who manufactures the sensors?

[1832vin]

well, first off, i know sony does it, cuz i know loads of point and shoots, and smart phone sensors are made by they, and also their A7 line up too, but what about canon? nikon (i hear they use sony sensors as well...)

 

i just wondered, cuz sony camera don't sound pretentious or anything like that, but somehow, sony felts like if they decided to pull out of camera silicon, everyone would wither...

and there just wasn't much info out there easy enough to find....?

and do wonder where Sony gets all their sand from when i hear all their fabs are in japan...

[1823alex]

I believe Canon makers there own.

[1832vin]

I believe Canon makers there own.

really??!! where are their fabs? i can't find a single info on them.....  and their source of sand too....

i'm more on the fab side of stuff, so that was what i wanted to know, but no info on google....

[Guest]

Fairchild Camera makes sensors.

TOSHIBA makes camera for Motorola.

Matsushida makes sensors for Olympus cameras.

Cypress makes sensors.

Kodak makes sensors.

Dalsa makes sensors.

[Captain_Slow]

really??!! where are their fabs? i can't find a single info on them.....  and their source of sand too....

i'm more on the fab side of stuff, so that was what i wanted to know, but no info on google....

 

Canon develops their own sensors, as for actually manufacturing I believe they use a combination of in house and outsourcing, sort of like what apple does with their ARM chips. 

 

Nikon sometimes make their own sensors, but also sometimes gets it from sony or toshiba. For instance, the D7100 is a toshiba sensor, the D5300 is a Sony sensor, and the D3300 is a Nikon sensor.

 

as for Silicon, it's the 7th most plentiful element on earth and it doesnt just come from sand, also I'm sure japan doesnt manufacture all their silicon in the country, they'd probably get most of it from China or India. 

 

Sony is the dominant player in Image sensor tech, the amount of sensors needed for phones, tablets, CCTV, Webcams, etc. etc. far outweighs the amount needed for DSLRs and Mirrorless. If Sony pulled out, and they probably wouldn't since it's about the only thing making them $$ atm, there would be issues with manufacturers getting parts for their products, not necessarily Pro Camera manufacturers but other things. However even if Sony did exit the sensor business they would need to sell it to someone else who would presumably continue to supply the world with the parts. 

[ShadowCaptain]

Canon are rumoured to be stopping all small sensor cameras, and to be using Sony sensors in future cameras

Nikon use Sony sensors

Toshiba sensors are being sold to Sony

Many smartphones use sony

Basically Sony are taking over the imagine world, not only are the A7 and A6000 series cameras selling like hotcakes, they are basically taking over the industry

[1832vin]

Fairchild Camera makes sensors.

 

 

FAIRCHILD STILL EXISTED???!!!

[1832vin]

Canon are rumoured to be stopping all small sensor cameras, and to be using Sony sensors in future cameras Nikon use Sony sensors Toshiba sensors are being sold to Sony Many smartphones use sony Basically Sony are taking over the imagine world, not only are the A7 and A6000 series cameras selling like hotcakes, they are basically taking over the industry

that's what i felt like, but i didn't have evidence to prove that sony seems like they are taking over the image world

[ShadowCaptain]

that's what i felt like, but i didn't have evidence to prove that sony seems like they are taking over the image world

 

Well they are amazing at it so  

[1832vin]

Sony is the dominant player in Image sensor tech

it does make me wonder, if sony fabs. their sensors, what stops them from going out of full frame? i know it's very different from fab.ing processor chips (what i actually specialize in) but surely, they can just make a bigger than full frame sensor on a die and charge the extra extra premium for the lost of material on the dividing of the chips on a die hand still get extra profit.

 

why is hasselblad the only one that makes bigger than full frame... what give?  i think we do need bigger than full frame for alot of applications in photography

[Guest]

FAIRCHILD STILL EXISTED???!!!

Yeah:

https://www.fairchildsemi.com

It is sorta like how Sony makes sensors, but it isn't all that publicly known.

[ShadowCaptain]

it does make me wonder, if sony fabs. their sensors, what stops them from going out of full frame? i know it's very different from fab.ing processor chips (what i actually specialize in) but surely, they can just make a bigger than full frame sensor on a die and charge the extra extra premium for the lost of material on the dividing of the chips on a die hand still get extra profit.

