EM-1 uses Panasonic sensor per Chipworks

Started 8 months ago | Discussions
Landscapephoto99
Senior MemberPosts: 2,497
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to exdeejjjaaaa, 8 months ago

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

s_grins wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

It was subcontracted by Olympus to Panasonic, but it is Olympus' design. It has better high ISO than the E-M5 according to dpreview and others, it has better DR, slightly higher resolution, color and great AF. Competition does wonderful things. Maybe next time Olympus will contract out with Fuji or Toshiba for their sensors.

Maybe next time Oly will outsource the sensor to Fuji, Toshiba, or any other company, but this time it was a Panasonic, and for me it does make a difference.

Oly does not outsouce, because they do not design sensors - they buy sensor designed and manufactured by others.

Others design them to their specifications. Just like Nikon and Pentax do with Sony and Toshiba, so Olympus apparently does with Sony and Panasonic. I don't really care and I didn't like Panasonic technology for a long while, but at this point I don't see what the fuss is all about.

Olympus does not have much different specifications from what Panasonic camera division 'd want for itself (except in video department)... the only difference might be in what lays on top of sensor - Olympus probably wants their own CFA specs, their IR/UV cut filter specs and no AA filter... but for the sensor itself I bet both companies on the same page in terms of what is the size, readout parameters, noise parameters, etc, etc - so Panasonic just did the best and then probably approached Olympus with their price (including CFA laid out to accomodate PDAF) that was competetive vs Sony or may be Olympus like Nikon decided that it is good to have > 1 supplier in any case (for as long as both deliver comparable solutions).

Yes, that is true.  I'd like to see them source with Fuji for a sensor, but I know..dream on.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Landscapephoto99
Senior MemberPosts: 2,497
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to Iliah Borg, 8 months ago

Iliah Borg wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

Whatever you see is probably the specifications.

No, that is not the answer.

Now, here is the situations. Sensors are still developed from "what is possible", not by specifications. Specifications are written post factum.

the most recent enthusiast DSLRs for both Nikon and Pentax have their sensors made by Toshiba, but they are not the same.

How do they differ? Details, please.

I remember reading the reviews and comparing them.  I don't think the Pentax sensor is quite as good, but then again they don't have to be since they have their own IBIS.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Iliah Borg
Forum ProPosts: 16,134
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to Landscapephoto99, 8 months ago

the most recent enthusiast DSLRs for both Nikon and Pentax have their sensors made by Toshiba, but they are not the same.

How do they differ? Details, please.

I remember reading the reviews and comparing them.

Reviews do not compare sensors. They compare cameras, using mostly uncontrolled experiments.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
peevee1
Senior MemberPosts: 6,102Gear list
Like?
Re: EM-1 uses Panasonic sensor per Chipworks
In reply to Fredrik Glckner, 8 months ago

Fredrik Glckner wrote:

The specifications say that it can do 1080p @ 60fps and 4k @ 30fps. So no chance of a high speed full HD video output from GH4.

Also, it says that the full scan can be done at 22.5 fps. This means that the electronic shutter readout speed is about twice that of the GH3.

It is for 10-bit color. Basically, just for video.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MichaelKJ
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,121Gear list
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to Landscapephoto99, 8 months ago

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

s_grins wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

It was subcontracted by Olympus to Panasonic, but it is Olympus' design. It has better high ISO than the E-M5 according to dpreview and others, it has better DR, slightly higher resolution, color and great AF. Competition does wonderful things. Maybe next time Olympus will contract out with Fuji or Toshiba for their sensors.

Maybe next time Oly will outsource the sensor to Fuji, Toshiba, or any other company, but this time it was a Panasonic, and for me it does make a difference.

Oly does not outsouce, because they do not design sensors - they buy sensor designed and manufactured by others.

Others design them to their specifications. Just like Nikon and Pentax do with Sony and Toshiba, so Olympus apparently does with Sony and Panasonic. I don't really care and I didn't like Panasonic technology for a long while, but at this point I don't see what the fuss is all about.

Your previous posts suggest that you think that another company (you mentioned Fuji & Toshiba) could produce a comparable quality sensor because all they would have to do is use Oly's design specifications.  However, the impact of end-user specifications on the quality of the sensor is a minimal part of the sensor quality. For example, the sensor in the D800/e has some Nikon specific specifications. Nevertheless, the quality of the sensor in the D800/E is almost entirely due to Sony engineering.

As for your comment that you "don't see what the fuss is all about", some of us think it is nice to see that Panasonic can produce a sensor of this quality.

