X2D is real??

[Erik Kaffehr]

As a 907x owner I can only confirm that 50mp is absolutely good for 99,9% of works.

the fields of improvement for H are AF speed and maybe IBIS, the rest is already more than good enough for any pro use.

Hi,

The main reason for having 102 MP is not the need of resolution, but proper handling of the image projected by the lens.

To that comes that the new sensor is a much improved design, over the old one. Some key technologies:

Backside Illumination:

• Makes better use of sensor surface by moving the wiring behind the photo sensitive layer.
• Reduces pixel level vignetting.
• Reduces optical cross talk.

Dual gain architecture:

Improves DR at medium ISOs and higher, by reducing readout noise.

Gapless microlenses:

• Reduces aliasing
• Improves quantum efficiency

In this comparison all the images are scaled to around 45 MP. Which camera deliver the cleanest image?

Also, the 102 MP sensor supports phase detection AF, allowing for more efficient focusing and faster readout times.

Why would OSPDAF allow faster readout times?

I think maybe Erik meant "requiring" not "allowing".

Bad writing on my part...

The correct writing would be: Also, the 102MP sensor phase detection AF, allowing for more efficient focusing. It also has faster readout times.

The readout times are obviously faster, as the 102 MP sensor can handle 6FPS while the 50 MP sensor has only 3 FPS. That would also mean that electronic shutter has twice the speed.

The focusing system uses local (windowed) readout modes. It would be feasible to assume that those readout modes are better optimized for mirrorless, but I don't think we know.

BTW, Ming Thein, who used to be in charge of strategy at Hasselblad, wrote on his blog that the 50 MP sensor was optimized for DSLRs, while the 102 MP sensor was designed with mirrorless in mind.

AFAIK, OSPDAF is optional and not an integrated part of a sensor technology.

It affects the toppings, but also the silicon must support the OSPDAF system requirements.

We don't know at which level PDAF is implemented. Would it be easy to add PDAF to the 50 MP design, Sony would probably made it. Some posters suggested that the 50 MP sensor is no longer made, that is the vendors use existing stocks. We don't know.

I believe that Phase One uses the “same” sensor and M11 likely as well. Neither has OSPDAF.

See the distinction between requiring and allowing.

Phase One uses a different sensor, as it is 54x41 mm size. We don't know if that sensor supports PDAF.

If Phase One is a single customer, it may be quite probable that the sensor is made to their specifications, especially as the 54x41 mm sensor requires a different set of masks to 44x33 mm.

I would guess that the Leica M11 is a manual focus camera. So, having PDAF would be zero advantage.

My personal stance may be that having a sensor without PDAF and a camera without IBIS may make some sense when shooting on tripod and focusing manually.

Best regards

Erik



--
Erik Kaffehr
Website: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net
Magic uses to disappear in controlled experiments…
Gallery: http://echophoto.smugmug.com
Articles: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles

 

[SrMi]

As a 907x owner I can only confirm that 50mp is absolutely good for 99,9% of works.

the fields of improvement for H are AF speed and maybe IBIS, the rest is already more than good enough for any pro use.

Hi,

The main reason for having 102 MP is not the need of resolution, but proper handling of the image projected by the lens.

To that comes that the new sensor is a much improved design, over the old one. Some key technologies:

Backside Illumination:

• Makes better use of sensor surface by moving the wiring behind the photo sensitive layer.
• Reduces pixel level vignetting.
• Reduces optical cross talk.

Dual gain architecture:

Improves DR at medium ISOs and higher, by reducing readout noise.

Gapless microlenses:

• Reduces aliasing
• Improves quantum efficiency

In this comparison all the images are scaled to around 45 MP. Which camera deliver the cleanest image?

Also, the 102 MP sensor supports phase detection AF, allowing for more efficient focusing and faster readout times.

Why would OSPDAF allow faster readout times?

I think maybe Erik meant "requiring" not "allowing".

Bad writing on my part...

The correct writing would be: Also, the 102MP sensor phase detection AF, allowing for more efficient focusing. It also has faster readout times.

The readout times are obviously faster, as the 102 MP sensor can handle 6FPS while the 50 MP sensor has only 3 FPS. That would also mean that electronic shutter has twice the speed.

The focusing system uses local (windowed) readout modes. It would be feasible to assume that those readout modes are better optimized for mirrorless, but I don't think we know.
BTW, Ming Thein, who used to be in charge of strategy at Hasselblad, wrote on his blog that the 50 MP sensor was optimized for DSLRs, while the 102 MP sensor was designed with mirrorless in mind.

