# Nikon is working on an interchangeable sensor camera. Why not Canon?



## Bruce75 (Sep 30, 2013)

I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor. I found it interesting and also clever marketwise. At this moment the cameras ar covering pretty well the photographers needs, and it can become interesting to start to sell specific sensor for the diverse kind of shooting (high iso specific sensor, a low clean one and so on). ithink that there is a chance to sell many of them.
Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.
Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor. I found it interesting and also clever marketwise. At this moment the cameras ar covering pretty well the photographers needs, and it can become interesting to start to sell specific sensor for the diverse kind of shooting (high iso specific sensor, a low clean one and so on). ithink that there is a chance to sell many of them.
> Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.
> Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?


If you think about it a little, a interchangeable sensor is not the best idea we've seen! Nikon filed a patent for one, but only one of every several hundred patents actually happens. 

New sensor tech comes along every year or two and, it requires different pin outs, different processors, etc. If sensors had to be compatible with old design motherboards, there could be no dual pixel technology, no 8 channel readouts, no improvements at all! We would still be forced to use Digic I, 2 channel readouts, 1 inch LCD displays, and a ton of old stuff that's way out of date.

The only standard to be set would be for having a camera that was the most out of date, and perhaps for losing the most sales.

Do you really think that Nikon is going to tell Sony that they won't buy their new super duper sensor because it won't work with their 2 or 4 year or older camera body? Do you think that a replaceable sensor will be cheap? Look at RED, their modular sensor costs more than most cameras. Or at the low end, Ricoh, 

The other factor is that Camera bodies and particularly shutters have a limited lifetime, why put a new sensor in a worn out body, not to mention not having the latest features that we all want.


----------



## David Hull (Oct 1, 2013)

So.... let's say you had a Nikon Camera (like a D800 for example) what sensor would you want to exchange it with? I don't get the benefit Nikon is using the best sensors made.


----------



## mb66energy (Oct 1, 2013)

An interchangeable sensor is a good idea, but
- it requires to change the processor too because IMO sensor + processor = film replacement - but that doesn't drive the price too much.
- replacing a sensor by a customer needs a high precision sensor fixture to bring it in the same plane as the replaced sensor

I think it is possible to do this for 200 or 300 $/EUR more on a medium class camera, let's say 1300 $ instead of 1000 $. I would really appreciate such a system - specially if a monochrome sensor is available. Thinking (better dreaming) of ~ 20MPix with 12 or 13 bit DR and superior sensitivity, 2 EV more ISO sensitivity and working red filters for landscapes ...


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 1, 2013)

This isn't new. Ricoh has been doing it for quite some time I believe but it'll be fun if Canon follow suit though this route must be followed only if IQ difference will be quite high. If minimal, it's better to stick to the current system because it'll be cheaper.


----------



## lol (Oct 1, 2013)

The electronic interface need not be a major barrier. Look at CF cards, and how we get ever faster ones while maintaining backward compatibility. Unlike SD cards, where newer generations don't necessarily work on older ones.

Also there is a possibility they could release multiple sensors per generation, but will still have an upgrade path in that if you want a radical improvement some time later, you'd have to replace a bit more. Within a generation, I'd love to see a mono sensor offered alongside the typical bayer colour sensor. Want AA or not? That could be another choice. Or even one optimised for video like the ultra-low light one they're testing.

But the biggest problem I see is that a removable sensor will consume more space, which goes against the trend of smaller bodies in the consumer space. So this may be better suited to higher end kit, perhaps a future medium format body.


----------



## Hesbehindyou (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.



A full frame sensor is by far the most expensive component in a camera body. There is little advantage, once you've taken into account the downsides, of a system that has an interchangeable sensor - you'd be better off buying two bodies, each with a different sensor. It would probably work out cheaper, too.


----------



## MLfan3 (Oct 1, 2013)

like Thom Hogan says in his latest article, I think they(all camera companies at least able to produce FF or FX )need to go modular design.
and this patent is a big move towards that trend.
I hope Sony and Canon will follow that trend.


