New Sony Sensor Technology May Help Solve Problems with P&S Cameras

Discussion in 'Sony' started by SMS, Aug 6, 2009.

  1. SMS

    SMS Guest

    "http://tinyurl.com/sonyexmor"

    This sensor may help solve one of the biggest problems with small sensor
    P&S digital cameras, the poor results in low light situations.

    No reason they could not extend this to larger D-SLR sensors as well,
    though with larger pixels there's less of an advantage to having the
    wiring underneath since the wiring represents a much lower proportion of
    the total area.

    Canon's lead over Nikon in large sensors, while still significant, has
    shrunk now that Nikon has managed to come out with a full frame sensor
    (though of lower resolution). Now Sony may have some disruptive technology.

    Hopefully it works better than the Foveon sensors.
     
    SMS, Aug 6, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. SMS

    Me Guest

    Too late to say "no reason they could not..."
    "...celebrates the launch of new Cyber-shot, Handycam and ? DSLR models
    featuring the Exmor R CMOS sensor"
    http://australia.sony.com.au/SonyTwilight/about-the-prize.html

    Are the "Exmor R" sensors for still cameras also using the "Clearvid"
    RGB array with reduced ratio of B&R to G, or as the name suggests is
    "Clearvid" for Exmor R video cameras, and the still cameras have a more
    conventional RGBG pattern colour filter?
     
    Me, Aug 6, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. SMS

    nospam Guest

    with the d3 sensor, it is nikon who has the lead over canon, and
    nikon's 24 megapixel sensor is not a lower resolution than canon's 21
    megapixel sensor.
    can't be any worse. :)
     
    nospam, Aug 7, 2009
    #3
  4. SMS

    Me Guest

    The D3x sensor is way ahead of the Canon 21 mp sensors. The point that
    it might not be strictly speaking a "Nikon sensor" - so doesn't count -
    smacks of religious delusion or trolling.
     
    Me, Aug 7, 2009
    #4
  5. SMS

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Even if true that's a stupid statement for the simple reason that a
    camera is not a sensor. People don't buy or use sensors. They buy
    and use cameras.
     
    Ray Fischer, Aug 7, 2009
    #5
  6. SMS

    nospam Guest

    but people buy cameras because they have a particular sensor. they'll
    pick the d3 or d700 because of its high iso performance. this is most
    apparent with the foveon fanatics, who pick a really shitty camera only
    because it has this supposedly magical sensor.
     
    nospam, Aug 7, 2009
    #6
  7. SMS

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Nonsense. Even among real photographers damn few care about the
    sensor. It's the camera that counts.
    And not because of the sensor.
    "Fanatics" are, by definition, not rational.
     
    Ray Fischer, Aug 7, 2009
    #7
  8. SMS

    Charles Guest


    Twice as sensitive? That's what, one /f stop?
     
    Charles, Aug 7, 2009
    #8
  9. SMS

    nospam Guest

    and that's largely due to the sensor. had the d3 had a larger d2x
    sensor, few people would be as impressed.
    the high iso performance is due to the sensor.
    true.
     
    nospam, Aug 7, 2009
    #9
  10. SMS

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Nope. Lenses, shutter, computers, batteries, controls, menus. All
    that counts for more.
    Only partly. Without the CPU to take care of processing the image the
    sensor would be just another sensor. Without the code to take the
    sensor data and turn it into pixels you wouldn't even have an image.
     
    Ray Fischer, Aug 7, 2009
    #10
  11. SMS

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Except for all of those people who wanted a D3 for other reasons.

    How many people buy a sensor without buying a camera?
     
    Ray Fischer, Aug 7, 2009
    #11
  12. SMS

    Ray Fischer Guest

    You really are an idiot. You're too stupid to grasp the obvious fact
    that people buy cameras. Cameraqs that have dozens to hundreds of
    components. To insist that people ignore the usability, the
    ergonomics, the performance, and focus only on a sensor that they
    cannot even measure is pure stupidity.
    Logical fallacy: Assuming the conclusion.
     
    Ray Fischer, Aug 8, 2009
    #12
  13. No, the lens is more important than the sensor. If you have a sharp lens
    then your image quality is only limited by the weakest link, the sensor's
    resolution. I don't buy a camera unless the lens is capable of single-pixel
    detail resolution over most all of its aperture range. Then you know you
    have a good camera.
     
    Correction Police, Aug 8, 2009
    #13
  14. SMS

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Betamax
     
    Ray Fischer, Aug 8, 2009
    #14
  15. SMS

    nospam Guest

    if you have a low resolution and/or noisy sensor, the best lens in the
    world won't help.
    no camera can have single pixel resolution. it's a mathematical
    impossibility.
     
    nospam, Aug 8, 2009
    #15
  16. SMS

    barry cade Guest

    So how else would you explain why people were still lugging around large
    format film and plate cameras around for decades following the introduction
    of 35mm in the 1920's ?

    BC


     
    barry cade, Aug 8, 2009
    #16
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.