Re: Canon 10D problem...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by George Preddy, Apr 1, 2004.

  1. Gerhard Beulke <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > In article <BC8C7B7B.3F15E%>,
    > says...
    > > Thanks for your advice,
    > >
    > > Eric.

    >
    > Hello Eric,
    >
    > My story is very similar.
    >
    > Canon 10D, took the first shots of a moon rise here on the beach and was
    > surprised to see dead pixels on the pics (shot at 20 seconds).
    > I ran the Dead Pixel Test program:
    > http://www.starzen.com/imaging/deadpixeltest.htm
    > It sadly confirmed what I thought. 8 of them all in the same area.
    > I sent it back to Canon for replacement of the CMOS. It came back with a
    > new CMOS and again visible Dead Pixels!
    > It is now on it's way to the online store where I bought it from for
    > replacement.
    > If I wouldn't have bought a few L lenses, I would swap it to a Nikon.
    >
    > I had the same problem with my G1 a few years ago.
    >
    > Let's see when the new one comes back.


    If you have less than ~10 dead pixels with a 10D, you have a good
    sample and should consider keeping it.

    This is a real problem with a camera manufacturer meddling in the CMOS
    busininess. Go Foveon if you want a reliable CMOS, they are (49%)
    owned by National Semiconductor and are currently producing state of
    the art CMOS sensors using Pentium 4-level fabrication technology, but
    Fovoeon sensors actually have a much high transistor count than a
    measly Pentium 4. Canon's CMOS technoology isn't even competitive
    with 486 era chips.
     
    George Preddy, Apr 1, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. George Preddy

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <> on 1 Apr 2004 03:36:53
    -0800, (George Preddy) wrote:

    >This is a real problem with a camera manufacturer meddling in the CMOS
    >busininess. Go Foveon if you want a reliable CMOS, they are (49%)
    >owned by National Semiconductor and are currently producing state of
    >the art CMOS sensors using Pentium 4-level fabrication technology, but
    >Fovoeon sensors actually have a much high transistor count than a
    >measly Pentium 4. Canon's CMOS technoology isn't even competitive
    >with 486 era chips.


    Rubbish.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>

    "A little learning is a dangerous thing." [Alexander Pope]
    "It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant,
    than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." [Mark Twain]
     
    John Navas, Apr 1, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. (George Preddy) wrote in message

    > This is a real problem with a camera manufacturer meddling in the CMOS
    > busininess. Go Foveon if you want a reliable CMOS, they are (49%)
    > owned by National Semiconductor and are currently producing state of
    > the art CMOS sensors using Pentium 4-level fabrication technology, but
    > Fovoeon sensors actually have a much high transistor count than a
    > measly Pentium 4. Canon's CMOS technoology isn't even competitive
    > with 486 era chips.


    Foveon sensors are built at National's South Portland Maine Fab. This
    fab uses 0.18 micron technology. All Pentium IV's currently in
    production use 0.13 micron or 90nm (0.09 micron).

    Foveon is stuck, because National is their biggest investor, and
    obviously won't let them move to a sensor based on state-of-the-art
    fabrication, in Japan or Taiwan. Yet since National doesn't
    manufacture any other devices that would benefit from 90nm, or even
    0.13u, they're not going to spend a billion dollars to upgrade their
    fab, nor should they. Only if there were a huge market for high Mp
    Foveon sensors, would this make sense. If Foveon develops a 6Mp or
    12Mp sensor, then they'll have to fabricate it elsewhere.

    Foveon has one big advantage. Their sensors are very cheap to
    manufacture. Look for Foveon to move big-time into the low end, i.e.
    cell phone cameras, disposable digital cameras, etc. They can't
    compete at the high end because they don't have the process
    technology, as well as because there are no high-end camera makers
    (Nikon, Canon, etc) that will use them. It's a damn shame that Foveon
    ended up in bed with Sigma, it really hurts them that there are no
    high end lenses with the SA mount. So Foveon gets blamed for lens
    issues, though OTOH, Sigma gets blamed for sensor issues.

