# Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 20, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/01/patent-noise-aliasing-reduction-for-small-pixels/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/01/patent-noise-aliasing-reduction-for-small-pixels/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>A patent for APS-C?

</strong>Canon has filed a patent to reduce the noise and aliasing in small pixels.</p>
<p>This sort of patent could benefit higher megapixel APS-C cameras, like the EOS 7D Mark II.</p>
<p><strong>Source: [<a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fegami.blog.so-net.ne.jp%2F&act=url" target="_blank">EG</a>]</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/646908-REG/Canon_3814B004_EOS_7D_SLR_Digital.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank"><em>EOS 7D Body at B&H Photo for $1199</em></a></p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## candyman (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

Promising. So, how many megapixels will it be. I guess they start conservative with maybe 20. Really hope that 6400 will be usable


----------



## shadowsatnight (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

If the 7d2 is gonna be announced soon, i guess this is aimed at the high megapickle full frame?


----------



## Rat (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

I think the chance that this patent will be applied in the 7DII is negligible, unless the 7DII will be released in 2016 or thereabouts. I'm not sure how much time usually is between filing for patents, getting them granted and using them in products, but I'm assuming it's years rather than months.


----------



## ddashti (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

If this actually applies to the 7D Mark II, then here comes the super-extended wait!


----------



## Rat (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



Freelancer said:


> as you can read the patent was filed 2011 and granted in 2013.


I read the CR post which only told me Canon had _filed_ for a patent. Not a _news_ post, I guess...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



Rat said:


> Freelancer said:
> 
> 
> > as you can read the patent was filed 2011 and granted in 2013.
> ...



The public doesn't find out about patents when they're filed, we find out when they are published - 18 months after they are filed.


----------



## jhenderson0107 (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

A patent application requires reduction to practice. The implementation presented need not yet be commercially viable or readily manufacturable, but must exist at the time of application. So a 2011 prototype could form the basis for a product in 2013.


----------



## Plainsman (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

This patent won't frighten the competition as both Nikon and even Pentax are well ahead and already have camera sensors with no anti - aliasing filters and they apparently work.

While Canon makes the finest top of the range lenses I can't help thinking they are falling behind with their sensor technology. 

Don't expect much from the 7D II somehow - except delays - perhaps even the same old sensor. Well you can't have everything!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



Plainsman said:


> Don't expect much from the 7D II somehow - except delays - perhaps even the same old sensor. Well you can't have everything!



Not that Canon hasn't done some unfathomably stupid things, but I can't see the 7D's sensor in a 7DII. The 7D is all that and a bag of chips...except for the high ISO noise.


----------



## Martin (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

I am not sure if I understood the post properly but there is no info what kind of patent is this. It could be a kind of digital post processing algorithm so It does't have to influence raw and sensor quality but jogs and noise reduction only from a digital side? Is that possible?


----------



## Etienne (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



Plainsman said:


> This patent won't frighten the competition as both Nikon and even Pentax are well ahead and already have camera sensors with no anti - aliasing filters and they apparently work.
> 
> While Canon makes the finest top of the range lenses I can't help thinking they are falling behind with their sensor technology.
> 
> Don't expect much from the 7D II somehow - except delays - perhaps even the same old sensor. Well you can't have everything!



Rubbish ... The 5DIII produces no moire or aliasing in video, whereas the D800 is about the same as the 5DII. Nikon is behind on this.


----------



## Lawliet (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



neuroanatomist said:


> ...except for the high ISO noise.



And no support for the new flash system, even with the big firmware update. They really like to leave out those small handy details.


----------



## Plainsman (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



Etienne said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > This patent won't frighten the competition as both Nikon and even Pentax are well ahead and already have camera sensors with no anti - aliasing filters and they apparently work.
> ...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



neuroanatomist said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > Don't expect much from the 7D II somehow - except delays - perhaps even the same old sensor. Well you can't have everything!
> ...



It has less noise per sensor area than the 5D2.
It can be prone to vertical gain banding and the usual low ISO offset bandings.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



Etienne said:


> Rubbish ... The 5DIII produces no moire or aliasing in video, whereas the D800 is about the same as the 5DII. Nikon is behind on this.



To bad it also has a trademark lack of detail. And the effective resolution isn't even 1080 vertical.


