D4 sensor?

They designed it, or at least had a hand in its design, much like the D800 sensor. I am not sure they actually manufactured it...I thought Aptina did the actual fabrication.

Could be. This is what I found: http://nikonrumors.com/2012/08/22/the-sensor-inside-the-d4-is-made-by-nikon.aspx/
but it is hardly conclusive. I have worked for companies which sell circuit cards. They usually went outside for fab, but included their logo in a silkscreen layer.

Either way, it's not particularly relevant. Even if they build sensors for the D4, D3200, etc., Sony halting their line would be a huge speedbump for Nikon.

Yeah, kind of hard to be conclusive about it. Some of Canon's parts have Canon's name on them, but fabrication markings from other fabs. For example, DIGIC5 has Canon's name, because they designed it (along with Ti), but it was fabbed by UMC (http://www.chipworks.com/en/technical-competitive-analysis/resources/blog/inside-the-canon-rebel-t4i-dslr/). I know Nikon has had a hand in designing most if not all of the parts that are included in their cameras. I honestly don't know when they last fabbed their own sensor, though.

As far as Canon goes, I am very curious to see Chipworks tear apart whatever new sensor finds it's way into the 7D II. If it has some radical changes, especially a die shrink, I'd be very curious to know if it was fabbed by Canon, or fabbed elsewhere.

 

[jrista]

Sorry, I do not think Aptina has anything to do with Nikon D4, it is a Renesas made sensor as in D3

And what information do you have to back that up? There is no mention of CMOS Image Sensors on Renesas' site. I found one article that mentioned Nikon uses Renesas microcomputer parts for controller chips in some of their cameras, but that is not the same thing as a CMOS Image Sensor.

Chipworks has a breakdown of the D4 sensor, however you have to pay (a hefty price) for it. The only other mentions of the D4 sensor is on Nikon Rumors, and last I remember, it was there that I saw the D4 sensor and Aptina mentioned together. Chipworks also did a breakdown of the D3 sensor, and they mentioned Renesas as a possibility, but only because they had prior ties to Nikon (for the controllers), however they also noted that Renesas has no history of actually manufacturing CIS parts (despite apparently having a couple patents for CIS technology.)

The Renesas idea has been brought up before, but there is absolutely no hard evidence to suggest they actually fabbed any Nikon sensors. The only concrete link between Nikon and Renesas is for controllers. There were numerous debates on DPR about Renesas and Nikon, even there there has never been any conclusion that Renesas has ever manufactured a CIS part, let alone any D3/D3s/D4 sensors.

Aptina, on the other hand, most definitely has a very powerful and strong presence in the CIS world. If any third party, other than Toshiba and Sony, has ties with Nikon to manufacture sensors, it would be Aptina.