AFAIK, OSPDAF is optional and not an integrated part of a sensor technology.

It affects the toppings, but also the silicon must support the OSPDAF system requirements.

We don't know at which level PDAF is implemented. Would it be easy to add PDAF to the 50 MP design, Sony would probably made it. Some posters suggested that the 50 MP sensor is no longer made, that is the vendors use existing stocks. We don't know.

I believe that Phase One uses the “same” sensor and M11 likely as well. Neither has OSPDAF.

See the distinction between requiring and allowing.

Phase One uses a different sensor, as it is 54x41 mm size. We don't know if that sensor supports PDAF.

AFAIK, Sony a7rIV, GFX100S, Phase One 150 (and others), use the same type of silicon but differ only in the wafer size.

If Phase One is a single customer, it may be quite probable that the sensor is made to their specifications, especially as the 54x41 mm sensor requires a different set of masks to 44x33 mm.

I would guess that the Leica M11 is a manual focus camera. So, having PDAF would be zero advantage.
My personal stance may be that having a sensor without PDAF and a camera without IBIS may make some sense when shooting on tripod and focusing manually.

Best regards

Erik

 

[JimKasson]

As a 907x owner I can only confirm that 50mp is absolutely good for 99,9% of works.

the fields of improvement for H are AF speed and maybe IBIS, the rest is already more than good enough for any pro use.

Hi,

The main reason for having 102 MP is not the need of resolution, but proper handling of the image projected by the lens.

To that comes that the new sensor is a much improved design, over the old one. Some key technologies:

Backside Illumination:

• Makes better use of sensor surface by moving the wiring behind the photo sensitive layer.
• Reduces pixel level vignetting.
• Reduces optical cross talk.

Dual gain architecture:

Improves DR at medium ISOs and higher, by reducing readout noise.

Gapless microlenses:

• Reduces aliasing
• Improves quantum efficiency

In this comparison all the images are scaled to around 45 MP. Which camera deliver the cleanest image?

Also, the 102 MP sensor supports phase detection AF, allowing for more efficient focusing and faster readout times.

Why would OSPDAF allow faster readout times?

I think maybe Erik meant "requiring" not "allowing".

Bad writing on my part...

The correct writing would be: Also, the 102MP sensor phase detection AF, allowing for more efficient focusing. It also has faster readout times.

The readout times are obviously faster, as the 102 MP sensor can handle 6FPS while the 50 MP sensor has only 3 FPS. That would also mean that electronic shutter has twice the speed.

The focusing system uses local (windowed) readout modes. It would be feasible to assume that those readout modes are better optimized for mirrorless, but I don't think we know.
BTW, Ming Thein, who used to be in charge of strategy at Hasselblad, wrote on his blog that the 50 MP sensor was optimized for DSLRs, while the 102 MP sensor was designed with mirrorless in mind.

AFAIK, OSPDAF is optional and not an integrated part of a sensor technology.

It affects the toppings, but also the silicon must support the OSPDAF system requirements.

We don't know at which level PDAF is implemented. Would it be easy to add PDAF to the 50 MP design, Sony would probably made it. Some posters suggested that the 50 MP sensor is no longer made, that is the vendors use existing stocks. We don't know.

I believe that Phase One uses the “same” sensor and M11 likely as well. Neither has OSPDAF.

See the distinction between requiring and allowing.

Phase One uses a different sensor, as it is 54x41 mm size. We don't know if that sensor supports PDAF.

AFAIK, Sony a7rIV, GFX100S, Phase One 150 (and others), use the same type of silicon but differ only in the wafer size.

I highly doubt if the size is different for the wafers from which those sensors are made.

--

the last word the last word - Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

blog.kasson.com

 

[SrMi]

As a 907x owner I can only confirm that 50mp is absolutely good for 99,9% of works.

the fields of improvement for H are AF speed and maybe IBIS, the rest is already more than good enough for any pro use.

Hi,

The main reason for having 102 MP is not the need of resolution, but proper handling of the image projected by the lens.

To that comes that the new sensor is a much improved design, over the old one. Some key technologies:

Backside Illumination:

• Makes better use of sensor surface by moving the wiring behind the photo sensitive layer.
• Reduces pixel level vignetting.
• Reduces optical cross talk.

Dual gain architecture:

Improves DR at medium ISOs and higher, by reducing readout noise.

Gapless microlenses:

• Reduces aliasing
• Improves quantum efficiency

In this comparison all the images are scaled to around 45 MP. Which camera deliver the cleanest image?

Also, the 102 MP sensor supports phase detection AF, allowing for more efficient focusing and faster readout times.