 MichaelKJ's gear list:MichaelKJ's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zoron
Forum MemberPosts: 66Gear list
Like?
Re: EM-1 uses Panasonic sensor per Chipworks
In reply to madzazulu, 8 months ago

Atrocious!...unbelievable... i am selling all my Olympus gear

 Zoron's gear list:Zoron's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon D300S Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,534
Like?
Re: Panasonic could be just subcontractor
In reply to micksh6, 8 months ago

micksh6 wrote:

All die markings say is that the sensor was manufactured at Panasonic fab. It might as well be designed by Sony and then they could outsource production to Panasonic.

No - the die markings are put there by the people who design the chip, not the fab line. That's why the die markings for Nikon sensors say 'Nikon'.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,534
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to Landscapephoto99, 8 months ago

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

For example, the most recent enthusiast DSLRs for both Nikon and Pentax have their sensors made by Toshiba, but they are not the same.

No they don't - they have sensors made by Sony. The D5300 and D3300 have Sony sensors. I don't know what the Pentax has, but probably Sony. The D5200 and D7100 had Toshiba sensors and the D3200 had a Nikon sensor. Nikon seems to shop around as, we learn, does Olympus.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,534
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to exdeejjjaaaa, 8 months ago

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

arbuz wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

It was subcontracted by Olympus to Panasonic, but it is Olympus' design.

I don't recall any camera sensor designed by Olympus. They don't do it.

it is easy to check - any company that have an ability to design sensors have patents as a trace of research done by their engineers - Oly does not have any patent related to sensors, only to things on top of sensors, but not to "silicone" itself...

Not correct, Olympus has plenty of 'silicone' related patents, and some 'silicon' related ones too.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,534
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to bobn2, 8 months ago

bobn2 wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

For example, the most recent enthusiast DSLRs for both Nikon and Pentax have their sensors made by Toshiba, but they are not the same.

No they don't - they have sensors made by Sony. The D5300 and D3300 have Sony sensors. I don't know what the Pentax has, but probably Sony. The D5200 and D7100 had Toshiba sensors and the D3200 had a Nikon sensor. Nikon seems to shop around as, we learn, does Olympus.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Just checked, the K-3 has a Sony, too.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,534
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to MichaelKJ, 8 months ago

MichaelKJ wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

s_grins wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

It was subcontracted by Olympus to Panasonic, but it is Olympus' design. It has better high ISO than the E-M5 according to dpreview and others, it has better DR, slightly higher resolution, color and great AF. Competition does wonderful things. Maybe next time Olympus will contract out with Fuji or Toshiba for their sensors.

Maybe next time Oly will outsource the sensor to Fuji, Toshiba, or any other company, but this time it was a Panasonic, and for me it does make a difference.

Oly does not outsouce, because they do not design sensors - they buy sensor designed and manufactured by others.

Others design them to their specifications. Just like Nikon and Pentax do with Sony and Toshiba, so Olympus apparently does with Sony and Panasonic. I don't really care and I didn't like Panasonic technology for a long while, but at this point I don't see what the fuss is all about.

Your previous posts suggest that you think that another company (you mentioned Fuji & Toshiba) could produce a comparable quality sensor because all they would have to do is use Oly's design specifications. However, the impact of end-user specifications on the quality of the sensor is a minimal part of the sensor quality. For example, the sensor in the D800/e has some Nikon specific specifications. Nevertheless, the quality of the sensor in the D800/E is almost entirely due to Sony engineering.

As for your comment that you "don't see what the fuss is all about", some of us think it is nice to see that Panasonic can produce a sensor of this quality.

I think people confuse types of specification. What the camera design teams will issue is a 'requirements specification', dictating pixel count, readout rates, some performance thresholds, etc. Typically, that requirements specification will form the pass of an invitation to tender, and they will choose what they think is the best. The best might include many considerations, price, security of supply, inventory management and by how much the exceed the requirements specification - that is a company will not always choose the best performing sensor. Nikon has been seen to shop around, and now too it seems that Olympus is.

The nonsense that this whole 'who makes Olympus' sensors' argument is based on is that Panasonic wouldn't 'give' Olympus their best sensors. More likely, Olympus was unprepared to put the investment into sourcing better sensors, thinking it could go on with the old ones. Now, under a new management, it is putting some investment in and has sourced at least two leading edge sensors from different manufacturers.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
exdeejjjaaaa
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,809Gear list
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to bobn2, 8 months ago

bobn2 wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

arbuz wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

It was subcontracted by Olympus to Panasonic, but it is Olympus' design.

I don't recall any camera sensor designed by Olympus. They don't do it.

it is easy to check - any company that have an ability to design sensors have patents as a trace of research done by their engineers - Oly does not have any patent related to sensors, only to things on top of sensors, but not to "silicone" itself...

