Rethinking stacked sensor in om-5

[Interceptor121]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think it has go one way or the other. Either the same sensor that's in OM1, or a non-stacked, higher resolution BSI sensor to cater to different needs. I don't think 20mp non-stacked sensor will be that appealing, given that it'll be competing with EM1III and EM5III in that price range, not to mention other m43 and APSC offerings in that range. But whether we see higher resolution sensor also depends on how well the current lenses can resolve the additional detail. OM doesn't seem to prioritize spec sheet bragging as much as real world improvements (e.g. they improved IBIS in OM1 even though it makes zero difference in CIPA rating since CIPA does not test for rolls) so I think it would happen only if they believe that there's real image resolution gain from higher res sensor.

There was a low credibility rumor about OM5 having higher resolution sensor. I think it's actually possible they would go for a higher resolution sensor. It will differentiate OM1 and OM5 in a way that will make them more appealing as a set, using one for wildlife and the other for nature

back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

Please explain to me why the Fuji APSC of 26MP then is BSI and 26 MP? That doesn't make sense. Also the Fuji 26MP is a relatively fast sensor (close to EM1.2/.3 readouts) in its class. Of course doesn't compare to the super fast stacked sensors but that's beside the point.

Evidence the Fuji 26MP is BSI and has been that for a while now:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/54716...s-with-a-26mp-x-trans-sensor-and-4k-60p-video

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination

Update: BSI enables actually bigger pixel counts without sacrificing image quality vs some degree of lower pixel counts. No, I am not going to bother looking where this piece of knowledge came from but I am pretty sure you can find it if you look for it. I already gave you evidence.

Hope you now return in kind.

There are back illuminated non stacked sensors typically used for low pixel count cameras like sony And panasonic 24 megapixels

You brought up the GH5s as an example of low pixel count BSI.

no the gh5s is not stacked

those read slow cant do 60 fos without crop

The Fuji 26MP ASPC sensor being used is not slow even if it's not hitting 60fps. It's definitively a step above the average CMOS sensor that was done until that time.

then there sre backilluminated stacked sensor with high pixel count those don’t do equally well in low light and are what goes in full frame high megapixel sensor.

This is a new claim. What you claimed was

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination"

So looks like the pixel count isn't limited. I gave you quite the example with the sony 61MP sensor. There's others around.

you don’t understand that there are 3 types of construction

front illuminated - sony exmor

back illuminated - sony exmor R

stacked back illuminated in multiple variants - sony exmor rs

Currently the exmor line has very few products it is the oldest line making apsc and MFT sensor with pixel size 3.3-3.97 microns

The exmor r line is the back illuminated line with higher sensitivity it has a wide range of pixel size however those have slow readout the only models that read 60 fps have 12 megapixels or less

Finally the rs line is the new mainstream pixel size up to 2.4 in normal cell and smaller for quad bayer

the sensor in the om-1 has 80 megapixels arranged in 20 megapixel cells

so yes stacking means higher count and smaller pixels

Am not familiar with fuji sony apsc stack uses traditional front illuminated sensors that are still very high performance.

? They are BSI.

nope sony apsc are front illuminated

Why don’t they change to stacked? Not sure but probably dont want to make a 32 megapixel apsc eating into their full frame

? Fuji just announced a 26MP Stacked sensor camera.

sony strategy is to get a winning full frame product and apsc is a commodity product

I was giving you the concrete example of Sony 61MP and Fuji's 26MP BSI sensors.

With more companies using high megapixels high speed full frame also those sensor will become mainstream

For MFT is a bit tricker especially if panasonic no longer uses sony so it will be hard to drive volumes

it would make sense for OMS to move all cameras to the new sensor to reduce purchase price instead kod getting other products

sensor costs is driven by volumes a line only does one process if you make 1 million of a certain product and 10000 of another video on the same line the latter will be significantly more expensive

this is the same reason why you buy a disk and a larger size costs less as raw materials quantity means nothing in the pricing while volumes matter

i think you need to refresh yourself a bit on the technology aspects

so your reasoning om-1 get a new different sensor to have lower cost doesn’t work

 

[Interceptor121]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

The A9 has a quad bayer cell to have many AF points so actually 96 megapixels

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

DJI is using the same sensor in the Mavic 3 line, I suspect they will drive far more volume than the OM-1.

Yes that would make a difference

 

[Interceptor121]

Here

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...re-of-autofocus-plus-expect-more-aps-c-bodies

"

DE: As time goes on, will the cost of stacked technology come down enough that it will fit cost-wise into consumer cameras?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price.

DE: Yes. And of course, the stacked is just a more complicated technology. There's a lot going on there ,so it's going to be always more expensive than not stacked. But on the other hand, the cell-phone sensors that Sony makes use stacked technology, so that also helps drive the cost down. It sounds like, really, there's no way to tell how much it's going to come down over time, and whether that will be enough for entry-level models too."

looks like you don’t understand your own sources?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price

the price are high because volumes are low

the other sentence is the interviewer making stuff up

Everything that has more complexity in build or design costs more. And yes, of course volume is a problem. But I still highlight that you are comparing smaller sensors with bigger sensors and that's a very known variable for cost difference - in addition to the volume difference.

In either case the claim was that stacked sensors are more expensive than the other type. That's how it is today, that's not a false claim. OM-5 announced next month is necessarily implying today as a context right? Of course tech and cost march forward and down.