 

why is hasselblad the only one that makes bigger than full frame... what give?  i think we do need bigger than full frame for alot of applications in photography

 

there is not much demand for medium format outside of the professional space, lenses are more expensive and larger, the cameras are larger, you need a larger flange distance, heavier cameras, heavier glass

 

Funnily enough there are full frame cameras with less noise than medium format even though the sensor is smaller

 

Also fast medium format glass has a TINY focus plane making focusing slower, or very hard if focussed manually 

[ALwin]

it does make me wonder, if sony fabs. their sensors, what stops them from going out of full frame? i know it's very different from fab.ing processor chips (what i actually specialize in) but surely, they can just make a bigger than full frame sensor on a die and charge the extra extra premium for the lost of material on the dividing of the chips on a die hand still get extra profit.

why is hasselblad the only one that makes bigger than full frame... what give? i think we do need bigger than full frame for alot of applications in photography

I'm sure Sony has conducted market research analysis and commercial viability of manufacturing just larger than full frame sensors and also if they decide to produce cameras larger than full frame.

Digital large format cameras are not commercially available, the largest medium format sensors are 40.4 x 53.9mm in the Mamiya digital backs (at least according to what is available on B&H). And this size doesn't even come close to any large format film sizes.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Sensor+Dimensions_40.4+x+53.9mm&catName=Medium-Format-Digital-Cameras&catName=Digital-Cameras&ci=16734&Ns=p_PRICE_2|0&N=4259332394+4099204991

 

there is not much demand for medium format outside of the professional space, lenses are more expensive and larger, the cameras are larger, you need a larger flange distance, heavier cameras, heavier glass

 

Funnily enough there are full frame cameras with less noise than medium format even though the sensor is smaller

 

Also fast medium format glass has a TINY focus plane making focusing slower, or very hard if focussed manually

 

You beat me to what I was going to say.

 

Looking at Sony's most current cameras (A7sII and A7rII) which uses the E-mount system with a flange distance of 18mm.  If Sony were to keep the flange distance and lens mount compatible, they would need to introduce an optical element to the back of the lens that would expand the image circle to cover a much larger medium format sensor.  An introduction of this corrective element could potentially reduce image quality.  Hence a better option would be to create a new lens mount system with a longer flange distance or adopt an existing system.  I'm not even sure the flange distance of a Sony A-mount (44.5mm) or Nikon F-mount (46.5mm) is enough for medium format lenses.  If you look at all the digital medium format cameras currently on the market, the mirror chamber in the bodies are almost large enough to fit a Rubik's cube.

 

Lenses would not necessarily be larger, the lenses for my Hasselblad medium format film camera are smaller than some of my Nikon glass.  But yes, at the widest aperture (e.g. f/1.4) the DOF would be so thin that it will make focusing much harder.  And crop factors would be "reversed".  Currently 33.3mm on APS-C is about 50mm on full frame, with medium format a longer focal length will have equivalent FOV to shorter focal length on 35mm full frame.

 

And while digital medium format or large format cameras (however expensive they can be, and I am certain they will be VERY expensive) may be useful for stills photos, I am not certain they will be suitable for video.  A video camera with a medium format sensor would definitely be larger than a Super 35 or 35mm (Super 35 is smaller than 35mm full frame) camera.

 

If you or anyone else wants to play with larger than 35mm cameras, GO buy a film camera.  Like a Hasselblad 500C/M or Yashica Twins Lens Reflex or any other camera that takes 120 roll film, there are some nice cheap cameras by Lomography that use 120 roll films.

[SeanAngelo]

well, first off, i know sony does it, cuz i know loads of point and shoots, and smart phone sensors are made by they, and also their A7 line up too, but what about canon? nikon (i hear they use sony sensors as well...)

 

i just wondered, cuz sony camera don't sound pretentious or anything like that, but somehow, sony felts like if they decided to pull out of camera silicon, everyone would wither...

and there just wasn't much info out there easy enough to find....?

and do wonder where Sony gets all their sand from when i hear all their fabs are in japan...