----------



## photonius (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor. I found it interesting and also clever marketwise. At this moment the cameras ar covering pretty well the photographers needs, and it can become interesting to start to sell specific sensor for the diverse kind of shooting (high iso specific sensor, a low clean one and so on). ithink that there is a chance to sell many of them.
> Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.
> Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?



Precision would seem to be a major issue. As lensrentals showed with the adapters, as little as 10 micrometer off, and one side will be soft with respect to the other wide open. Given that everybody seems to want a D800 sensor, with a supersharp image from edge to edge, there probably will be a lot of complaining. A little grain of dust could easily tilt the sensor when inserted. Of course it could probably be adjusted with some calibration system to make sure it's planar again. Never mind that the you would have to recalibrate the microadjustment for all your lenses


----------



## bainsybike (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.



Do we know that they aren't?


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 1, 2013)

mb66energy said:


> it requires to change the processor too because IMO sensor + processor = film replacement - but that doesn't drive the price too much.



Ugh, why's that? Surely a processor can be designed to work with different sensors?

Anyway, for general consumer dslrs I don't see this patent going anywhere because
* changing the sensor has to be awkward in practice
* the price of a ff sensor is large, if you buy it you want to use it
* manufacturers are quite happy to sell 2 bodies (crop for reach & ff for iq)


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 1, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> mb66energy said:
> 
> 
> > it requires to change the processor too because IMO sensor + processor = film replacement - but that doesn't drive the price too much.
> ...



Change the sensor for IR or UV photography rather than getting multiple cameras, perhaps...


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 1, 2013)

Random Orbits said:


> Change the sensor for IR or UV photography rather than getting multiple cameras, perhaps...



Sounds a bit too specialized to implement something like this in mainstream gear ... even exchanging a sensor for less resolution but a lot of whole more dynamic range might only concern a minority.


----------



## m (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?



Is that a rhetoric question? Or sarcasm?
Not to save one's life would there be a standard for interchangeable sensors across companies.


----------



## Max ☢ (Oct 1, 2013)

Beside the technicalities, this interchangeable sensor concept would not result in a lucrative business model because profits are best realized on *systems* rather than *components*. Canon and Nikon certainly have more interest in selling complete camera bodies to the amateur/pro who whishes to update his/her equipment rather than just one sensor...


----------



## Marsu42 (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?



Btw Canon is the market leader because of sales figures, not because they're spearheading anything (well, at least since the 5d2 video update) but because they're hitting the sweet spot of the market - from Rebels to 5d3. Selling a camera to a happy customer is worth as much as to a grumbling customer, pecunia non olet.


----------



## pdirestajr (Oct 1, 2013)

Perhaps Canon will do that with their Medium Format line


----------



## aj1575 (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor...
> 
> Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.
> Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?



What makes you belive that Canon is not working on such a camera? Maybe they are already working on it. Just because there is a patent from Nikon, it doesn't mean that Canon isn't thinking about such a camera. (no matter if it makes sense or not)


----------



## zlatko (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor. I found it interesting and also clever marketwise. At this moment the cameras ar covering pretty well the photographers needs, and it can become interesting to start to sell specific sensor for the diverse kind of shooting (high iso specific sensor, a low clean one and so on). ithink that there is a chance to sell many of them.
> Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.
> Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?



I would not buy a sensor for one kind of shooting, and a different sensor for another kind of shooting. And I would never want to change the sensor. The current sensors do a fantastic job at low ISO and high ISO. They already meet very, very diverse needs. Sensors that excel at just one thing would necessarily have fewer buyers. Canon understands the market very well.


----------



## Halfrack (Oct 1, 2013)

How many of you actually open up your computer and do hardware replacement? That's literally what you're asking Canon and everyone else to 'allow' for. The tolerances for getting it right are just too tight, and the 'upgradeable' parts would impossible to protect with rain seals.

Let us look at the major parts of a camera- body, sensor, electronics. The body has to be rigid to support the weight of the lenses and tough enough to stand up to weeks in Africa. The sensor is a precision built tool, that requires perfect alignment with many things like the focal plane shutter and the lens mount. The electronics need to match up with the latest greatest technology used in the sensor, and consist of multiple boards shaped to the body of the camera.