    One reason that Canon has pulled away from the pack in D-SLRs, is
    because they invested in the development of their own sensors, 6Mp and
    11Mp. Not sure where Canon is fabricating their sensors, but it's
    immaterial. Most camera makers don't own their own fabs. Canon is
    lucky that they're not tied to using any particular fab, so they can
    use whatever fab fits their technology, rather than forcing their
    sensors to fit a fab.
     
    Steven Scharf, Apr 14, 2004
    #3
  4. George Preddy

    John Navas Guest

    [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <> on 14 Apr 2004
    07:57:23 -0700, (Steven Scharf) wrote:

    >Foveon sensors are built at National's South Portland Maine Fab. This
    >fab uses 0.18 micron technology. All Pentium IV's currently in
    >production use 0.13 micron or 90nm (0.09 micron).
    >
    >Foveon is stuck, because National is their biggest investor, and
    >obviously won't let them move to a sensor based on state-of-the-art
    >fabrication, in Japan or Taiwan.


    I doubt that, since Foveon doesn't represent much revenue as compared to
    the investment -- my bet is that Foveon uses that fab because, given its
    relatively small quantities, (1) it can more easily get special
    processing, and/or (2) it can get a lower price than it would from an
    outside fab.

    >Yet since National doesn't
    >manufacture any other devices that would benefit from 90nm, or even
    >0.13u, they're not going to spend a billion dollars to upgrade their
    >fab, nor should they. Only if there were a huge market for high Mp
    >Foveon sensors, would this make sense.


    True.

    >If Foveon develops a 6Mp or
    >12Mp sensor, then they'll have to fabricate it elsewhere.


    It's by no means clear that Foveon needs or would benefit from a more
    advanced process at higher resolution. I suspect the real problem is
    that sensitivity and/or selectivity and/or cost (yield) become
    unacceptable at higher resolutions given the same sensor size.

    >Foveon has one big advantage. Their sensors are very cheap to
    >manufacture.


    Perhaps for the low-end version, but that's by no means clear for the
    high-end version, especially with the addition of microlenses.

    >Look for Foveon to move big-time into the low end, i.e.
    >cell phone cameras, disposable digital cameras, etc.


    Even at the low end, it's not clear that Foveon is cost-competitive with
    Bayer CMOS sensors that have an economy of scale advantage.

    >... It's a damn shame that Foveon
    >ended up in bed with Sigma, it really hurts them that there are no
    >high end lenses with the SA mount. So Foveon gets blamed for lens
    >issues, though OTOH, Sigma gets blamed for sensor issues.


    Indeed.

    >One reason that Canon has pulled away from the pack in D-SLRs, is
    >because they invested in the development of their own sensors, 6Mp and
    >11Mp.


    Yet that strategy hasn't really worked for Fuji, or even Sony for that
    matter. In fact it tends to be risky and costly to depend on
    proprietary technology rather than taking advantage of the best the
    industry has to offer.

    >Not sure where Canon is fabricating their sensors, but it's
    >immaterial. Most camera makers don't own their own fabs. Canon is
    >lucky that they're not tied to using any particular fab, so they can
    >use whatever fab fits their technology, rather than forcing their
    >sensors to fit a fab.


    Again, that's not necessarily true -- those with in-house fabs (e.g.,
    Sony) may well be in a better position to build in-house designs, rather
    than compromising them to fit whatever external process may be
    available.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas
    [PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
    <http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]
     
    John Navas, Apr 14, 2004
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Steven

    Q about Canon 10D and Canon AE1 Lenses

    Steven, Aug 2, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    3,137
    PhotoPhreak514
    Sep 19, 2006
  2. DigitalCameraBasics

    To Canon 10D owners: What has Canon told YOU about focusing "issues"?

    DigitalCameraBasics, Nov 3, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    485
    Lionel
    Nov 16, 2003
  3. Nickyvonbuskergr

    sigma 120-300 2.8 or canon 70-200 2.8l ,canon 10d

    Nickyvonbuskergr, Mar 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    899
  4. Engelkott

    Canon EOS 10D and Canon Macro Ring Lite ML-3

    Engelkott, Apr 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,756
    Engelkott
    Apr 8, 2004
  5. Ken

    Canon 10D vs Canon Digital Rebel

    Ken, Jun 7, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    34
    Views:
    920
    Chris Schmelzer
    Jun 10, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page