Nikon uses Sony sensors I believe.

Canon makes their own.

Sony uses their own sensors because Sony

[1832vin]

there is not much demand for medium format outside of the professional space, lenses are more expensive and larger, the cameras are larger, you need a larger flange distance, heavier cameras, heavier glass

 

Funnily enough there are full frame cameras with less noise than medium format even though the sensor is smaller

 

Also fast medium format glass has a TINY focus plane making focusing slower, or very hard if focussed manually 

i was thinking more on the lines of scientific purposes.... but what ever..

[ShadowCaptain]

i was thinking more on the lines of scientific purposes.... but what ever..

 

They already exist though, there are plenty of digital medium format cameras, besides how does medium format benefit science?

[1832vin]

I'm sure Sony has conducted market research analysis and commercial viability of manufacturing just larger than full frame sensors and also if they decide to produce cameras larger than full frame.

Digital large format cameras are not commercially available, the largest medium format sensors are 40.4 x 53.9mm in the Mamiya digital backs (at least according to what is available on B&H). And this size doesn't even come close to any large format film sizes.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Sensor+Dimensions_40.4+x+53.9mm&catName=Medium-Format-Digital-Cameras&catName=Digital-Cameras&ci=16734&Ns=p_PRICE_2|0&N=4259332394+4099204991

You beat me to what I was going to say.

 

Looking at Sony's most current cameras (A7sII and A7rII) which uses the E-mount system with a flange distance of 18mm.  If Sony were to keep the flange distance and lens mount compatible, they would need to introduce an optical element to the back of the lens that would expand the image circle to cover a much larger medium format sensor.  An introduction of this corrective element could potentially reduce image quality.  Hence a better option would be to create a new lens mount system with a longer flange distance or adopt an existing system.  I'm not even sure the flange distance of a Sony A-mount (44.5mm) or Nikon F-mount (46.5mm) is enough for medium format lenses.  If you look at all the digital medium format cameras currently on the market, the mirror chamber in the bodies are almost large enough to fit a Rubik's cube.

 

Lenses would not necessarily be larger, the lenses for my Hasselblad medium format film camera are smaller than some of my Nikon glass.  But yes, at the widest aperture (e.g. f/1.4) the DOF would be so thin that it will make focusing much harder.  And crop factors would be "reversed".  Currently 33.3mm on APS-C is about 50mm on full frame, with medium format a longer focal length will have equivalent FOV to shorter focal length on 35mm full frame.

 

And while digital medium format or large format cameras (however expensive they can be, and I am certain they will be VERY expensive) may be useful for stills photos, I am not certain they will be suitable for video.  A video camera with a medium format sensor would definitely be larger than a Super 35 or 35mm (Super 35 is smaller than 35mm full frame) camera.

 

If you or anyone else wants to play with larger than 35mm cameras, GO buy a film camera.  Like a Hasselblad 500C/M or Yashica Twins Lens Reflex or any other camera that takes 120 roll film, there are some nice cheap cameras by Lomography that use 120 roll films.

 hm......  i was actually thinking that they could have gone with small steps out of full frame, not necessary meant that they should just make 1.6 times the full frame sensor...

 

and i was thinking that alot of scientific research would like this, because in alot of times, it's not how much detail you can make out of it, but just can you see it or not.....    or was i thinking too out of the box?(off topic i meant)

[ALwin]

i was thinking more on the lines of scientific purposes.... but what ever..

 

 

They already exist though, there are plenty of digital medium format cameras, besides how does medium format benefit science?

 

 

 hm......  i was actually thinking that they could have gone with small steps out of full frame, not necessary meant that they should just make 1.6 times the full frame sensor...

 

and i was thinking that alot of scientific research would like this, because in alot of times, it's not how much detail you can make out of it, but just can you see it or not.....    or was i thinking too out of the box?(off topic i meant)

 

There are already non-conventional sensor sizes for scientific purposes.  Some scientific applications even use a "linking" (can't think of the right term to use right now) of standard sensor sizes to act as a much larger sensor (I'm thinking of digital sensors used in some astronomical observatories).