Basically to do this you're going to frankenstein a camera for what - the illusion that you can 'upgrade' to the latest greatest without buying a whole new camera? Tell that to the 645 folks whom are shooting with a digital back - there isn't any savings. There are 2 batteries in the camera, one for the back, and one for the body. Hasselblad is a bit better on the battery (1 for the whole camera), but worse in that the H4D and H5D backs and bodies are mated for life, so not interchangeable (have heard this, haven't experienced it).


----------



## Skulker (Oct 1, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I've seen rumor....
> 
> Now, I found really strange that Canon .................... is not working on something similar.
> ............



so how do you know they are not?


----------



## pharp (Oct 1, 2013)

Ricoh has the GXR - similar enough idea I guess, but still not sure what the point is. Might be worthwhile if you could get really different sensor modules - B&W, extreme DR, hi ISO etc that could be easily swapped out in the field, they might have something. UMmmmm


----------



## Bruce75 (Oct 2, 2013)

Hi,
still I don't get the precision issue about mounting a sensor. If the the precision is necessary due it's positioning regard to the lens, well... the lens should be an issue already know with a fixed sensor. We are already able to have a lens mount that respects the strict tolerance of a digital sensor, so we can have a sensor mount as well.

For the people that say that they prefer to bring 2 cameras in spite of two sensor because of changing issues. How many cameras are you bringing with you now? One for each lens?
Please, let be serious.

I think it is more the case that canon is selling well this kind of cameras and when you win the last thing you have in mind is to change something. you don't change anything if you win, but changing after a loss is too late


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Oct 2, 2013)

I don't think Canon needs to copy everything Nikon does ... Canon has its own strengths, no need for them to go the Nikon way.


----------



## photonius (Oct 2, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> Hi,
> still I don't get the precision issue about mounting a sensor. If the the precision is necessary due it's positioning regard to the lens, well... the lens should be an issue already know with a fixed sensor. We are already able to have a lens mount that respects the strict tolerance of a digital sensor, so we can have a sensor mount as well.
> 
> For the people that say that they prefer to bring 2 cameras in spite of two sensor because of changing issues. How many cameras are you bringing with you now? One for each lens?
> ...



Well, getting the lens properly aligned in all directions is already an issue, or otherwise we wouldn't have all the issues with off axis, soft on one side, front/back focusing etc. Lenses under the mount can have tiny shims to adjust lenses. Now, if you have an exchangeable sensor, you have all these issues there as well,
i.e. you want to avoid any minute tilt - (one-sided softness), front or back displacement (front/back focusing), off center axis (asymmetric vignetting), any rotation (horizon not straight). 
Obviously the most sensitive issue is in the distance and perpendicularity to the lens, due to the minute distances that will lead to focus issues, and titled focal planes. Of course you can devise adjustment schemes (screws to adjust, or piezo elements), which would work in a lab with optical bench, but at home?
And each time you change the sensor, you have to freshly calibrate all your lenses for front and back-focusing, since the sensor might be slightly off compared to the last time you used it.
If you have on sensor focus, then you don't have to worry so much about this issue, of course.


----------



## Woody (Oct 2, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I've seen rumors...



It's a rumor or at best a patent. Enough said.


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 2, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor. I found it interesting and also clever marketwise.



I bought a few of these Canon cameras with the interchangeable sensors in the 1990's (before then I was using Pentax's version of the same technology). Now using the Olympus and again the Pentax version ... usually with Fuji or Kodak sensors. Never liked Nikon's implementation of the idea.


----------



## danski0224 (Oct 2, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> I've seen rumors that Nikon is working on cameras that can have an interchangeable sensor. I found it interesting and also clever marketwise. At this moment the cameras ar covering pretty well the photographers needs, and it can become interesting to start to sell specific sensor for the diverse kind of shooting (high iso specific sensor, a low clean one and so on). ithink that there is a chance to sell many of them.
> Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.
> Canon il the market leader and could set a standard for all the companies, no?



I can't see this being economical, not to mention practical.

