# EOS-1D X Mark II Sensor Talk [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 5, 2015)

```
We’re told that the sensor currently being tested in the EOS-1D X Mark II is 25mp.  The sensor will be manufactured by Canon, so any third party manufacturing rumors can be quashed before they start.</p>
<p>This source is also confirming the likelihood of a new pair of DIGIC processors to handle the added resolution and maintain the frame rate of the current EOS-1D X.</p>
<p>Do not expect any heavy handed ergonomic changes, the camera will likely look and operate very much like the current model.</p>
<p>More to come…</p>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2015)

All good news...


----------



## expatinasia (May 5, 2015)

All good, but wasn't there another CR2 that talked of quite a substantial increase in frame rates? I remember, because I rarely keep the mirror locked to get the 14 fps the current 1D X can offer, as I am happy with 12. More would be nice of course, especially if you do not need to lock up the mirror, but 12 is plenty to work with.


----------



## Click (May 5, 2015)

I'm looking forward to it


----------



## d (May 5, 2015)

This is about what I would expect for the next iteration. Hopefully battery is the same (or at least compatible with 1Dx), and I'm not too worried about more FPS, a few more megapixels would be welcome. If they can achieve that with some slightly cleaner shadows, I'll be happy to add this as a stable mate for my 1Dx.

d.


----------



## pedro (May 5, 2015)

If that is the case, the new 5D won't see a22 MP sensor anymore...not even a 24 MP...an 28 MP sensor seems quite feasable then, what do you think?


----------



## seamonster (May 5, 2015)

CROP MODE PLEASE!!!!!!!!


----------



## Spacenoodle (May 5, 2015)

I wonder if we'll see this released by the end of the year. 

2016 is both an Olympic year and a World Cup year, so I'm guessing they might want to have it out well before then to have them readily available well before the games begin

I'm more interested to see what other improvements the next gen of flagship DSLRs come packed with, really hoping for WiFi and better video, it's just not feasible to run a 1DX and a C100 Mk II on a single assignment. 

Things like this make the Panasonic GH series and Sony A series really strong competitors for journalists than the traditional Canon / Nikon lineup.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2015)

seamonster said:


> CROP MODE PLEASE!!!!!!!!



Why?


----------



## Dylan777 (May 5, 2015)

My hope for a stop better in high ISO started to shake, 25MP :-\


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 5, 2015)

pedro said:


> If that is the case, the new 5D won't see a22 MP sensor anymore...not even a 24 MP...an 28 MP sensor seems quite feasable then, what do you think?



I think I'd not draw any conclusions about what a 5D will ship with based on a 1D rumor or spec. If both cameras are doing the C300II blended ISO thing, which may be processor intensive, I wouldn't be surprised to see a new 5D come in with a lower resolution, especially considering they have a high resolution flagship already in the 5D line (S and SR).


----------



## K (May 5, 2015)

Well, that falls in the 24-28mp sweet spot. 

This is great news from Canon on this and the 5D4's sensor. Good to have a little boost in resolution and detail, but without having stupidly large files - all in cameras designed with good ISO performance in mind.

All the more-megapixels-are-better people can go to the 5DS to satisfy their needs.


----------



## sanj (May 5, 2015)

Nothing exciting here. For me. 
I want to hear better fps (14) and 1 stop improvement each in DR and ISO. Higher MP is fine, but not necessary. For that there is 5dR


----------



## pedro (May 5, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > If that is the case, the new 5D won't see a22 MP sensor anymore...not even a 24 MP...an 28 MP sensor seems quite feasable then, what do you think?
> ...


*3kramd5*: thanks for your "encouraging" words. I forgot that...;-) So we will see.


----------



## wockawocka (May 5, 2015)

That's brilliant news, Canon saved me 5k and I can keep my 1DX


----------



## sanj (May 5, 2015)

wockawocka said:


> That's brilliant news, Canon saved me 5k and I can keep my 1DX



History indicates minor but steady upgrades. But with the launch of 5dr I am hopeful that they have some sweet surprises for us in 1dx2. So the 5k may not sit in your or my bank after all. Deep down we both want to spend it on a new 1d.


----------



## PureClassA (May 5, 2015)

1 more MP than I anticipated, but again, just a test model. I figured we would see a FF iteration of the new 24MP crop sensor that recently popped up on the new Rebels and M3. FF + DPAF and the new DR capabilities of the c300 would certainly make a damn compelling case for upgrade.

I don't think the rumor's mention of "using Digic 7 to keep up with frame rate on new sensor" necessarily precludes it from meaning "no higher frame rates than 1DX" Grain of salt folks. 

I'm still wishful this really becomes the merger of the DX and DC and we retain some good 4k ability from it.

Exciting news regardless. I've been renting instead of buying the 1DX (as seldom needed) but this new one may really tempt me beyond control. Having the extra 7MP would be huge when shooting live performances and I can't always frame the dancers up the way I'd like to.


----------



## 9VIII (May 5, 2015)

Grr I wanted more than 30MP.

I still have no idea what camera I'm getting next.


----------



## PureClassA (May 5, 2015)

Sounds like they are going with as high a MP count as they can without giving up FPS (or perhaps adding a couple) and still generating the ISO performance on par or better than the original. 30MP would just probably be too much for 14FPS even with digic 7. That's a ton of data to sling. Then what? CFast 2.0 cards needed at $500 a pop? No thanks 



9VIII said:


> Grr I wanted more than 30MP.
> 
> I still have no idea what camera I'm getting next.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> I don't think the rumor's mention of "using Digic 7 to keep up with frame rate on new sensor" necessarily precludes it from meaning "no higher frame rates than 1DX" Grain of salt folks.



I think the 12 fps of the 1D X is limited by the mirror. It can do 14 fps, but only with the mirror locked up.


----------



## PureClassA (May 5, 2015)

Very True. I just meant that I don't think the statement necessarily precludes higher FPS, but they obviously needed more processing power to do it. The shutter mechanism is another story, as is how fast the AF can grab focus again between each shot. But yes, assuming teh same shutter, we get the same FPS. New shutter, maybe more. Also assuming we get a Digic 5 or 6 dedicated to AF like the Digic 4 is now



neuroanatomist said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think the rumor's mention of "using Digic 7 to keep up with frame rate on new sensor" necessarily precludes it from meaning "no higher frame rates than 1DX" Grain of salt folks.
> ...


----------



## sanj (May 5, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think the rumor's mention of "using Digic 7 to keep up with frame rate on new sensor" necessarily precludes it from meaning "no higher frame rates than 1DX" Grain of salt folks.
> ...



So 12 is the max limit because of the mirror? Actually I can live with that.... Maybe one day mirror less will surpass that along with other limitations...


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2015)

sanj said:


> So 12 is the max limit because of the mirror?



Sort of. There are some caveats to reach 12 fps, like a fast enough shutter speed, aperture not more than 4 stops down from wide open, ISO under 25600.


----------



## mb66energy (May 5, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> seamonster said:
> 
> 
> > CROP MODE PLEASE!!!!!!!!
> ...



Because it is nice to have a lot of features. (Just kidding)

IMO it would be great for very fast/erratic action of moving subjects. It is helpful to know how to correct the camera viewpoint using the information what is is outside the frame. Or think about some sports where you wait for a runner passing a hurdle: You can see the runner and "preload" your timing parameters ...

I have used a combined 35mm / 70mm external optical viewfinder (Galileo principle or similar) and it was fun to frame for 70mm with a 35mm equiv. view.


----------



## PureClassA (May 5, 2015)

Well the shutter and mirror assembly itself is the only hard mechanical limitation. Regardless of shutter speed you select, there are only so many actuation per second the motor can perform to lift and reset the mirror. Same with opening and closing the curtains. Then there's how much data can be managed through reading, buffering, and writing. Like Neuro said, shutter speed, ISO, and Ap can be manipulated by the user to reach whatever the hard ceiling of the mechanics and data processing streams are.



sanj said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > PureClassA said:
> ...


----------



## PureClassA (May 5, 2015)

Yes but even a crop mode has the same hard ceiling as FF given the same mirror/shutter assembly. Cameras that have higher FPS in crop than FF exist, but the FF FPS is limited by data processing capability, not mechanical mirror/shutter. On those cameras, if they can produce, say, 8 FPS in crop but only 5 in FF, it's not the shutter bottling up FF FPS, it's the processor (or a deliberate firmware limit put in by the manufacturer). That mirror/shutter can sling 8 FPS. period.