----------



## verysimplejason (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



Plainsman said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Plainsman said:
> ...


----------



## Etienne (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



HurtinMinorKey said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Rubbish ... The 5DIII produces no moire or aliasing in video, whereas the D800 is about the same as the 5DII. Nikon is behind on this.
> ...



Like every other camera ever built, the 5DIII is not perfect. But it is the best all-round "affordable" media camera available. It has no glaring weaknesses, can be used for every type of photography including sports, and it has many video friendly features like audio level during record as well as for moire-free video that is good enough for broadcast and the big screen. Not bad for $3000.

When your production skills outgrow the 5DIII, you should be looking at a C300, C500, or Sony FS700, because there isn't anything better in it's price range. ... oh ...and it shoots great stills as well.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



neuroanatomist said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > Don't expect much from the 7D II somehow - except delays - perhaps even the same old sensor. Well you can't have everything!
> ...



and low iso noise...

oh and mid iso noise


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jan 20, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

i have looked at the patent and as i understand (*) it this is to reduce banding or streaking.

im not sure if this has something to do with the patterns we see in shadow areas when they are pushed... maybe just wishfull thinking.

(*) the translation from japanese into english is bad and my english is bad too.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 21, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

I read thru the patent as well.
It pertains to the need to read data from a large mp sensor without overwhelming the buffer memory with huge quantities of data. Typical thinning methods cause a color stripe, this one is designed to avoid that. 

This allows for more images to be captured before a buffer fills, obviously a issue for a large mp camera.

Expect this to be used in a high mp camera, its basically firmware.

The patent number is actually 2013-012850, Igami dropped the leading zero.

Here is a quote from the translated text.

__________________________
[Problem to be solved by the invention] 
[0005] 
It is necessary to memorize a picture signal by four plains of R/G1/G2/B, and to memorize the picture signal of each plain for every frequency band further in the technology of a Patent document 2. Therefore, a mass memory is needed and it is not preferable in respect of cost. Since there are also many required amounts of memory access, when rapidity, such as continuous shooting, is the processings called for, there is a possibility of reaching the maximum of a memory access zone and causing deterioration of processing speed. 
[0006] 
In order to ease this problem, it is possible to, apply the thinning technology of a chrominance signal as shown in a Patent document 1 to the composition of a Patent document 2 for example, and to reduce required memory space and the amount of memory access. 
[0007] 
However, in order to interpolate the thinned-out chrominance signal in the technology of a Patent document 1 from the chrominance signal of an adjacent pixel and to restore, a difference arises in the frequency band of a chrominance signal, and the frequency band of a luminance signal, and there is a problem that the color stripe not existing will occur in an object.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 21, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*

Perhaps "small pixels" are those on the tiny sensors in the point/shoot cameras? In the global scale of things, APS-C sensors have fairly large pixels...


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Jan 21, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



Etienne said:


> When your production skills outgrow the 5DIII, you should be looking at a C300, C500, or Sony FS700, because there isn't anything better in it's price range. ... oh ...and it shoots great stills as well.



Maybe you're not counting the gh2 because it's $2000 cheaper..? And it comes nowhere close to the BMC Camera, which is the same price (but very hard to come by). The 5D3 is a great stills cam, arguably the best stills cam in it's price range (i think it is). But it's video is mediocre at best.


----------



## preppyak (Jan 22, 2013)

*Re: Patent: Noise & Aliasing Reduction for Small Pixels*



HurtinMinorKey said:


> Maybe you're not counting the gh2 because it's $2000 cheaper..? And it comes nowhere close to the BMC Camera, which is the same price (but very hard to come by). The 5D3 is a great stills cam, arguably the best stills cam in it's price range (i think it is). But it's video is mediocre at best.


One of the things that gets lost in those translations though is sensor size. Both your other examples are working with 2x or 2.4x crop factors; and while the film world is pretty used to not having as shallow a depth of field as the 5dIII can accomplish, it does still have that advantage.

I haven't seen tests, but, I would like to see the 3 compared in lower light scenes. The cameras being cheap is only useful if you aren't spending a ton of money on lighting, etc; so being able to operate in fairly low, natural light would be another plus on the Canon side.

But man, the image the BMCC puts out is pretty impressive


----------