Not correct, Olympus has plenty of 'silicone' related patents, and some 'silicon' related ones too.

so you know the URL to the one that you can post, please... for the imaging sensors ideally.

 exdeejjjaaaa's gear list:exdeejjjaaaa's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Sony Alpha 7 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +23 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tt321
Senior MemberPosts: 3,773Gear list
Like?
Re: Football fanboys must know something
In reply to Pixnat2, 8 months ago

Pixnat2 wrote:

Panasonic is a huge corporation that have many divisions. The corporation's interest is that each division should be profitable.

When Panasonic camera division states they will not use PDAF on sensor, it doesn't mean at all that Panasonic sensor division will not produce it for other companies.

Panasonic Camera Division has a strategy. Panasonic Sensor Division has another. They are independent.

There is indeed a degree of this, it would seem. At least the camera division was not obliged to source all of its sensors from the sensor division. So why is the sensor division obliged to supply its best tech only to the camera division?

When Olympus bought the sensor from Sony for the E-M5, Panasonic Sensor division lost a client. So they probably made a better offer to Olympus to produce their future sensors.

The good point is that Panasonic sensor division has the technology to make competitive sensors.

Yes. Very true, esp. within M43.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
tt321
Senior MemberPosts: 3,773Gear list
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to bobn2, 8 months ago

bobn2 wrote:

The nonsense that this whole 'who makes Olympus' sensors' argument is based on is that Panasonic wouldn't 'give' Olympus their best sensors. More likely, Olympus was unprepared to put the investment into sourcing better sensors, thinking it could go on with the old ones. Now, under a new management, it is putting some investment in and has sourced at least two leading edge sensors from different manufacturers.

Superbly argued! The money was probably more needed in the cosmetics venture.

However you are pouring icy water over people's romanticized notion of this 'm43 relationship' in terms of a familial rather than business context which has allowed them to cry like a wronged spouse. Cruel

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,534
Like?
Re: What difference does it make?
In reply to exdeejjjaaaa, 8 months ago

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

exdeejjjaaaa wrote:

arbuz wrote:

Landscapephoto99 wrote:

It was subcontracted by Olympus to Panasonic, but it is Olympus' design.

I don't recall any camera sensor designed by Olympus. They don't do it.

it is easy to check - any company that have an ability to design sensors have patents as a trace of research done by their engineers - Oly does not have any patent related to sensors, only to things on top of sensors, but not to "silicone" itself...

Not correct, Olympus has plenty of 'silicone' related patents, and some 'silicon' related ones too.

so you know the URL to the one that you can post, please... for the imaging sensors ideally.

For instance

www.google.com/patents/US20130120609

www.google.com/patents/US7485837

www.google.com/patents/US8558729

www.google.com/patents/US8508635

www.google.com/patents/US8411157

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 30,534
Like?
Re: Football fanboys must know something
In reply to tt321, 8 months ago

tt321 wrote:

At least the camera division was not obliged to source all of its sensors from the sensor division. So why is the sensor division obliged to supply its best tech only to the camera division?

Is there any evidence at all that the sensor division was obliged to supply its best tech only to the camera division?

The way these things usually work is:

Contract is made with customer.

In the end, the product has to be profitable, so R&D must be paid.

If a customer pays all the R&D, they can usually have (and will want) an exclusive - that is no other customer can use the product they paid for. If they don't, the supplier is able to sell on the open market to make it profitable overall.

So, most likely, Olympus didn't get the 'best tech' because it wouldn't pay for it.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pixnat2
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,215Gear list
Like?
Re: Football fanboys must know something
In reply to tt321, 8 months ago

tt321 wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

Panasonic is a huge corporation that have many divisions. The corporation's interest is that each division should be profitable.

When Panasonic camera division states they will not use PDAF on sensor, it doesn't mean at all that Panasonic sensor division will not produce it for other companies.

Panasonic Camera Division has a strategy. Panasonic Sensor Division has another. They are independent.

There is indeed a degree of this, it would seem. At least the camera division was not obliged to source all of its sensors from the sensor division. So why is the sensor division obliged to supply its best tech only to the camera division?

I don't think it's the actually the case. I think that Olympus had no (financial?) interest to buy the GH sensor technology.

Some camera fans see Panasonic and Olympus as two football teams engaged in a match. That only exists in their imagination.

They build stories and legends around their favorite team.

The story about Panasonic keeping their best tech for them has probably its source in Olmypus fans imagination. They were so frustrated that Olympus cameras sports subpar sensors! So instead of blaming their favorite team, they blamed the rival team.

Later, when Olympus bought the Sony sensor for the E-M5, Panasonic fans fell from their pedestal. Today, they are eagerly waiting for THE Panasonic camera that will beat the rival.

When Olympus had subpar sensors, Olympus fans were defending themselves with "Olympus colors".

Today, Panasonic fans defend themselves with "Panasonic video".