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

Sure, I never said that volume/ecnonomies of scale are not a factor. I don't know why you are trying go portrait that on something I said- I never said that. But I also highlight you can't compare phone sensor sizes with bigger sensor sizes- that's a variable that changes pricing.

the discount on the whole sale market for any components increases significantly as you hit 1000 and 100000 or millions

Of course, that's a factor. I never said it wasn't.

In any case the cost of the sensor is the smallest part of what you pay. Currently you can buy sensors for $150 that go in cameras with $1500 RRP

So, at this point I must join almost doctor asking for a source for your claim that stacked sensors aren't more expensive to manufacture. Can you please provide a source for your claims the claim you made?

you can go on distributors website yourself use the 1 or 1/1.7 or smaller format and see it for yourself

Wait hold on. You were asked for a link to provide evidence to your claims. I provided evidence for mine. Can you please return in kind? Keep in mind again, this is ignoring sensor size which is again a big variable in sensor expense.

you have not provided any source your link actually disproofs your point as it says prices are driven by volumes which is correct

Also can we agree that BSI sensors do not imply small pixel counts?

no stacking is a primary way to increase pixel count and fill factor

If your pixel count doesn’t need to go up there is no need for stacking

I am not talking about stacking here. I am talking about the claim you made here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66214031

Which is on BSI sensors:

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S"

Clearly this claim is false given there's BSI sensors around with high megapixel counts?

you don’t understand the difference between BI and BSI i have posted a full list of technologies for your learning

sony own texts

By this stacked structure, large-scale circuits can now be mounted keeping small chip size.

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

for compacts the migration from front to stack didn’t improve IQ at all it is not a magic bullet it has been already discussed here long time ago

the primary benefit is increased fill factor and no loss of speed compared to back illuminated non stacked sensors

thanks again.

 

[JakeJY]

Presuming the OM-5 is still following E-M5 lineage (not a different one where Olympus flips the numbering convention), I don't see OIympus coming up with a completely new sensor. Seems to make more sense to keep with the same sensor like they did for E-M5 III (inheriting E-M1 II/III sensor) and have the volume. Just decontent a bit on the image processor and some of the other features of the camera.

Then presuming they don't kill off the E-PL lineup, that one just inherits the old E-M1 II sensor.

 

[Raist3d]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels

That is not correct.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100

That's the first one, it was already 20 MP from the get go and it's not a stacked sensor.

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

The A9 has a quad bayer cell to have many AF points so actually 96 megapixels

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

DJI is using the same sensor in the Mavic 3 line, I suspect they will drive far more volume than the OM-1.

Yes that would make a difference

It sure seems like there's some misunderstandings but then after you are given evidence and you provide none, after ranting about what about the OP and why you have to provide anything, you still provide none, then make some other easily debunk able claims.

At this point I have to question the sincerity in making reasonable efforts to look for facts and instead great effort seems to be spent in a vain attempt to "look right."

Bye.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

 

[Raist3d]

Here

https://www.imaging-resource.com/ne...re-of-autofocus-plus-expect-more-aps-c-bodies

"

DE: As time goes on, will the cost of stacked technology come down enough that it will fit cost-wise into consumer cameras?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price.

DE: Yes. And of course, the stacked is just a more complicated technology. There's a lot going on there ,so it's going to be always more expensive than not stacked. But on the other hand, the cell-phone sensors that Sony makes use stacked technology, so that also helps drive the cost down. It sounds like, really, there's no way to tell how much it's going to come down over time, and whether that will be enough for entry-level models too."

looks like you don’t understand your own sources?

KT: Can it come down enough? <laughs> Unfortunately, the stacked image sensor is still very high-price. This is my personal opinion. In the semiconductor business, if we use a lot of image sensors, the bulk price is going to go down. That is a theory of the semiconductor business. Volume covers the price

the price are high because volumes are low

the other sentence is the interviewer making stuff up

Everything that has more complexity in build or design costs more. And yes, of course volume is a problem. But I still highlight that you are comparing smaller sensors with bigger sensors and that's a very known variable for cost difference - in addition to the volume difference.

In either case the claim was that stacked sensors are more expensive than the other type. That's how it is today, that's not a false claim. OM-5 announced next month is necessarily implying today as a context right? Of course tech and cost march forward and down.

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

Sure, I never said that volume/ecnonomies of scale are not a factor. I don't know why you are trying go portrait that on something I said- I never said that. But I also highlight you can't compare phone sensor sizes with bigger sensor sizes- that's a variable that changes pricing.

the discount on the whole sale market for any components increases significantly as you hit 1000 and 100000 or millions

Of course, that's a factor. I never said it wasn't.

In any case the cost of the sensor is the smallest part of what you pay. Currently you can buy sensors for $150 that go in cameras with $1500 RRP

So, at this point I must join almost doctor asking for a source for your claim that stacked sensors aren't more expensive to manufacture. Can you please provide a source for your claims the claim you made?

you can go on distributors website yourself use the 1 or 1/1.7 or smaller format and see it for yourself

Wait hold on. You were asked for a link to provide evidence to your claims. I provided evidence for mine. Can you please return in kind? Keep in mind again, this is ignoring sensor size which is again a big variable in sensor expense.

you have not provided any source your link actually disproofs your point as it says prices are driven by volumes which is correct

Actually what I provided is the claim that back side illuminated sensors are expensive. That is evidence for the claim. In the context of the OM-5 to be announced next month, and today this is how it is.

On the other hand you have not provided any evidence for your claims. Can you please return in kind?

Also can we agree that BSI sensors do not imply small pixel counts?

no stacking is a primary way to increase pixel count and fill factor

If your pixel count doesn’t need to go up there is no need for stacking

I am not talking about stacking here. I am talking about the claim you made here:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66214031

Which is on BSI sensors:

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S"

Clearly this claim is false given there's BSI sensors around with high megapixel counts?

you don’t understand the difference between BI and BSI i have posted a full list of technologies for your learning

Where? I however found this:

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...they-actually-important-bsi-sensors-explained

I am afraid BSI are also known as BI sensors.

"BSI, or Back Side Illuminated sensors are also known as ‘Back Illuminated' sensors."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back-illuminated_sensor

"A back-illuminated sensor, also known as backside illumination (BI) sensor,..."

sony own texts

By this stacked structure, large-scale circuits can now be mounted keeping small chip size.

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

for compacts the migration from front to stack didn’t improve IQ at all it is not a magic bullet it has been already discussed here long time ago

the primary benefit is increased fill factor and no loss of speed compared to back illuminated non stacked sensors

thanks again.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

 

[Interceptor121]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels

That is not correct.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100

That's the first one, it was already 20 MP from the get go and it's not a stacked sensor.

the rx100 front

rx100 II back

rx100 IV stacked

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

The A9 has a quad bayer cell to have many AF points so actually 96 megapixels

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

DJI is using the same sensor in the Mavic 3 line, I suspect they will drive far more volume than the OM-1.

Yes that would make a difference

 

[Raist3d]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels

That is not correct.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100

That's the first one, it was already 20 MP from the get go and it's not a stacked sensor.

the rx100 front

rx100 II back

rx100 IV stacked

You realize all these models are 20MP? So how does that make in any shape or form your claim above of "yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels" true?

Remember, you also said:

"it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible"

So we have evidence Sony had 20 MP RX100 compact camera, so it sure means 20MP were possible before stacked, right?

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

The A9 has a quad bayer cell to have many AF points so actually 96 megapixels

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

DJI is using the same sensor in the Mavic 3 line, I suspect they will drive far more volume than the OM-1.

Yes that would make a difference

 

[Raist3d]

Presuming the OM-5 is still following E-M5 lineage (not a different one where Olympus flips the numbering convention), I don't see OIympus coming up with a completely new sensor. Seems to make more sense to keep with the same sensor like they did for E-M5 III (inheriting E-M1 II/III sensor) and have the volume. Just decontent a bit on the image processor and some of the other features of the camera.

My thought too- by same sensor just to be clear, you mean the OM-1 sensor.

Then presuming they don't kill off the E-PL lineup, that one just inherits the old E-M1 II sensor.

I honestly think they will need better than that, though depends on pricing. Maybe kill the EPL's but do finally a real PenF Mark 2.

 

[Interceptor121]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels

That is not correct.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100

That's the first one, it was already 20 MP from the get go and it's not a stacked sensor.

the rx100 front

rx100 II back

rx100 IV stacked

You realize all these models are 20MP? So how does that make in any shape or form your claim above of "yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels" true?

Remember, you also said:

"it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible"

So we have evidence Sony had 20 MP RX100 compact camera, so it sure means 20MP were possible before stacked, right?

yes but the readout with the back illuminated sensor was poor

Besides stacked sensor in general start with mobile phones

second sony A9 (forgot about that one)

third sony rx series

phones drive most of the innovations including autofocus as it is on the OM-1

the exmor rs is currently the highest volume line so actually products are cheaper as long as the batch size is large

so again your hypothesis doesn’t work in order to bring cost down it makes sense for all cameras to use the same sensor

the residual front illuminated sensor will die of natural causes it is a fully depreciated line with no new products being added for camera use since six years now so don’t worry about that soon everything will be stacked construction in terms of camera sensors

if that is going to give a significant IQ benefit remains to be seen evidence is not fully supporting it however faster readout and flexible handling of autofocus inherited from mobile phones are a reality

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

The A9 has a quad bayer cell to have many AF points so actually 96 megapixels

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

DJI is using the same sensor in the Mavic 3 line, I suspect they will drive far more volume than the OM-1.

Yes that would make a difference

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

--
instagram http://instagram.com/interceptor121
My flickr sets http://www.flickr.com/photos/interceptor121/
Youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/interceptor121
Underwater Photo and Video Blog http://interceptor121.com
Deer Photography workshops https://interceptor121.com/2021/09/26/2021-22-deer-photography-workshops-in-woburn/

 

[AlmostDoctor]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think it has go one way or the other. Either the same sensor that's in OM1, or a non-stacked, higher resolution BSI sensor to cater to different needs. I don't think 20mp non-stacked sensor will be that appealing, given that it'll be competing with EM1III and EM5III in that price range, not to mention other m43 and APSC offerings in that range. But whether we see higher resolution sensor also depends on how well the current lenses can resolve the additional detail. OM doesn't seem to prioritize spec sheet bragging as much as real world improvements (e.g. they improved IBIS in OM1 even though it makes zero difference in CIPA rating since CIPA does not test for rolls) so I think it would happen only if they believe that there's real image resolution gain from higher res sensor.

There was a low credibility rumor about OM5 having higher resolution sensor. I think it's actually possible they would go for a higher resolution sensor. It will differentiate OM1 and OM5 in a way that will make them more appealing as a set, using one for wildlife and the other for nature

back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

Please explain to me why the Fuji APSC of 26MP then is BSI and 26 MP? That doesn't make sense. Also the Fuji 26MP is a relatively fast sensor (close to EM1.2/.3 readouts) in its class. Of course doesn't compare to the super fast stacked sensors but that's beside the point.

Evidence the Fuji 26MP is BSI and has been that for a while now:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/54716...s-with-a-26mp-x-trans-sensor-and-4k-60p-video

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination

Update: BSI enables actually bigger pixel counts without sacrificing image quality vs some degree of lower pixel counts. No, I am not going to bother looking where this piece of knowledge came from but I am pretty sure you can find it if you look for it. I already gave you evidence.

Hope you now return in kind.

There are back illuminated non stacked sensors typically used for low pixel count cameras like sony And panasonic 24 megapixels

You brought up the GH5s as an example of low pixel count BSI.

no the gh5s is not stacked

those read slow cant do 60 fos without crop

The Fuji 26MP ASPC sensor being used is not slow even if it's not hitting 60fps. It's definitively a step above the average CMOS sensor that was done until that time.

then there sre backilluminated stacked sensor with high pixel count those don’t do equally well in low light and are what goes in full frame high megapixel sensor.

This is a new claim. What you claimed was

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination"

So looks like the pixel count isn't limited. I gave you quite the example with the sony 61MP sensor. There's others around.

you don’t understand that there are 3 types of construction

front illuminated - sony exmor

back illuminated - sony exmor R

stacked back illuminated in multiple variants - sony exmor rs

Currently the exmor line has very few products it is the oldest line making apsc and MFT sensor with pixel size 3.3-3.97 microns

The exmor r line is the back illuminated line with higher sensitivity it has a wide range of pixel size however those have slow readout the only models that read 60 fps have 12 megapixels or less

Finally the rs line is the new mainstream pixel size up to 2.4 in normal cell and smaller for quad bayer

the sensor in the om-1 has 80 megapixels arranged in 20 megapixel cells

so yes stacking means higher count and smaller pixels

Am not familiar with fuji sony apsc stack uses traditional front illuminated sensors that are still very high performance.

? They are BSI.

nope sony apsc are front illuminated

Why don’t they change to stacked? Not sure but probably dont want to make a 32 megapixel apsc eating into their full frame

? Fuji just announced a 26MP Stacked sensor camera.

sony strategy is to get a winning full frame product and apsc is a commodity product

I was giving you the concrete example of Sony 61MP and Fuji's 26MP BSI sensors.

With more companies using high megapixels high speed full frame also those sensor will become mainstream

For MFT is a bit tricker especially if panasonic no longer uses sony so it will be hard to drive volumes

it would make sense for OMS to move all cameras to the new sensor to reduce purchase price instead kod getting other products

sensor costs is driven by volumes a line only does one process if you make 1 million of a certain product and 10000 of another video on the same line the latter will be significantly more expensive

this is the same reason why you buy a disk and a larger size costs less as raw materials quantity means nothing in the pricing while volumes matter

i think you need to refresh yourself a bit on the technology aspects

so your reasoning om-1 get a new different sensor to have lower cost doesn’t work

So your claim about stacked sensor costing the same as non-stacked is purely based on your speculation and not based on actual sensor pricing information offered by Sony, correct?

Even IF the raw manufacturing costs for the stacked bsi m43 sensor were the same as non-stacked m43 sensor (which is a big if), there's no reason Sony semi conductor would have to offer more desirable product for the same price as the less desirable variant, given the same sensor format. I think it's safe to assume that stacked sensor adds some cost to the manufacturer though the exact amount is still a mystery.

 

[Interceptor121]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think it has go one way or the other. Either the same sensor that's in OM1, or a non-stacked, higher resolution BSI sensor to cater to different needs. I don't think 20mp non-stacked sensor will be that appealing, given that it'll be competing with EM1III and EM5III in that price range, not to mention other m43 and APSC offerings in that range. But whether we see higher resolution sensor also depends on how well the current lenses can resolve the additional detail. OM doesn't seem to prioritize spec sheet bragging as much as real world improvements (e.g. they improved IBIS in OM1 even though it makes zero difference in CIPA rating since CIPA does not test for rolls) so I think it would happen only if they believe that there's real image resolution gain from higher res sensor.

There was a low credibility rumor about OM5 having higher resolution sensor. I think it's actually possible they would go for a higher resolution sensor. It will differentiate OM1 and OM5 in a way that will make them more appealing as a set, using one for wildlife and the other for nature

back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

Please explain to me why the Fuji APSC of 26MP then is BSI and 26 MP? That doesn't make sense. Also the Fuji 26MP is a relatively fast sensor (close to EM1.2/.3 readouts) in its class. Of course doesn't compare to the super fast stacked sensors but that's beside the point.

Evidence the Fuji 26MP is BSI and has been that for a while now:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/54716...s-with-a-26mp-x-trans-sensor-and-4k-60p-video

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination

Update: BSI enables actually bigger pixel counts without sacrificing image quality vs some degree of lower pixel counts. No, I am not going to bother looking where this piece of knowledge came from but I am pretty sure you can find it if you look for it. I already gave you evidence.

Hope you now return in kind.

There are back illuminated non stacked sensors typically used for low pixel count cameras like sony And panasonic 24 megapixels

You brought up the GH5s as an example of low pixel count BSI.

no the gh5s is not stacked

those read slow cant do 60 fos without crop

The Fuji 26MP ASPC sensor being used is not slow even if it's not hitting 60fps. It's definitively a step above the average CMOS sensor that was done until that time.

then there sre backilluminated stacked sensor with high pixel count those don’t do equally well in low light and are what goes in full frame high megapixel sensor.

This is a new claim. What you claimed was

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination"

So looks like the pixel count isn't limited. I gave you quite the example with the sony 61MP sensor. There's others around.

you don’t understand that there are 3 types of construction

front illuminated - sony exmor

back illuminated - sony exmor R

stacked back illuminated in multiple variants - sony exmor rs

Currently the exmor line has very few products it is the oldest line making apsc and MFT sensor with pixel size 3.3-3.97 microns

The exmor r line is the back illuminated line with higher sensitivity it has a wide range of pixel size however those have slow readout the only models that read 60 fps have 12 megapixels or less

Finally the rs line is the new mainstream pixel size up to 2.4 in normal cell and smaller for quad bayer

the sensor in the om-1 has 80 megapixels arranged in 20 megapixel cells

so yes stacking means higher count and smaller pixels

Am not familiar with fuji sony apsc stack uses traditional front illuminated sensors that are still very high performance.

? They are BSI.

nope sony apsc are front illuminated

Why don’t they change to stacked? Not sure but probably dont want to make a 32 megapixel apsc eating into their full frame

? Fuji just announced a 26MP Stacked sensor camera.

sony strategy is to get a winning full frame product and apsc is a commodity product

I was giving you the concrete example of Sony 61MP and Fuji's 26MP BSI sensors.

With more companies using high megapixels high speed full frame also those sensor will become mainstream

For MFT is a bit tricker especially if panasonic no longer uses sony so it will be hard to drive volumes

it would make sense for OMS to move all cameras to the new sensor to reduce purchase price instead kod getting other products

sensor costs is driven by volumes a line only does one process if you make 1 million of a certain product and 10000 of another video on the same line the latter will be significantly more expensive

this is the same reason why you buy a disk and a larger size costs less as raw materials quantity means nothing in the pricing while volumes matter

i think you need to refresh yourself a bit on the technology aspects

so your reasoning om-1 get a new different sensor to have lower cost doesn’t work

So your claim about stacked sensor costing the same as non-stacked is purely based on your speculation and not based on actual sensor pricing information offered by Sony, correct?

Even IF the raw manufacturing costs for the stacked bsi m43 sensor were the same as non-stacked m43 sensor (which is a big if), there's no reason Sony semi conductor would have to offer more desirable product for the same price as the less desirable variant, given the same sensor format. I think it's safe to assume that stacked sensor adds some cost to the manufacturer though the exact amount is still a mystery.

Sony manufacturing is no longer launching any front illuminated sensors since 2016
so everything will be stacked as that is now mainstream

thats the reason why the new mft sensor is stacked not because is more desirable it is simply the only option offered from now on

Of course if you want to buy the old sensor that’s on alibaba at $90-130

sooner or later sony will migrate their apsc to exmor rs and the old exmor will be pronounced dead

 

[JakeJY]

Presuming the OM-5 is still following E-M5 lineage (not a different one where Olympus flips the numbering convention), I don't see OIympus coming up with a completely new sensor. Seems to make more sense to keep with the same sensor like they did for E-M5 III (inheriting E-M1 II/III sensor) and have the volume. Just decontent a bit on the image processor and some of the other features of the camera.

My thought too- by same sensor just to be clear, you mean the OM-1 sensor.

Yes, that's what I meant, although my wording is confusing.

Then presuming they don't kill off the E-PL lineup, that one just inherits the old E-M1 II sensor.

I honestly think they will need better than that, though depends on pricing. Maybe kill the EPL's but do finally a real PenF Mark 2.

I think the E-M1 II sensor is fine and still quite good. I'm pretty sure a lot of people would be quite happy with a GF successor (or even GX successor) if it got the G9 sensor and processor. I don't imagine it'll be a whole lot different for E-PL line. It would allow an inexpensive camera that is still very capable.

 

[whumber]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels

What point do you think you're making here?

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

The A9 has a quad bayer cell to have many AF points so actually 96 megapixels

Where did you pull this one from? We have the datasheet for the IMX310, it's definitely not a quad bayer design. Plus it produces PDAF striping against strong backlights like all of Sony's other masked PDAF sensor designs.

 

[kamerakiri]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

GH6 sensor is not stacked and it is pretty darn fast. Current generation normal sensors are pretty good in terms of speed so that's the least of worries.

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

Now you are talking from your heart. See - the important stuff is new UI and new AI, that is, the new processing pipeline.

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

Unique?

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

Follow the marketing. Only two things are certain about the camera - compact and aimed for outdoors. Implies weather sealing. And a few logical things we can surmise - new interface and new AF. This guarantees that new processor will come as this software can't run on older hardware.

So the only variable here may be the sensor. Rest assured, it certainly won't be worse than EM 1 Mark III, nor will it be slower.

No matter what happens, this new camera will still sit above all existing cameras, though perhaps a tad bit under OM-1, and will likely have price around $1500 or less. Price around $1800 is simply too close to OM-1(and many, many full frame options - Z5, Z6, S5, A7C, A7III, R). The market for an expensive non-stacked MFT body is non-existent as far as photography is concerned (hence Panasonic sells video features only) - especially now that Canon gives AI autofocus in R10 for just over $1000.

I think you are just overthinking everything. Just chill. We'll get a good camera for a good price in a relatively compact body. If OM-1 didn't radically adopt a new design compared to existing bodies, OM-5 will likely do the same. It may be a better version of EM-5 platform.

Note carefully what Andrea said "I have been told this is not the replacement of E-M5 Mark III". Replacement of E-M5 Mark III is E-M5 Mark IV with internals of E-M1 Mark III. Instead, this is a compact version of OM-1 tech, in a body that probably is a new design.

I personally think that a non-stacked MFT sensor in a DSLR style body ( essentially EM 1 Mark IV) at $1700 or thereabouts has zero market today. Whatever niche remained was crushed by Canon R7. Either OMDS brings down their AF in a non-stacked sensor for $1200 or they go bust and bankrupt.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

 

[Jonas Palm]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

 

[Raist3d]

it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible

There were multiple generations of 20MP 1" sensors before Sony started introducing stacked versions.

yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels

That is not correct.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100

That's the first one, it was already 20 MP from the get go and it's not a stacked sensor.

the rx100 front

rx100 II back

rx100 IV stacked

You realize all these models are 20MP? So how does that make in any shape or form your claim above of "yes but stacked started with the rx100 20 megapixels" true?

Remember, you also said:

"it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible"

So we have evidence Sony had 20 MP RX100 compact camera, so it sure means 20MP were possible before stacked, right?

yes but the readout with the back illuminated sensor was poor

And? This is what you wrote:

"it started with compact cameras at 20 megapixels it was not otherwise possible"

So you were saying 20 MP was not possible before until Sony did stacked sensors? Except that they did?

Besides stacked sensor in general start with mobile phones

That point is irrelevant to the conversation. It sure seems you were claiming that 20MP were not possible before stacked sensors arrived, yet Sony themselves did several RX models with 20MP and no stacked sensors.

OR did I misinterpret what you wrote above? What's the correct interpretation?

second sony A9 (forgot about that one)

third sony rx series

phones drive most of the innovations including autofocus as it is on the OM-1

the exmor rs is currently the highest volume line so actually products are cheaper as long as the batch size is large

so again your hypothesis doesn’t work in order to bring cost down it makes sense for all cameras to use the same sensor

What hypothesis specifically you are talking about? I never said that economies of scale are not part of the price equation. Sensor size also is- you keep quoting mobile phone sensors but those are pretty small aren't they?

the residual front illuminated sensor will die of natural causes it is a fully depreciated line with no new products being added for camera use since six years now so don’t worry about that soon everything will be stacked construction in terms of camera sensors

if that is going to give a significant IQ benefit remains to be seen evidence is not fully supporting it however faster readout and flexible handling of autofocus inherited from mobile phones are a reality

??? I think this derails from the discussion.

sony apsc runs ok front illumination and back illuminated full frame run on back illuminated non stacked so only for higher than 24 megapixels full frame stacking has been used

The first stacked sensor available in any MILC was the 24MP A9.

The A9 has a quad bayer cell to have many AF points so actually 96 megapixels

the sensor in the OM-1 is still tentative until there are no volumes it will cost more to make not because it is intrinsically more expansive but because capacity of the foundry is used for larger orders of mom different form factors (mobile phones)

DJI is using the same sensor in the Mavic 3 line, I suspect they will drive far more volume than the OM-1.

Yes that would make a difference

 

[Raist3d]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think it has go one way or the other. Either the same sensor that's in OM1, or a non-stacked, higher resolution BSI sensor to cater to different needs. I don't think 20mp non-stacked sensor will be that appealing, given that it'll be competing with EM1III and EM5III in that price range, not to mention other m43 and APSC offerings in that range. But whether we see higher resolution sensor also depends on how well the current lenses can resolve the additional detail. OM doesn't seem to prioritize spec sheet bragging as much as real world improvements (e.g. they improved IBIS in OM1 even though it makes zero difference in CIPA rating since CIPA does not test for rolls) so I think it would happen only if they believe that there's real image resolution gain from higher res sensor.

There was a low credibility rumor about OM5 having higher resolution sensor. I think it's actually possible they would go for a higher resolution sensor. It will differentiate OM1 and OM5 in a way that will make them more appealing as a set, using one for wildlife and the other for nature

back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

Please explain to me why the Fuji APSC of 26MP then is BSI and 26 MP? That doesn't make sense. Also the Fuji 26MP is a relatively fast sensor (close to EM1.2/.3 readouts) in its class. Of course doesn't compare to the super fast stacked sensors but that's beside the point.

Evidence the Fuji 26MP is BSI and has been that for a while now:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/54716...s-with-a-26mp-x-trans-sensor-and-4k-60p-video

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination

Update: BSI enables actually bigger pixel counts without sacrificing image quality vs some degree of lower pixel counts. No, I am not going to bother looking where this piece of knowledge came from but I am pretty sure you can find it if you look for it. I already gave you evidence.

Hope you now return in kind.

There are back illuminated non stacked sensors typically used for low pixel count cameras like sony And panasonic 24 megapixels

You brought up the GH5s as an example of low pixel count BSI.

no the gh5s is not stacked

I didn't claim it was stacked. I said BSI. This was your own claim

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S"

those read slow cant do 60 fos without crop

The Fuji 26MP ASPC sensor being used is not slow even if it's not hitting 60fps. It's definitively a step above the average CMOS sensor that was done until that time.

then there sre backilluminated stacked sensor with high pixel count those don’t do equally well in low light and are what goes in full frame high megapixel sensor.

This is a new claim. What you claimed was

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination"

So looks like the pixel count isn't limited. I gave you quite the example with the sony 61MP sensor. There's others around.

you don’t understand that there are 3 types of construction

front illuminated - sony exmor

back illuminated - sony exmor R

stacked back illuminated in multiple variants - sony exmor rs

Er... I quite know that . I am not making the claim that you need stacked sensors for higher pixel counts, and I gave you very concrete evidence of shipping models today that have a high pixel count and are not stacked sensors.

Currently the exmor line has very few products it is the oldest line making apsc and MFT sensor with pixel size 3.3-3.97 microns

The exmor r line is the back illuminated line with higher sensitivity it has a wide range of pixel size however those have slow readout the only models that read 60 fps have 12 megapixels or less

Finally the rs line is the new mainstream pixel size up to 2.4 in normal cell and smaller for quad bayer

the sensor in the om-1 has 80 megapixels arranged in 20 megapixel cells

so yes stacking means higher count and smaller pixels

Am not familiar with fuji sony apsc stack uses traditional front illuminated sensors that are still very high performance.

? They are BSI.

nope sony apsc are front illuminated

I am talking about the Fuji Sony made 26MP sensors.

Why don’t they change to stacked? Not sure but probably dont want to make a 32 megapixel apsc eating into their full frame

? Fuji just announced a 26MP Stacked sensor camera.

No acknowledgement here?

sony strategy is to get a winning full frame product and apsc is a commodity product

I was giving you the concrete example of Sony 61MP and Fuji's 26MP BSI sensors.

With more companies using high megapixels high speed full frame also those sensor will become mainstream

For MFT is a bit tricker especially if panasonic no longer uses sony so it will be hard to drive volumes

it would make sense for OMS to move all cameras to the new sensor to reduce purchase price instead kod getting other products

sensor costs is driven by volumes a line only does one process if you make 1 million of a certain product and 10000 of another video on the same line the latter will be significantly more expensive

That is one factor. Another factor is the size of the sensor because the bigger the wafer area you need to etch statistically the higher chances an error invalidates a large area of the wafer.

This is pretty basic and known since ages by the way. Read the first answer here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/tz1cd/why_do_larger_sensors_make_cameras_so_expensive

this is the same reason why you buy a disk and a larger size costs less as raw materials quantity means nothing in the pricing while volumes matter

Again, the issue is you get errors in silicon edging and the bigger the sensor/more components the higher chance you will get an error and have to throw material/redo away.

i think you need to refresh yourself a bit on the technology aspects

Actually no, I think I am doing quite well from what I am seeing here.

so your reasoning om-1 get a new different sensor to have lower cost doesn’t work

It can work if the economies of scale aren't hit, because per Sony's admission stacked sensors are expensive to make at the moment.

 

[Raist3d]

Been saying they need to put the new sensor down the line but I am rethinking this now since stacked sensors are $$$

So to me the most important thing is the on-5 sensor if it’s not the stacked one, that I shares the modest image quality improvements of the new sensor and also able to auto iso to 25600

But all said I rather have them do a pro specced smaller om-5 priced high than a model with some obvious compromises to make it “cheap”

Even if that means a price north of $1,500 USD - say $1600 or even $1799 - make it right make it pro small That would be pretty unique in the market

thoughts? What you think is key for the om-5 to come out in todays market competitively - assuming this is an em5 mark iii follow up or even em1 mark iii

I think it has go one way or the other. Either the same sensor that's in OM1, or a non-stacked, higher resolution BSI sensor to cater to different needs. I don't think 20mp non-stacked sensor will be that appealing, given that it'll be competing with EM1III and EM5III in that price range, not to mention other m43 and APSC offerings in that range. But whether we see higher resolution sensor also depends on how well the current lenses can resolve the additional detail. OM doesn't seem to prioritize spec sheet bragging as much as real world improvements (e.g. they improved IBIS in OM1 even though it makes zero difference in CIPA rating since CIPA does not test for rolls) so I think it would happen only if they believe that there's real image resolution gain from higher res sensor.

There was a low credibility rumor about OM5 having higher resolution sensor. I think it's actually possible they would go for a higher resolution sensor. It will differentiate OM1 and OM5 in a way that will make them more appealing as a set, using one for wildlife and the other for nature

back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

Please explain to me why the Fuji APSC of 26MP then is BSI and 26 MP? That doesn't make sense. Also the Fuji 26MP is a relatively fast sensor (close to EM1.2/.3 readouts) in its class. Of course doesn't compare to the super fast stacked sensors but that's beside the point.