I can't install a Sandy Bridge processor into a Pentium socket. I do not get the full benefits of current SATA drives with IDE ports, cables and adapters.

Apple is worse with their OS "upgrades".

The latest versions of Android do not work on older phones.

At some point, the ability to upgrade a sensor while retaining the supporting electronics would become impossible. I know someone that bought an "upgradeable" high end audio/video preamp and within three years, the only upgrade was all of the stuff inside the chassis. 

I have no idea what the cost is for the sensor in a quality digital camera. I do think it would be very cool to be able to buy specialized sensors, maybe one just for IR or one just for B&W, but if those are $1k+ USD apiece for a swappable module, the number of people actually willing to pay for the option just got smaller.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Oct 2, 2013)

Bruce75 said:


> Now, I found really strange that Canon, that's producing both Camera and Sensors is not working on something similar.



why? what are the benefits for canon?
ricoh has it.... not a big success. 

MF backs are something different.
maybe canon will do it when they enter MF.


----------



## Steb (Oct 2, 2013)

I like the idea... interchangeable sensor means removable sensor. Now you can clean it in the dishwasher.


----------



## tolusina (Oct 2, 2013)

Pentax LX, Nikon F3 and Canon F-1 all had replaceable backs. Options typically were dial data backs or large film magazines that held 250 exposure rolls.
They also had changeable finders and screens, a marvelous era for 35mm film cameras. 

Anyway, in my daydreams, a digital back for that type camera would need sensor, processor, iso control, display for review and batteries. 
The camera body would retain the shutter, metering functions, aperture controls. 
I cannot imagine live view or video, that may be a limitation of my imagination.
Linking iso settings between the camera body and the digital back also eludes my imagination though manually synching the two could be pretty easy.


----------



## photonius (Oct 2, 2013)

tolusina said:


> Pentax LX, Nikon F3 and Canon F-1 all had replaceable backs. Options typically were dial data backs or large film magazines that held 250 exposure rolls.
> They also had changeable finders and screens, a marvelous era for 35mm film cameras.
> 
> Anyway, in my daydreams, a digital back for that type camera would need sensor, processor, iso control, display for review and batteries.
> ...



the replaceable backs in film days did not change the film plane itself. It was only what went behind the film. But effectively, changing each role of film was of course an exchange of the sensor. Of course nobody pixel peeped in those days.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Oct 3, 2013)

Steb said:


> I like the idea... interchangeable sensor means removable sensor. Now you can clean it in the dishwasher.


They should have had it in the D600 ... it would have helped to wash off all the oily smudges from the sensor and would have saved them from having to produce D610


----------



## Sporgon (Oct 3, 2013)

I would have been_very_ annoyed if I had bought a D600, had a continual dirty sensor issue and then Nikon replaces it with an otherwise identical camera other than the shutter mechanism. 

To answer the OP's question: Canon don't need this kind if gimmick to sell cameras.


----------



## pedro (Oct 3, 2013)

Instead of this I rather see Canon investing in improved sensor tech to get us 12800k-ish (5D3 today) ISO 51k in the overnext 5D body (5DV sometime in 2018). Hope they get as close as possible. 8)


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 3, 2013)

dilbert said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > mb66energy said:
> ...


The digic chip in the camera works with several other microprocessors, and the sensor has a increased number of readout channels requiring more pins on it and on the motherboard. That's needed to get faster readout Its not something easy to try to shoehorn updated technology into a old design. Even the motherboard would not fit into a 5D. And, who would want to spend $XXXXX upgrading a 5D I with custom motherboards and customized microprocessors when only a few hundred might sell?. Its a losing situation.

Its like trying to put a modern computer controlled car engine that interfaces with several computers in order to work into a older car that either did not use computers at all, or had much simpler ones that had fewer wires and simple but incompatible functions. It can be done, but the cost is more than a new car.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Oct 5, 2013)

Probably because it wouldn't sell. 
Ricoh has had a wonderful camera on the market for the last several years where you buy the "body"
and a "lens/sensor" combination that is interchangeable. Ever seen one? That's why!


----------

