Pixels for Geeks: A peek inside Nikon’s super-secret sensor design lab

[TOF guy]

What is the margin of error in those? In other words, take to Nikon D850 cameras with sensors from different batches, and show that in DxO measurement protocol DR and CS are exactly the same.

Larger than the differences we see here I bet ;-)

Differences in DR at high ISO and noise will be.

Really ? Show us. :-D

 

[nuke12]

Fascinating and enlightening article. It seems to fly in the face of other recent threads!

I'm curious, could you please provide links?

--

It was in the first post Iliah;

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...-inside-nikons-super-secret-sensor-design-lab

 

[Iliah Borg]

Fascinating and enlightening article. It seems to fly in the face of other recent threads!

I'm curious, could you please provide links?

--

It was in the first post Iliah;

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...-inside-nikons-super-secret-sensor-design-lab

Sorry for being unclear, I asked "Which threads?", in subject line.

 

[NexLupus]

On top of that, he chooses to ignore that i said like for like sensor, which this is not as the Sony is a 42 megapixel not a 45 so completely different sensors.

Are you saying that using different margins amounts to a different sensor? Do you know that the pixel count you are quoting doesn't include service areas, calibration areas, optical black, etc? Have you looked at some sensor data sheets to get some idea of how sensors are configured?

So just to be clear, are you saying that the Sony 42 megapixel sensor is the same as the 45 megapixel sensor used in the D850?

First, please define "different". Different pixel structure design? Different downstream design?

Different pixel count doesn't necessarily amount to a different sensor. In many ays one can say that even different active areas in mm also doesn't doesn't necessarily amount to a different sensor. Those differences are only one of the factors to consider, and not the most important ones.

I believe that Nikon does have a large part in designing their sensors and then having someone fab to their specs.

You can't fab from specs.

Nikon indeed does have a large part in designing their sensors. Sensor in D850 is not a NIkon sensor.

 

[Iliah Borg]

On top of that, he chooses to ignore that i said like for like sensor, which this is not as the Sony is a 42 megapixel not a 45 so completely different sensors.

Are you saying that using different margins amounts to a different sensor? Do you know that the pixel count you are quoting doesn't include service areas, calibration areas, optical black, etc? Have you looked at some sensor data sheets to get some idea of how sensors are configured?

So just to be clear, are you saying that the Sony 42 megapixel sensor is the same as the 45 megapixel sensor used in the D850?

First, please define "different". Different pixel structure design? Different downstream design?

Different pixel count doesn't necessarily amount to a different sensor. In many ays one can say that even different active areas in mm also doesn't doesn't necessarily amount to a different sensor. Those differences are only one of the factors to consider, and not the most important ones.

I believe that Nikon does have a large part in designing their sensors and then having someone fab to their specs.

You can't fab from specs.

Nikon indeed does have a large part in designing their sensors. Sensor in D850 is not a NIkon sensor.

Why do i feel like your playing semantics?

Maybe because semantics is study of meaning.

Is the 42 the same sensor as the 45?

You don't know the actual pixel count and design. The question you are putting is meaningless in the context.

The programming of the sensors is different, one starts at the gain that corresponds to something like ISO 64, the other - at the gain that corresponds to ISO 100. That alone can cause enough difference for a non-techie to decide those are different sensors.

Note how you ignoring my questions here

What??? take a look at the 14.8 vs. 14.7 dynamic range, and also take a look at the color depth of 26.4 vs. 26, and lastly, it's not the same sensor.

What is the margin of error in those? In other words, take two Nikon D850 cameras with sensors from different batches, and show that in DxO measurement protocol DR and CS are exactly the same.

 

[xPhoenix]

On top of that, he chooses to ignore that i said like for like sensor, which this is not as the Sony is a 42 megapixel not a 45 so completely different sensors.

Are you saying that using different margins amounts to a different sensor? Do you know that the pixel count you are quoting doesn't include service areas, calibration areas, optical black, etc? Have you looked at some sensor data sheets to get some idea of how sensors are configured?

 

[nuke12]

Fascinating and enlightening article. It seems to fly in the face of other recent threads!

I'm curious, could you please provide links?

--

It was in the first post Iliah;

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...-inside-nikons-super-secret-sensor-design-lab

Sorry for being unclear, I asked "Which threads?", in subject line.

Ahhh, I now see what your asking for. I bet I can guess but I'll let Tim answer.

 

[Dibyendu Majumdar]

I know Nikon's and Sony's processing is different, but I shoot RAW, so don't look at jpegs much. I did rent an a7riii very briefly, so hard to say for sure, but it was putting out images pretty comparable to the D850. I wouldn't say, OMG, this Nikon-tweaked sensor is so much better. Just from what I've read, it sounds like Nikon is spending an awful lot of time on "sensor design" for very little, if any, gains over an off-the-shelf Sony. Maybe in the past, they were able to squeeze more out of them, but comparing two similar models (D850 vs a7riii) doesn't seem to show much difference.

Hi, I don't think it is wasted effort. Nikon needs to have their own sensor know-how in my opinion. They have used other fabs than Sony before ... of course right now all the fabs they used have somehow ended up with Sony or are no longer available (Aptina, Toshiba, Renesas) - but they must be looking for / talking to other fabs I am sure. Being totally dependent on Sony, while Canon and Sony have their own sensors - doesn't seem sensible to me.

Regards

 

[Iliah Borg]

it sounds like Nikon is spending an awful lot of time on "sensor design" for very little,

2/3 of a stop higher useful DR on D5 vs. D850, starting at ISO 2500, is IMHO an awful lot.

 

[xPhoenix]

I know Nikon's and Sony's processing is different, but I shoot RAW, so don't look at jpegs much. I did rent an a7riii very briefly, so hard to say for sure, but it was putting out images pretty comparable to the D850. I wouldn't say, OMG, this Nikon-tweaked sensor is so much better. Just from what I've read, it sounds like Nikon is spending an awful lot of time on "sensor design" for very little, if any, gains over an off-the-shelf Sony. Maybe in the past, they were able to squeeze more out of them, but comparing two similar models (D850 vs a7riii) doesn't seem to show much difference.

Hi, I don't think it is wasted effort. Nikon needs to have their own sensor know-how in my opinion. They have used other fabs than Sony before ... of course right now all the fabs they used have somehow ended up with Sony or are no longer available (Aptina, Toshiba, Renesas) - but they must be looking for / talking to other fabs I am sure. Being totally dependent on Sony, while Canon and Sony have their own sensors - doesn't seem sensible to me.

Regards

True, this is probably not a good idea for them. Couldn't Sony just stop supplying them with sensors, and in effect, they'd be screwed? Judging by the D850 shortages (at least in the US), it already seems like they're having big trouble with production.

 

[philharris]

Did you read the comments below the article? The author basically admits that Nikon put on a stage managed show for him and he fell for it.

Maybe Nikon should quit wasting their time and just use non-"nikon designed" Sony sensors. DXO shows that most of the top 10 cameras are Sony, and Photons-to-Photos also shows the Sony cameras performing better than Nikon.

Really? That's certainly not how I would interpret their information presented here.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings

Did you do any research before making that statement? Or perhaps just make it up because it's what you want to believe?

The timing of this article is interesting, too. Why now? After decades of being business? Maybe trying to hype their upcoming mirrorless cameras?

 

[Iliah Borg]

Couldn't Sony just stop supplying them with sensors

No. It's Japan.

 

[xPhoenix]

Did you read the comments below the article? The author basically admits that Nikon put on a stage managed show for him and he fell for it.

Maybe Nikon should quit wasting their time and just use non-"nikon designed" Sony sensors. DXO shows that most of the top 10 cameras are Sony, and Photons-to-Photos also shows the Sony cameras performing better than Nikon.

Really? That's certainly not how I would interpret their information presented here.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings

Did you do any research before making that statement? Or perhaps just make it up because it's what you want to believe?

The timing of this article is interesting, too. Why now? After decades of being business? Maybe trying to hype their upcoming mirrorless cameras?

--
Phil Harris
http://500px.com/philharris999

Try sorting them by sports score. I'm most interested in low-light, high ISO performance. Sony rules the top ranks on DXO when it comes to that, at least according to DXO. Also, if you look at the dynamic range charts over on photons-to-photos, the Sonys beat the Nikons by a not-so-insignificant margin. The D850 only really wins at extreme low ISO because it has 64. Otherwise, the a7riii beats it all throughout the range. Nikon's "secret sauce" doesn't seem to be doing much, IMO.

I posted this earlier. If this is Nikon's best, well, I wouldn't be bragging if I were them.

 

[lonewolf1983]

Did you read the comments below the article? The author basically admits that Nikon put on a stage managed show for him and he fell for it.

