Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f37-digital-photography.html)
-   -   Re: Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t620225-re-sony-mass-produces-back-illuminated-image-sensors.html)

Kevin McMurtrie 06-14-2008 04:19 PM

Re: Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
 
In article <MPG.22bda0eb5b04276998bcba@news.supernews.com>,
Alfred Molon <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:

> http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1213308645.html
>


This is the key sentence:
"The newly developed CMOS image sensor achieves a signal-to-noise ratio
of +8dB(+6dB sensitivity, -2dB noise) in comparison to existing Sony
CMOS image sensors of the same pixel size."

This is good news for cell phones and cheap cameras but, if ever
applied, won't have such an impressive impact on large sensors.

--
I will not see your reply if you use Google.

David J Taylor 06-15-2008 05:14 AM

Re: Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
 
Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> In article <MPG.22bda0eb5b04276998bcba@news.supernews.com>,
> Alfred Molon <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1213308645.html
>>

>
> This is the key sentence:
> "The newly developed CMOS image sensor achieves a signal-to-noise
> ratio of +8dB(+6dB sensitivity, -2dB noise) in comparison to existing
> Sony CMOS image sensors of the same pixel size."
>
> This is good news for cell phones and cheap cameras but, if ever
> applied, won't have such an impressive impact on large sensors.


Why do you say that? Isn't the quantum efficiency improvement in going
from front- to back-illumination enough to produce a substantial
sensitivity gain?

David



Ray Fischer 06-15-2008 07:40 AM

Re: Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
 
David J Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.neither-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
>Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
>> In article <MPG.22bda0eb5b04276998bcba@news.supernews.com>,
>> Alfred Molon <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1213308645.html
>>>

>>
>> This is the key sentence:
>> "The newly developed CMOS image sensor achieves a signal-to-noise
>> ratio of +8dB(+6dB sensitivity, -2dB noise) in comparison to existing
>> Sony CMOS image sensors of the same pixel size."
>>
>> This is good news for cell phones and cheap cameras but, if ever
>> applied, won't have such an impressive impact on large sensors.

>
>Why do you say that? Isn't the quantum efficiency improvement in going
>from front- to back-illumination enough to produce a substantial
>sensitivity gain?


Why would it be?

No, I don't take their marketing BS as fact.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net


David J Taylor 06-15-2008 08:15 AM

Re: Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
 
Ray Fischer wrote:
> David J Taylor

[]
>> Why do you say that? Isn't the quantum efficiency improvement in
>> going from front- to back-illumination enough to produce a
>> substantial sensitivity gain?

>
> Why would it be?
>
> No, I don't take their marketing BS as fact.


As I understand it, the QE difference is a factor of two or three.

David



David J Taylor 06-15-2008 11:06 AM

Re: Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
 
frederick wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> David J Taylor

>> []
>>>> Why do you say that? Isn't the quantum efficiency improvement in
>>>> going from front- to back-illumination enough to produce a
>>>> substantial sensitivity gain?
>>> Why would it be?
>>>
>>> No, I don't take their marketing BS as fact.

>>
>> As I understand it, the QE difference is a factor of two or three.
>>
>> David
>>

> % of photosite surface obscured by wires / transistors would be
> proportionately much less for larger sensels. That's not to say there
> mightn't be some benefit.
> But photosite size might not be a good indicator or efficiency in any
> case. Doesn't seem to correlate with dslr sensor performance.


Thanks, Frederick. I take your point. It will be interesting to see how
it pans out, and whether their technique is applicable to DSLRs.

Cheers,
David



Kevin McMurtrie 06-15-2008 07:22 PM

Re: Sony mass-produces back-illuminated image sensors
 
In article <yy15k.9606$E41.6426@text.news.virginmedia.com>,
"David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@blueyonder.neither-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:

> Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> > In article <MPG.22bda0eb5b04276998bcba@news.supernews.com>,
> > Alfred Molon <alfred_molon@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1213308645.html
> >>

> >
> > This is the key sentence:
> > "The newly developed CMOS image sensor achieves a signal-to-noise
> > ratio of +8dB(+6dB sensitivity, -2dB noise) in comparison to existing
> > Sony CMOS image sensors of the same pixel size."
> >
> > This is good news for cell phones and cheap cameras but, if ever
> > applied, won't have such an impressive impact on large sensors.

>
> Why do you say that? Isn't the quantum efficiency improvement in going
> from front- to back-illumination enough to produce a substantial
> sensitivity gain?
>
> David


The wires block proportionately less light as the sensors get larger.
The meaning of this improvement has to take into account how terrible
Sony's small sensors are.

--
I will not see your reply if you use Google.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.