Why would OSPDAF allow faster readout times?

I think maybe Erik meant "requiring" not "allowing".

Bad writing on my part...

The correct writing would be: Also, the 102MP sensor phase detection AF, allowing for more efficient focusing. It also has faster readout times.

The readout times are obviously faster, as the 102 MP sensor can handle 6FPS while the 50 MP sensor has only 3 FPS. That would also mean that electronic shutter has twice the speed.

The focusing system uses local (windowed) readout modes. It would be feasible to assume that those readout modes are better optimized for mirrorless, but I don't think we know.
BTW, Ming Thein, who used to be in charge of strategy at Hasselblad, wrote on his blog that the 50 MP sensor was optimized for DSLRs, while the 102 MP sensor was designed with mirrorless in mind.

AFAIK, OSPDAF is optional and not an integrated part of a sensor technology.

It affects the toppings, but also the silicon must support the OSPDAF system requirements.

We don't know at which level PDAF is implemented. Would it be easy to add PDAF to the 50 MP design, Sony would probably made it. Some posters suggested that the 50 MP sensor is no longer made, that is the vendors use existing stocks. We don't know.

I believe that Phase One uses the “same” sensor and M11 likely as well. Neither has OSPDAF.

See the distinction between requiring and allowing.

Phase One uses a different sensor, as it is 54x41 mm size. We don't know if that sensor supports PDAF.

AFAIK, Sony a7rIV, GFX100S, Phase One 150 (and others), use the same type of silicon but differ only in the wafer size.

I highly doubt if the size is different for the wafers from which those sensors are made.

Thank you for the correction.

--
https://blog.kasson.com

 

[JimKasson]

AFAIK, Sony a7rIV, GFX100S, Phase One 150 (and others), use the same type of silicon but differ only in the wafer size.

I highly doubt if the size is different for the wafers from which those sensors are made.

Thank you for the correction.

You meant die size, right? I can get behind that for the pixel designs, but other aspects of the sensors may be different due to system requirements and ability -- or lack of it -- for design choices to scale.

 

[Erik Kaffehr]

AFAIK, Sony a7rIV, GFX100S, Phase One 150 (and others), use the same type of silicon but differ only in the wafer size.

We don't actually know.

It is a reasonable approach is to assume that they share pixel design, but we cannot be sure about that.

There is a lot of development going into sensor design. What I read it is like a four year cycle, In older times, there used to be development teams working interleaved so we had new designs each second year.

Wafer size is something different. Each wafer contains a number of sensors.

Each sensor needs a set of masks and those mask sets will differ for sensor sizes. So, an APS-C sensor will have different mask sets from say 24x36 mm or 33x44 mm.

That also means designs may vary, although basic pixel design is the same.

Best regards

Erik

 

[SrMi]

AFAIK, Sony a7rIV, GFX100S, Phase One 150 (and others), use the same type of silicon but differ only in the wafer size.

We don't actually know.

It is a reasonable approach is to assume that they share pixel design, but we cannot be sure about that.

There is a lot of development going into sensor design. What I read it is like a four year cycle, In older times, there used to be development teams working interleaved so we had new designs each second year.

Wafer size is something different. Each wafer contains a number of sensors.

Each sensor needs a set of masks and those mask sets will differ for sensor sizes. So, an APS-C sensor will have different mask sets from say 24x36 mm or 33x44 mm.

That also means designs may vary, although basic pixel design is the same.

Best regards

Erik

As Jim wrote, I meant of course die size, not wafer size.

What you and Jim wrote makes sense.

 

[Mistral75]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/HasselbladX1D/permalink/2557400147724519/?fs=e&s=cl

From the OP:

"testers on the field have reported serious overheating issues, causing cameras to shut down, they were given another sample of the body without IBIS, that one works fine so ....could be no IBIS-.- and seems the camera is still not ready for consumers this side of Xmas"

 

[gameshoes3003]

https://www.facebook.com/groups/HasselbladX1D/permalink/2557400147724519/?fs=e&s=cl

From the OP:

"testers on the field have reported serious overheating issues, causing cameras to shut down, they were given another sample of the body without IBIS, that one works fine so ....could be no IBIS-.- and seems the camera is still not ready for consumers this side of Xmas"

Pity. At least it gives me more time to save up money.

 

[JAKORO]

here is an old image from a few months ago.

Although the new strap loop brings back old v series designs, it had reported by testers that it will obstruct the port doors when its hanging down.

Also to note, testers have been using x2d on the field since early March, giving feedbacks (not to Switzerland it had various issues such as overheating but to answer the title, X2D is real.