New MX-1, good name, good idea ... wrong execution !

I made this mistake a while back with the Samsung EX2f, back lit sensors are of very marginal benefit on larger pixel sensors.  They are best for 1/2.3" sensors or smaller (really based on pixel pitch, maybe if the MX-1 was 20 MP it would really need BSI). Aptina I think published a white paper on this.

The reason BSI isn't needed on larger pixels is the microlens on the sensor channels the light down through the circuitry to the sensel and on larger pixels the circuitry is a smaller percentage of the overal sensel area so there is less need for back lit sensors (especially with efficient microlenses).  So until we get up to our 150 MP APS-C sensors we probably won't need BSI on APS-C (rough guess on number, but could figure out based on pixel pitch best for BSI).

I am curious as to what the MX-1 will score with the BSI sensor, since DXOMark doesn't test Samsung anymore, maybe they will test that.  Based on sensor dimensions and resolution it would appear that the EX2f and MX-1 share the same 1/1.7" BSI sensor.

I think they should have saved the MX-1 name for something like the Sony RX1 as well, it would have a lot more impact.

Eric

--
I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)
See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)