Cypress *MONOCHROME* sensor... please please please...

The unusual CMOS design of this Cypress sensor is probably teh me one I sw described on FilFactory's websit for the Kodak 14/N etc. Normal CMS sensors have a part of the area of each photosite taken up with electronics like amplifiers, so that the electron well that detects light covers only part of the photosite. Microlenses are uses to steer light into the well.

An explanatio I saw at the FillFactory web site explained that the sensor is rather transparent, with light passing through the other electronics on the front and gathering in a well that occupies the entire back side of the photosite.

Perhaps the transparency is not very high though, which would help to explain the low sensitivity (low maximum usable ISO speed) and very low minimum usable ISO speed of the previous FillFactory CMOS sensors used by Kodak. But I certainly do not rule out the extra resources of Cypress having improved sensitivity.

Who might use this sensor?

It is in exactly the "DX" format of just under 16x24mm, used by Nikon, Pentax, Konica-Minolta and Fuji. It is not clear that anyone of them is tied to using the same sensor supplier for all models, so maybe Cypress is aiming at some future entry level models. Only $90 per sensor to manufacturers could be attractive even if it reaches "only" ISO 800 while more expensive models do 1600.

Maybe Kodak will return to the DSLR market with a more traditionally "Kodak priced" camera: i.e. a relatively cheap, low end model, like they did with the Brownie and Instamatic.

Maybe digicam makers will use this bargain priced sensor to follow the Sony R1 lead with fixed lens digicams in 16x24mm format.
 
Yes MONOCHROME digicams would be a great idea
Lets say, two versions of a specific digicam:
Monocrome and color.
So that the user interface is the same.
I would absolutely love to see the new Cypress monochrome sensor
in a compact body. Since it has no microlenses, it ought to work
well even with symmetric lens designs. And with 9 MP monochrome,
resolution ought to be mind-blowing, noise ought to be tight and
not unpleasant, and even sensitivity ought to be OK. Digital Hexar
anyone?
--------------------------------------------
Sorry if there are typing errors in my texts.
I usually do not check that before sending.
 
Separate B&W + Color models: First thing that comes to mind is a digital Ricoh GRS with the APS size sensor. The quality PS camera. Second, a reincarnation of the Olympus Pen FT but this time digital APS. Third, a digital rangefinder like the Epson RD1 but made by KM, with AS + the Hexar lenses. The last would be nicer with the 10 MP APS sensor of the Nikon D200 though, higher ISO numbers.

Wonder how well the sensor copes with wide angle lenses designed for the Olymous Pen FT. There will be new lens designs needed anyway but you wouldn't like to see big lenses on a camera like that.
 
So you are basing this analysis on defect rate. It also depends on applied technology I guess. Extrapolating only certain conditions usually leads astray...
What is your guess of the cost of a Canon or Sony APS sensor?
thanks
The defect rate goes up exponentially with size. With chips as big
as this, a FF one is about 10-15 times more expensive to make than
an APS-C one.

Petteri
--
My flickr page: [ http://www.flickr.com/photos/primejunta/ ]
Me on photography: [ http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/ ]
Me on politics: [ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]
--
mc
 
... now you exaggerate a bit. How did you calculate 10x cost of 2x
size sensor?
--
mc
You can "cut out" 20 36mmx24mm sensors out of a 8" wafer and 72 DX sized sensors.

Rumors(!) say, that yield rate for Canon CMOS sensors is 25% for "fullframe (improved from 10% in the "early days") and 70% for APS-C sized sensors.

This would make 5 useable "fullframe" sensors vs. 50 usable DX sized sensors from one 8" wafer.
 
You might make fun of us, but as you can see, there's a fairly enthustiastic group dream of just such a thing. It could tap into one of the last groups of photographers still using film - the the Tri-X, HP5+, PanF, Neopan shooters out there.

What huge untapped market does that lastest Coolpix Optio Easyshare 815WSX Crazyshot target?
 
So you are basing this analysis on defect rate. It also depends on
applied technology I guess. Extrapolating only certain conditions
usually leads astray...
What is your guess of the cost of a Canon or Sony APS sensor?
I've previously pegged them at around $50-$100. But that's just a guess really.

Petteri
--
My flickr page: [ http://www.flickr.com/photos/primejunta/ ]
Me on photography: [ http://194.100.88.243/petteri/pont/ ]
Me on politics: [ http://p-on-p.blogspot.com/ ]
 
Yes MONOCHROME digicams would be a great idea
Lets say, two versions of a specific digicam:
Monocrome and color.
So that the user interface is the same.
How about D300M or 30DM? Heh, one can dream.

--
hobster
 
Ah, but that's a color Bayer sensor! Without that fuzzy clumping effect Bayer creates, perhaps it would be very good?
And with 9 MP monochrome,
resolution ought to be mind-blowing, noise ought to be tight and
not unpleasant, and even sensitivity ought to be OK.
Yes, tell me more about how tight and pleasant Sony's R1 sensor
noise is :-)
 
Or may be a DSLR with interchangable sensor ? Why not, there are SLRs/DSLRs with interchangable focusing screens.
 
Who says sensors are expensive????
you get what you pay for....
yep. All the people hping for good high ISO performance should have a look on the last fillfactory sensors without microleses.

"...Our patented pixel architecture, proven in Kodak's DCS Pro SLR line of cameras, is the only CMOS architecture capable of achieving the noise and dark current targets demanded by high-end DSC manufacturers..."

So you know what to expect.

Maybe this sensor will deliver good dynamic range and low CAs at a price cheap enough for compact digicams, but I doubt that we will get good high ISO performance.

We will see...
 
So you are basing this analysis on defect rate. It also depends on
applied technology I guess. Extrapolating only certain conditions
usually leads astray...
What is your guess of the cost of a Canon or Sony APS sensor?
I've previously pegged them at around $50-$100. But that's just a
guess really.
$50 APS, $500 FF so it'd mean an APS DSLR for $500 and FF for $950 or $1000 and $1500 respectively. Some folks overpaying :).
--
mc
 
It seems like not having microlenses is not a scalable proposition -- in that with further scaling of CMOS technology, pixel vignetting is likely to become more and more of an issue -- but for compacts, the tradeoff might be acceptable.
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/Microlenses_01.htm

Basically the photosensitive part of the entire photosite is a
percentage of its total area (fill factor), microlenses are used to
'gather' the light across a larger area and focus it into the
photosensitive part. This is even more important with CMOS sensors
which tend to have a lower fill factor. Cypress are claiming that
they have a photosite design which has such a high fill factor that
it doesn't need microlenses (hence less cost and no lens-> microlens
issues).
Could you folks elaborate a bit on how come it has no microlenses
and how it differs it from APS sensors used in DSLRS?
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top