Tweet
Ik vond dit bericht van Thom Hogan redelijk verontrustend. Ik had zoals velen gedacht dat we in de nabije toekomst een 24MP FF sensor in een lager geprijsde D700 body gingen krijgen, maar dan lees ik dit 
Bron: http://bythom.com/
Bron: http://bythom.com/
Sony Sensor Shakeup?
July 26 (commentary)--I've heard from multiple sources now that Sony Semiconductor is about to drop FX sensors from their lineup. What I'm hearing is that high management in Sony is saying that full-frame cameras and sensors aren't bringing the payback necessary to make them long-term profitable. This is essentially forcing Sony Imaging to consider dropping future plans for full-frame cameras (A850, A900, and follow-ups), though I'm sure we'll still see some FF products from them that were already in progress before the stream of sensors dies out. Some of the sources for the rumor appear to be Sony employees who are lobbying for keeping full-frame in the lineup. They seem to hope that news of the impending decision on the Internet will generate a wave of protest that Sony management can't ignore.
But this has a Nikon component, too. I've been wondering why I'm not hearing rumblings on a D3xs model (the D3x uses a Sony sensor at its base). It would be due later this year (and I'm on record as predicting it to arrive in December). It very well may be that there's no new sensor for a D3xs (one would have expected video capabilities to be added). Thus, there's almost nothing else of major impact that could be added that would distinguish a D3xs from a D3x. Most of the other proposed additions could simply be firmware updates to the existing model. If we don't get a D3xs by December, we won't get one, as the D4 generation is too close at hand. Thus, it looks highly likely that Nikon's FX future is in their own hands creating their own FX sensors. Given the D3/D700 and D3s sensors, that doesn't sound like a bad thing, but it will put more pressure on Nikon to produce a high-resolution sensor, something they have not yet done (to date, all of Nikon's sensor development has been mostly targeted at low light improvements).
I think this also answers one persistent question that keeps coming up: "is there any future in DX?" Yes, there is. The reason why Sony would drop FF is rooted in the economics, because the dollar amounts don't really change with sensors like they do with most semiconductor chips. In CPUs, for instance, cost gets driven out by making the CPU chip smaller and using smaller transistors (process size). That doesn't really apply to sensors, as the sensor size itself is not changing, and the light detection mechanism doesn't particularly benefit from smaller transistors (the supporting circuity does). It's just very, very costly to do FF/FX sensors. This puts them into the prosumer and pro categories only, which means there's not a lot of volume. Not having great volume makes it more difficult to reduce costs, and the circle just repeats.
As I've written before, if an FX sensor costs US$500 then a DX sensor probably costs US$50. And a cellphone sensor these days costs less than US$5 (including lens in many cases). The two ways to get lower sensor costs (other than size) is to increase the wafer size (200mm -> 300mm -> 450mm) or increase the yield somehow. But both of these tend to yield small changes at a time and would produce proportional benefits to each size (e.g., if you could reduce FX costs to US$400, then a DX sensor is going to cost US$40). Moving to smaller process (e.g. going from the current 65 nanometer sizes to 45 or 28 or even smaller) doesn't reduce FX sensor cost. But it might benefit noise handling on smaller sensors. This may be why Sony appears about to concentrate solely on DX-sized sensors at the big end. They may see that they can get to FX-type performance with DX-sized sensors, in which case the cost benefit of doing so is huge.
So, yes, there's a future in DX. Certainly a Sony future ;~)
July 26 (commentary)--I've heard from multiple sources now that Sony Semiconductor is about to drop FX sensors from their lineup. What I'm hearing is that high management in Sony is saying that full-frame cameras and sensors aren't bringing the payback necessary to make them long-term profitable. This is essentially forcing Sony Imaging to consider dropping future plans for full-frame cameras (A850, A900, and follow-ups), though I'm sure we'll still see some FF products from them that were already in progress before the stream of sensors dies out. Some of the sources for the rumor appear to be Sony employees who are lobbying for keeping full-frame in the lineup. They seem to hope that news of the impending decision on the Internet will generate a wave of protest that Sony management can't ignore.
But this has a Nikon component, too. I've been wondering why I'm not hearing rumblings on a D3xs model (the D3x uses a Sony sensor at its base). It would be due later this year (and I'm on record as predicting it to arrive in December). It very well may be that there's no new sensor for a D3xs (one would have expected video capabilities to be added). Thus, there's almost nothing else of major impact that could be added that would distinguish a D3xs from a D3x. Most of the other proposed additions could simply be firmware updates to the existing model. If we don't get a D3xs by December, we won't get one, as the D4 generation is too close at hand. Thus, it looks highly likely that Nikon's FX future is in their own hands creating their own FX sensors. Given the D3/D700 and D3s sensors, that doesn't sound like a bad thing, but it will put more pressure on Nikon to produce a high-resolution sensor, something they have not yet done (to date, all of Nikon's sensor development has been mostly targeted at low light improvements).
I think this also answers one persistent question that keeps coming up: "is there any future in DX?" Yes, there is. The reason why Sony would drop FF is rooted in the economics, because the dollar amounts don't really change with sensors like they do with most semiconductor chips. In CPUs, for instance, cost gets driven out by making the CPU chip smaller and using smaller transistors (process size). That doesn't really apply to sensors, as the sensor size itself is not changing, and the light detection mechanism doesn't particularly benefit from smaller transistors (the supporting circuity does). It's just very, very costly to do FF/FX sensors. This puts them into the prosumer and pro categories only, which means there's not a lot of volume. Not having great volume makes it more difficult to reduce costs, and the circle just repeats.
As I've written before, if an FX sensor costs US$500 then a DX sensor probably costs US$50. And a cellphone sensor these days costs less than US$5 (including lens in many cases). The two ways to get lower sensor costs (other than size) is to increase the wafer size (200mm -> 300mm -> 450mm) or increase the yield somehow. But both of these tend to yield small changes at a time and would produce proportional benefits to each size (e.g., if you could reduce FX costs to US$400, then a DX sensor is going to cost US$40). Moving to smaller process (e.g. going from the current 65 nanometer sizes to 45 or 28 or even smaller) doesn't reduce FX sensor cost. But it might benefit noise handling on smaller sensors. This may be why Sony appears about to concentrate solely on DX-sized sensors at the big end. They may see that they can get to FX-type performance with DX-sized sensors, in which case the cost benefit of doing so is huge.
So, yes, there's a future in DX. Certainly a Sony future ;~)
.
- dus niet full-frame compatibel, tenzij in 'crop mode'...
, daar geloof ik helemaal niet in, op die manier zouden Sony en Nikon alleen maar marktaandeel verliezen, die markt voor hoge resolutie FF is heus groter dan je denkt en terecht.
Comment