That's how football fans work

When Olympus bought the sensor from Sony for the E-M5, Panasonic Sensor division lost a client. So they probably made a better offer to Olympus to produce their future sensors.

The good point is that Panasonic sensor division has the technology to make competitive sensors.

Yes. Very true, esp. within M43.

-- hide signature --
 Pixnat2's gear list:Pixnat2's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Canon EOS M Nikon D600 Olympus E-M1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pixnat2
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,215Gear list
Like?
Re: Football fanboys must know something
In reply to bobn2, 8 months ago

bobn2 wrote:

tt321 wrote:

At least the camera division was not obliged to source all of its sensors from the sensor division. So why is the sensor division obliged to supply its best tech only to the camera division?

Is there any evidence at all that the sensor division was obliged to supply its best tech only to the camera division?

The way these things usually work is:

Contract is made with customer.

In the end, the product has to be profitable, so R&D must be paid.

If a customer pays all the R&D, they can usually have (and will want) an exclusive - that is no other customer can use the product they paid for. If they don't, the supplier is able to sell on the open market to make it profitable overall.

So, most likely, Olympus didn't get the 'best tech' because it wouldn't pay for it.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Exactly!

-- hide signature --
 Pixnat2's gear list:Pixnat2's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Canon EOS M Nikon D600 Olympus E-M1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MichaelKJ
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,121Gear list
Like?
Re: Football fanboys must know something
In reply to Pixnat2, 8 months ago

Pixnat2 wrote:

Panasonic is a huge corporation that have many divisions. The corporation's interest is that each division should be profitable.

When Panasonic camera division states they will not use PDAF on sensor, it doesn't mean at all that Panasonic sensor division will not produce it for other companies.

Panasonic Camera Division has a strategy. Panasonic Sensor Division has another. They are independent.

And you know this how? IMO, it would be foolish for a corporation to automatically allow each division to have completely independent strategies.  For example, Olympus officials have emphasized synergies between their imaging and medical divisions.  In most, if not all, companies, divisions have strategies that are reviewed and often modified by top management with the goal of maximizing overall corporate profits.  Thus, the extent to which division strategies are independent is decided by the top brass.

When Olympus bought the sensor from Sony for the E-M5, Panasonic Sensor division lost a client. So they probably made a better offer to Olympus to produce their future sensors.

Possibly. It could also be the case that Panasonic's R&D has led to more competitive sensors than they were able to make at the time Olympus was sourcing the sensor for the E-M5.

The good point is that Panasonic sensor division has the technology to make competitive sensors.

Agreed.  Competition is good for consumers.

In the end, IQ counts, not who made the sensors.

Very true.

P.S. All this makes me believe that the story about Panasonic not allowing Olympus to buy a sensor from other company was a huge Urban Legend

-- hide signature --
 MichaelKJ's gear list:MichaelKJ's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Joe Pa
Senior MemberPosts: 1,524Gear list
Like?
Re: Football fanboys must know something
In reply to MichaelKJ, 8 months ago

MichaelKJ wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

Panasonic is a huge corporation that have many divisions. The corporation's interest is that each division should be profitable.

When Panasonic camera division states they will not use PDAF on sensor, it doesn't mean at all that Panasonic sensor division will not produce it for other companies.

Panasonic Camera Division has a strategy. Panasonic Sensor Division has another. They are independent.

And you know this how? IMO, it would be foolish for a corporation to automatically allow each division to have completely independent strategies. For example, Olympus officials have emphasized synergies between their imaging and medical divisions. In most, if not all, companies, divisions have strategies that are reviewed and often modified by top management with the goal of maximizing overall corporate profits. Thus, the extent to which division strategies are independent is decided by the top brass.

If each division has their own P&L then it's quite possible that they act independently.  Many years ago I worked for a division of Xerox who's charter was to bid solutions which included competitive products if that gave us a better chance to win.  Kodak's sensor division (now JK) was a different division than their camera division.

Businesses care about being profitable, you don't put all your eggs in one basket.

When Olympus bought the sensor from Sony for the E-M5, Panasonic Sensor division lost a client. So they probably made a better offer to Olympus to produce their future sensors.

Possibly. It could also be the case that Panasonic's R&D has led to more competitive sensors than they were able to make at the time Olympus was sourcing the sensor for the E-M5.

The good point is that Panasonic sensor division has the technology to make competitive sensors.

Agreed. Competition is good for consumers.

In the end, IQ counts, not who made the sensors.

Very true.

P.S. All this makes me believe that the story about Panasonic not allowing Olympus to buy a sensor from other company was a huge Urban Legend

-- hide signature --
 Joe Pa's gear list:Joe Pa's gear list
Canon ELPH 300 HS Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS M Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Canon EOS 70D +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads