[Tech] Surprise : EM-1 Uses a Panasonic Sensor, not a Sony Sensor !

[daredevil123]

PDAF has nothing to do with the sensor itself, it's just a different micro lens filter. You could make on-sensor PDAF happen even with an old CCD.

Wrong....

on sensor PDAF is integrated as a second layer of a sensor behind the image capturing front layer. The light actually hit the imaging photosite layer FIRST, then passes through to the PDAF layer. Which means the the imaging photosites are the ones that passes light through.

So tell me, in this design, how can you make this happen for an old CCD? because last time I remember CCD sensor array is opaque.

sensors with on sensor PDAF is a complete unit design. The PDAF is not some bolted on magical micro lens piece. It is a complete semiconductor unit designed. the layers are built like any semiconductor layers.

Try to read up and understand the technology before making nonsensical statements like these.

 

[daredevil123]

For those interested in the technology behind this Panasonic sensor, you can read up on the patent for this Panasonic sensor with PDAF built in the link below. Pretty amazing technology.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/8482657.html

 

[ageha]

Wrong....

on sensor PDAF is integrated as a second layer of a sensor behind the image capturing front layer. The light actually hit the imaging photosite layer FIRST, then passes through to the PDAF layer. Which means the the imaging photosites are the ones that passes light through.

So tell me, in this design, how can you make this happen for an old CCD? because last time I remember CCD sensor array is opaque.

sensors with on sensor PDAF is a complete unit design. The PDAF is not some bolted on magical micro lens piece. It is a complete semiconductor unit designed. the layers are built like any semiconductor layers.

Try to read up and understand the technology before making nonsensical statements like these.

That's a patent, no implementation. Anyway, how do you know this patent is related to the EM-1 sensor? Because it's manufactured by Panasonic? Please post your insights.
There are many different patents out there for on-die PDAF even for CCD imagers, not just the single patent you posted. Fujifilm even released CCD cameras with on-sensor PDAF (F300EXR, Z800EXR). We don't know which implementation Olympus is using.

 

[daredevil123]

That's a patent, no implementation. Anyway, how do you know this patent is related to the EM-1 sensor? Because it's manufactured by Panasonic? Please post your insights.
There are many different patents out there for on-die PDAF even for CCD imagers. Fujifilm even released CCD cameras with on-sensor PDAF. We don't know which implementation Olympus is using.

Then please show us a single piece of evidence that supports your statement that states (in your own words)
"PDAF has nothing to do with the sensor itself, it's just a different micro lens filter. You could make on-sensor PDAF happen even with an old CCD."

Every on sensor PDAF implemented so far has been provided as a single chip solution.

BTW one of the implementation is already on the Canon 70D and it is shown that the sensor photodiode itself is the AF sensor not the microlens. Fuji's implementation is also the same, with the PDAF layer on imaging sensor layer, while the microlens layer is on top of the imaging photosite layer, even above the color filter layer. So on chip PDAF is never a on microlens layer as suggested by you.

Want more evidence? Here is how Fuji lay it out...

1: Microlenses
2: X-Trans Color Filter
3: L/R Light Interception Filter
4: Phase Detection Sensor / Green Filter Pixel
5: Photodiode

See it here... http://fujifilm-x.com/development_story/en/sensor/



Canon's implementation

http://www.slashgear.com/canon-eos-70d-dual-pixel-cmos-af-revolutionary-system-detailed-02288750/


Please show us at least one example or instance where the PDAF is a microlens layer. please...

 

[ageha]

Then please show us a single piece of evidence that supports your statement that states (in your own words)

"PDAF has nothing to do with the sensor itself, it's just a different micro lens filter. You could make on-sensor PDAF happen even with an old CCD."

Every on sensor PDAF implemented so far has been provided as a single chip solution.

Obviously, nobody mentioned a dedicated sensor.
I won't google all relevant patents for you but the first hit on Google might give you a hint: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2010/8/5/fujifilmpd

 

[daredevil123]

Obviously, nobody mentioned a dedicated sensor.
I won't google all relevant patents for you but the first hit on Google might give you a hint: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2010/8/5/fujifilmpd

read my modified post above.

Please show us at least one example or instance where the PDAF is a microlens layer. please...

and how "You could make on-sensor PDAF happen even with an old CCD."

Like I said before... KNOW before TALK...

 

[ageha]

read my modified post above.

Please show us at least one example or instance where the PDAF is a microlens layer. please...

and how "You could make on-sensor PDAF happen even with an old CCD."

Already posted.

 

[daredevil123]

Already posted.

And what you posted just showed what you said is Wrong. Thanks for clarifying your own BS and lack of understanding of the subject.

 

[daredevil123]

And BTW, what we are talking about here is the Panasonic sensor, which Panasonic has clearly shown HOW they did it with their ONLY SINGLE patent on how this is done.

Arguing that the patent is not implemented... that is just BS... because all you did is google another PATENT by Fuji... so how did you know if Fuji actually implemented that patent (by your own twisted logic)?

Chicken and Egg my friend.

Anyway, let's move on. I am sure the rest of the community can come to their own conclusions.

 

[ageha]

And what you posted just showed what you said is Wrong. Thanks for clarifying your own BS.

You seem to be a well educated man.

 

[daredevil123]

You seem to be a well educated man.

Thank you. Engineering background and worked for years in Semicon industry. You?

 

[ageha]

And BTW, what we are talking about here is the Panasonic sensor, which Panasonic has clearly shown HOW they did it with their ONLY SINGLE patent on how this is done.

Arguing that the patent is not implemented... that is just BS... because all you did is google another PATENT by Fuji... so how did you know if Fuji actually implemented that patent (by your own twisted logic)?

Chicken and Egg my friend.

Anyway, let's move on. I am sure the rest of the community can come to their own conclusions.

We're talking about a sensor appearing in an Olympus camera and manufactured in a Panasonic fab. I just asked for evidence this is the patent implement in the sensor Olympus is using. It might very well be but it's as much guesswork as saying they might have implemented another solution. We don't know, there are many solutions.
Fujifilm implemented their patent most probably, because they released two cameras with their own CCD and they stated they implemented exactly that patent there. I didn't see any claims by Olympus.

 

[keithwee]

My friends , let's move on.

The discussion on how PDAF may be integrated onto the sensor is going slightly OOT .

I agree that the news that EM1 is using a Pana manufactured sensor may be interesting to some brand conscious people. Especially when some of us have experienced noise issues with older Pana bodies and that some users have noted noise issues with long exposures on the EM1.

Let's just chill and think:
1. Will the news that Oly has implemented a Pana sensor make u sell the EM1?
I won't , using the EM1 has been great for me.

Not long ago there were people on the net stirring rumors that EP5 suffered shutter shock issues , where are them now? Most likely went on to stir shutter shock issues on the A7 now.

Nothing against them but as users, we trust our eyes, hands and obviously know when we r handling a quality piece of equipment if I know a user who dumps equipment because of what others say , I'm sorry - this person isn't much of an user, this person is just clueless.

2. A quick search will find that exposures lesser than 60s generally face no said issues on the EM1. How many of us shoot longer than 60s? If so, I would be more interested in a workaround then grumbling abt Pana sensors screwing up an Oly body.

3. Hence , again - if u wish for further discussions, take it offline. For now let's move on ok ?

Chill

 

[undergrd]

My friends , let's move on.

The discussion on how PDAF may be integrated onto the sensor is going slightly OOT .

I agree that the news that EM1 is using a Pana manufactured sensor may be interesting to some brand conscious people. Especially when some of us have experienced noise issues with older Pana bodies and that some users have noted noise issues with long exposures on the EM1.

Let's just chill and think:
1. Will the news that Oly has implemented a Pana sensor make u sell the EM1?
I won't , using the EM1 has been great for me.

Not long ago there were people on the net stirring rumors that EP5 suffered shutter shock issues , where are them now? Most likely went on to stir shutter shock issues on the A7 now.

Nothing against them but as users, we trust our eyes, hands and obviously know when we r handling a quality piece of equipment if I know a user who dumps equipment because of what others say , I'm sorry - this person isn't much of an user, this person is just clueless.

2. A quick search will find that exposures lesser than 60s generally face no said issues on the EM1. How many of us shoot longer than 60s? If so, I would be more interested in a workaround then grumbling abt Pana sensors screwing up an Oly body.

3. Hence , again - if u wish for further discussions, take it offline. For now let's move on ok ?

Chill

:thumbsup: Agree. As long as one is happy with his camera, who cares who manufacture the sensor...

 

[daredevil123]

We're talking about a sensor appearing in an Olympus camera and manufactured in a Panasonic fab. I just asked for evidence this is the patent implement in the sensor Olympus is using. It might very well be but it's as much guesswork as saying they might have implemented another solution. We don't know, there are many solutions.
Fujifilm implemented their patent most probably, because they released two cameras with their own CCD and they stated they implemented exactly that patent there. I didn't see any claims by Olympus.

Actually, I was just telling you what you said was wrong. And asked you put forth evidence that what you said was even remotely possible. So far nothing. But I have have shown you that different companies have already put forth solutions that show that you are wrong.

I think you really have no idea how the technology companies work. Let's leave it at that.

 

[daredevil123]

My friends , let's move on.

The discussion on how PDAF may be integrated onto the sensor is going slightly OOT .

I agree that the news that EM1 is using a Pana manufactured sensor may be interesting to some brand conscious people. Especially when some of us have experienced noise issues with older Pana bodies and that some users have noted noise issues with long exposures on the EM1.

Let's just chill and think:
1. Will the news that Oly has implemented a Pana sensor make u sell the EM1?
I won't , using the EM1 has been great for me.

Not long ago there were people on the net stirring rumors that EP5 suffered shutter shock issues , where are them now? Most likely went on to stir shutter shock issues on the A7 now.

Nothing against them but as users, we trust our eyes, hands and obviously know when we r handling a quality piece of equipment if I know a user who dumps equipment because of what others say , I'm sorry - this person isn't much of an user, this person is just clueless.

2. A quick search will find that exposures lesser than 60s generally face no said issues on the EM1. How many of us shoot longer than 60s? If so, I would be more interested in a workaround then grumbling abt Pana sensors screwing up an Oly body.

3. Hence , again - if u wish for further discussions, take it offline. For now let's move on ok ?

Chill

:thumbsup: Agree. As long as one is happy with his camera, who cares who manufacture the sensor...

+1. There will be haters, and there will people who put forth one liners but cannot face the facts when called out.

In the end, only the image matters.

*shrug*

 

[Agrivar]

My friends , let's move on. The discussion on how PDAF may be integrated onto the sensor is going slightly OOT . I agree that the news that EM1 is using a Pana manufactured sensor may be interesting to some brand conscious people. Especially when some of us have experienced noise issues with older Pana bodies and that some users have noted noise issues with long exposures on the EM1. Let's just chill and think: 1. Will the news that Oly has implemented a Pana sensor make u sell the EM1? I won't , using the EM1 has been great for me. Not long ago there were people on the net stirring rumors that EP5 suffered shutter shock issues , where are them now? Most likely went on to stir shutter shock issues on the A7 now. Nothing against them but as users, we trust our eyes, hands and obviously know when we r handling a quality piece of equipment if I know a user who dumps equipment because of what others say , I'm sorry - this person isn't much of an user, this person is just clueless. 2. A quick search will find that exposures lesser than 60s generally face no said issues on the EM1. How many of us shoot longer than 60s? If so, I would be more interested in a workaround then grumbling abt Pana sensors screwing up an Oly body. 3. Hence , again - if u wish for further discussions, take it offline. For now let's move on ok ? Chill

Totally agree on this.. I think many of us workaround whatever camera we have that helps us get the photo.. If the workaround or limitation is too bad/much then change the equipment, haven't seen or heard of major problems with the em1 that will make a user throw away his cam and buy something else,

 

[swifty]

and there will people who put forth one liners but cannot face the facts when called out.

Sticking my neck out here but at least I, for one do appreciate it when people scrutinise questionable information.
Not that I condone heated online arguments, and yes, it often takes the conversation off topic but inaccurate information just serve as a disservice to everyone on the forum.
Just my 2 cents.

 

[daredevil123]

Sticking my neck out here but at least I, for one do appreciate it when people scrutinise questionable information.
Not that I condone heated online arguments, and yes, it often takes the conversation off topic but inaccurate information just serve as a disservice to everyone on the forum.
Just my 2 cents.

Which is why some of us feel obliged to post when inaccurate information is put out. Some of the stuff we see we know is wrong, and it is easy for us to just keep it to ourselves and don't give a damn. But this is a forum to share information, letting it slide will be contributing to others reading and believing the wrong information.

 

[Agrivar]

Which is why some of us feel obliged to post when inaccurate information is put out. Some of the stuff we see we know is wrong, and it is easy for us to just keep it to ourselves and don't give a damn. But this is a forum to share information, letting it slide will be contributing to others reading and believing the wrong information.

Totally my feeling exactly. I deal with facts. When incorrect facts are tabled, I must speak out.