Maybe Nikon should quit wasting their time and just use non-"nikon designed" Sony sensors. DXO shows that most of the top 10 cameras are Sony, and Photons-to-Photos also shows the Sony cameras performing better than Nikon.

Really? That's certainly not how I would interpret their information presented here.

https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings

Did you do any research before making that statement? Or perhaps just make it up because it's what you want to believe?

The timing of this article is interesting, too. Why now? After decades of being business? Maybe trying to hype their upcoming mirrorless cameras?

--
Phil Harris
http://500px.com/philharris999

Try sorting them by sports score. I'm most interested in low-light, high ISO performance. Sony rules the top ranks on DXO when it comes to that, at least according to DXO. Also, if you look at the dynamic range charts over on photons-to-photos, the Sonys beat the Nikons by a not-so-insignificant margin. The D850 only really wins at extreme low ISO because it has 64. Otherwise, the a7riii beats it all throughout the range. Nikon's "secret sauce" doesn't seem to be doing much, IMO.

I posted this earlier. If this is Nikon's best, well, I wouldn't be bragging if I were them.

The thing is the D850 was designed around the ISO64 - for specific reasons, its one reason why the D810 was so popular.
They then built into it based on what people wanted, namely higher resolution and frame rate, better AF system etc.

You're right that there isnt a huge difference, but Nikon having a hand in tweaking the sensors to exactly what they want (e.g. D850's ISO64 and the D5's higher ISO) is certainly a marketing point and what their users seem to want.

 

[Bear Dale]

If this is Nikon's best, well, I wouldn't be bragging if I were them.

I think Nikon has every right to brag about the D850.

 

[Ellis Vener]

I know Nikon's and Sony's processing is different, but I shoot RAW, so don't look at jpegs much. I did rent an a7riii very briefly, so hard to say for sure, but it was putting out images pretty comparable to the D850. I wouldn't say, OMG, this Nikon-tweaked sensor is so much better. Just from what I've read, it sounds like Nikon is spending an awful lot of time on "sensor design" for very little, if any, gains over an off-the-shelf Sony. Maybe in the past, they were able to squeeze more out of them, but comparing two similar models (D850 vs a7riii) doesn't seem to show much difference.

Hi, I don't think it is wasted effort. Nikon needs to have their own sensor know-how in my opinion. They have used other fabs than Sony before ... of course right now all the fabs they used have somehow ended up with Sony or are no longer available (Aptina, Toshiba, Renesas) - but they must be looking for / talking to other fabs I am sure. Being totally dependent on Sony, while Canon and Sony have their own sensors - doesn't seem sensible to me.

Regards

True, this is probably not a good idea for them. Couldn't Sony just stop supplying them with sensors, and in effect, they'd be screwed?

Why would Sony do that? Sony sensor fabrication division is separate from Sony’s camera making division. Both the Sony camera division and Nikon are customers of the sensor fabrication division. I suspect Nikon is at least as large a customer as Sony’s camera division. Explain to me why Sony’s top brass would direct one very profitable division to dump a large, profitable client?

Judging by the D850 shortages (at least in the US), it already seems like they're having big trouble with production.

 

[Ellis Vener]

Couldn't Sony just stop supplying them with sensors

No. It's Japan.

 

[Pixel Pooper]

The timing of this article is interesting, too. Why now? After decades of being business? Maybe trying to hype their upcoming mirrorless cameras?

I think so. The fact they use third party sensors has been a source of shame for Nikon for some time, and they are often intentionally misleading in their claims about "designing" their own sensors. If the rumours of the upcoming mirrorless are true, then Nikon will soon be directly competing with Sony FE for the first time so they need to try even harder to differentiate their sensors from Sony. Obviously the "article" is nothing more than a puff piece to help push the narrative that Nikon sensors are special and unique, but it is interesting to see how the Nikon faithful blindly accept it as fact because it tells them what they want to hear.

 

[Bear Dale]

. The fact they use third party sensors has been a source of shame for Nikon for some time

Shame? Why is it a shame?

 

[JimKasson]

Note that all the images were of FSI sensors.

Note the captions say they illustrate the process , not the actual sensors

But the illustrations that I'm talking about were of actual sensor designs, and none were FSI.

-which as no one is denying, are dabbed in a Sony connected plant.

Dabbed? Fabbed? I don't know that Sony fabricates all the Nikon sensors.

Jim