Evidence the Fuji 26MP is BSI and has been that for a while now:

https://www.dpreview.com/news/54716...s-with-a-26mp-x-trans-sensor-and-4k-60p-video

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination

Update: BSI enables actually bigger pixel counts without sacrificing image quality vs some degree of lower pixel counts. No, I am not going to bother looking where this piece of knowledge came from but I am pretty sure you can find it if you look for it. I already gave you evidence.

Hope you now return in kind.

There are back illuminated non stacked sensors typically used for low pixel count cameras like sony And panasonic 24 megapixels

You brought up the GH5s as an example of low pixel count BSI.

no the gh5s is not stacked

those read slow cant do 60 fos without crop

The Fuji 26MP ASPC sensor being used is not slow even if it's not hitting 60fps. It's definitively a step above the average CMOS sensor that was done until that time.

then there sre backilluminated stacked sensor with high pixel count those don’t do equally well in low light and are what goes in full frame high megapixel sensor.

This is a new claim. What you claimed was

"back illuminated sensor read slower so the pixel count is limited like the GH5S

you need stacking to read faster or front illumination"

So looks like the pixel count isn't limited. I gave you quite the example with the sony 61MP sensor. There's others around.

you don’t understand that there are 3 types of construction

front illuminated - sony exmor

back illuminated - sony exmor R

stacked back illuminated in multiple variants - sony exmor rs

Currently the exmor line has very few products it is the oldest line making apsc and MFT sensor with pixel size 3.3-3.97 microns

The exmor r line is the back illuminated line with higher sensitivity it has a wide range of pixel size however those have slow readout the only models that read 60 fps have 12 megapixels or less

Finally the rs line is the new mainstream pixel size up to 2.4 in normal cell and smaller for quad bayer

the sensor in the om-1 has 80 megapixels arranged in 20 megapixel cells

so yes stacking means higher count and smaller pixels

Am not familiar with fuji sony apsc stack uses traditional front illuminated sensors that are still very high performance.

? They are BSI.

nope sony apsc are front illuminated

Why don’t they change to stacked? Not sure but probably dont want to make a 32 megapixel apsc eating into their full frame

? Fuji just announced a 26MP Stacked sensor camera.

sony strategy is to get a winning full frame product and apsc is a commodity product

I was giving you the concrete example of Sony 61MP and Fuji's 26MP BSI sensors.

With more companies using high megapixels high speed full frame also those sensor will become mainstream

For MFT is a bit tricker especially if panasonic no longer uses sony so it will be hard to drive volumes

it would make sense for OMS to move all cameras to the new sensor to reduce purchase price instead kod getting other products

sensor costs is driven by volumes a line only does one process if you make 1 million of a certain product and 10000 of another video on the same line the latter will be significantly more expensive

this is the same reason why you buy a disk and a larger size costs less as raw materials quantity means nothing in the pricing while volumes matter

i think you need to refresh yourself a bit on the technology aspects

so your reasoning om-1 get a new different sensor to have lower cost doesn’t work

So your claim about stacked sensor costing the same as non-stacked is purely based on your speculation and not based on actual sensor pricing information offered by Sony, correct?

Even IF the raw manufacturing costs for the stacked bsi m43 sensor were the same as non-stacked m43 sensor (which is a big if), there's no reason Sony semi conductor would have to offer more desirable product for the same price as the less desirable variant, given the same sensor format. I think it's safe to assume that stacked sensor adds some cost to the manufacturer though the exact amount is still a mystery.

Sony manufacturing is no longer launching any front illuminated sensors since 2016
so everything will be stacked as that is now mainstream.

They seem to be doing BSI's, not necessarily all stacked.

thats the reason why the new mft sensor is stacked not because is more desirable it is simply the only option offered from now on

That doesn't seem to be accurate.

Of course if you want to buy the old sensor that’s on alibaba at $90-130

sooner or later sony will migrate their apsc to exmor rs and the old exmor will be pronounced dead

At some point maybe that happens, well see.

 

[Raist3d]

Presuming the OM-5 is still following E-M5 lineage (not a different one where Olympus flips the numbering convention), I don't see OIympus coming up with a completely new sensor. Seems to make more sense to keep with the same sensor like they did for E-M5 III (inheriting E-M1 II/III sensor) and have the volume. Just decontent a bit on the image processor and some of the other features of the camera.

My thought too- by same sensor just to be clear, you mean the OM-1 sensor.

Yes, that's what I meant, although my wording is confusing.

Then presuming they don't kill off the E-PL lineup, that one just inherits the old E-M1 II sensor.

I honestly think they will need better than that, though depends on pricing. Maybe kill the EPL's but do finally a real PenF Mark 2.

I think the E-M1 II sensor is fine and still quite good. I'm pretty sure a lot of people would be quite happy with a GF successor (or even GX successor) if it got the G9 sensor and processor. I don't imagine it'll be a whole lot different for E-PL line. It would allow an inexpensive camera that is still very capable.

Well my concern is that we have seen the 20MP sensor capability in mft for quite a while, the new OM-1 seems to handle better color preservation as ISO climb. Given the competition, it just makes me think they need it to make the camera more competitive.

To put this another way- how long would a "new" 20MP sensor with PDAF on a Pen line would hang around in years further more? Where are the competitors already?