[1832vin]

They already exist though, there are plenty of digital medium format cameras, besides how does medium format benefit science?

alot, cuz admittedly most of the times, blurry photos are easier to visualise than graphs

 

and some practical examples, capturing microbiology, too much light through a cell can fry them, and you (prob.) have no idea how hard it is to obtain a medium format camera, then make it compatible with your equipment for a one off purpose...  i'm pretty sure (though the market would not be big), it's gonna be a niche, cuz medium formats aren't just about bigger lenses and things to compensate them, like, they have their shutter on their lens or what not, and alot else

 

physcis could use some help on the material tensile department, astronomy (do i even need to elaborate)

 

but what ever, no one's ever gonna do it

[ShadowCaptain]

 hm......  i was actually thinking that they could have gone with small steps out of full frame, not necessary meant that they should just make 1.6 times the full frame sensor...

 

and i was thinking that alot of scientific research would like this, because in alot of times, it's not how much detail you can make out of it, but just can you see it or not.....    or was i thinking too out of the box?(off topic i meant)

 

small steps are bad ideas, we need standardisation not more formats to worry about

[1832vin]

 

There are already non-conventional sensor sizes for scientific purposes. Some scientific applications even use a "linking" (can't think of the right term to use right now) of standard sensor sizes to act as a much larger sensor (I'm thinking of digital sensors used in some astronomical observatories).

yeah, bout' that, those are the ones that makes graphs ( i mean the huge ones)
and the non-conventional (for scientific purposes) they are totally useless outside of their marketed purpose, wouldn't like (a uni) benefit, if they say they buy 50 cameras that are a little more powerful? then share it among the departments, rather than buying a super camera for a single research?

 

 

small steps are bad ideas, we need standardisation not more formats to worry about

point taken. but i still wished there to be bigger formats.....

 

going back to personal use, cranking up the iso is hard to capture animals at night

[Prikk]

small steps are bad ideas, we need standardisation not more formats to worry about

Amen.

[ALwin]

yeah, bout' that, those are the ones that makes graphs ( i mean the huge ones)

and the non-conventional (for scientific purposes) they are totally useless outside of their marketed purpose, wouldn't like (a uni) benefit, if they say they buy 50 cameras that are a little more powerful? then share it among the departments, rather than buying a super camera for a single research?

 

When it comes to scientific applications, we're no longer just talking about sensor sizes.  We also have to talk about the type of applications where the sensor will be used.  Should the sensor be optimized to "sense" certain wavelengths better than others?  Digital photo camera sensors are optimized for visible wavelengths, while scientific sensors may be optimized for non-visible wavelengths as needed.

 

As for Universities buying cameras... I believe it's up the University or the researchers to decide which cameras will be suitable for their needs rather than buying a set of "generic" sensors that may or may not work for everything.

[ShadowCaptain]

point taken.  but i still wished there to be bigger formats.....

 

going back to personal use, cranking up the iso is hard to capture animals at night

It comes to a point where even a massive sensor will struggle at night, look how well the A7Sii handles low light, it's better than any medium format

Sony are looking into their new STARVIS Sensors which are insane at low light too

[The Knome]

To summarise; the long and short of all these answers:

Its a mess.
Everyone sells to everybody.
 

Makes sense really, develop a whole new sensor and produce for a specific camera model, of buy off the shelf and slap a logo on it?
When it comes to top end cameras though, would expect its all in house. If you are selling to pros you need that edge and to reach it you need control of all aspects to pull out the results.

 

It comes to a point where even a massive sensor will struggle at night, look how well the A7Sii handles low light, it's better than any medium format

Sony are looking into their new STARVIS Sensors which are insane at low light too

 

Light, photons, the more you can get on the sensor, the more you see.
As it is with ISO is digital gain, all sensors being analogue by nature is akin to old TV's and static (hence noise) and its all about getting clean data.

Currently, the silica chips we use are not the most sensitive of compounds out there we could use in terms of low light performance, the chemicals and neural transmitters in our own eyes are far far more sensitive, and like sensors work on a colour matrix.

Something to start learning from, you will see a lot of differences between our eyes and cameras.