mb66energy said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > seamonster said:
> ...


----------



## mb66energy (May 5, 2015)

Trying again as non-native speaker: If you can SEE some object or parts of it OUTSIDE the CROP frame but inside the viewfinder you have a better chance to control the camera view point to catch the object inside the frame at the RIGHT TIME as you want it. Shure, just crop in FF is limited by the max speed of the larger FF mirror assembly.
I am shure you need sth. like 20-50 fps to catch a decisive moment in fast action by accident. A well trained shooter might catch the decisive moment after extensive practice.
Or as comparison: A drummer might be precise to roughly 1-5msec but he needs some 10-100 msec to prepare for a break.



PureClassA said:


> Yes but even a crop mode has the same hard ceiling as FF given the same mirror/shutter assembly. Cameras that have higher FPS in crop than FF exist, but the FF FPS is limited by data processing capability, not mechanical mirror/shutter. On those cameras, if they can produce, say, 8 FPS in crop but only 5 in FF, it's not the shutter bottling up FF FPS, it's the processor (or a deliberate firmware limit put in by the manufacturer). That mirror/shutter can sling 8 FPS. period.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Eldar (May 5, 2015)

I asked for improved DR and noise performance, 24-28MP, 1-2 stop improvement in high ISO and improved support for manual focus. It seems this is getting fairly close, so I´m looking forward to it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2015)

mb66energy said:


> Trying again as non-native speaker: If you can SEE some object or parts of it OUTSIDE the CROP frame but inside the viewfinder you have a better chance to control the camera view point to catch the object inside the frame at the RIGHT TIME as you want it. Shure, just crop in FF is limited by the max speed of the larger FF mirror assembly.
> I am shure you need sth. like 20-50 fps to catch a decisive moment in fast action by accident. A well trained shooter might catch the decisive moment after extensive practice.
> Or as comparison: A drummer might be precise to roughly 1-5msec but he needs some 10-100 msec to prepare for a break.



Nope, I still don't get it. What if you misframe that fast moving action slightly? Sorry, your camera threw away the rest of the image. That's why there's:


----------



## pedro (May 5, 2015)

Eldar said:


> I asked for improved DR and noise performance, 24-28MP, 1-2 stop improvement in high ISO and improved support for manual focus. It seems this is getting fairly close, so I´m looking forward to it.



*Eldar:* If I am correctly informed by some of *the tech experts* on this forum, your hopes are reasonably high, but according to them (e.g. *jrista*) you may hardly expect more than 1/2 to 1 stop in high ISO improvement. For my interests I would like to see the same improvement in a 5DIV, or as I hope in another 5D body with an even lower MP count.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 5, 2015)

Well, if you put in a larger sensor...


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> Well, if you put in a larger sensor...



And a larger viewfinder with 'FF' crop marks...


----------



## PureClassA (May 5, 2015)

Has the method of achieving the 15 stops of DR on the C300II been definitively determined? I was making an educated guess on the implementation of the dual column ADC patent Canon had in 2013, but someone else in here mentioned ISO manipulation. Whatever the Cinema used will undoubtedly be the same as the 1DX2. Thoughts anyone?


----------



## 3kramd5 (May 5, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Has the method of achieving the 15 stops of DR on the C300II been definitively determined?



Yes. By canon


----------



## PureClassA (May 5, 2015)

Why, Thank You Captain Obvious! :



3kramd5 said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > Has the method of achieving the 15 stops of DR on the C300II been definitively determined?
> ...


----------



## TowcesterNews (May 5, 2015)

A couple of little hopes for the 1dx II

• Ability to WIFI voice memos with image
• Ability to write voice memos to both cards at the same time
• Ability to lock settings on camera, ie all settings easily.
• Ability to chatter to Profoto air devices through camera menus
• Add Canon EX Speedlite power to exif in ETTL mode
• A truly silent, silent mode, a la 5d MK III
• Better meta data - ie perhaps be able to better integrate in the camera a la Photo Mechanic - perhaps bluetooth IPTC stationery from Photo Mechanic to camera, so wifi images have meta data.
• A couple of user assigned versions of focus tracking options rather than editing existing.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 5, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> All good news...



how so?

Oh I know. Because every single part inside in it will have the Made by Canon stamp on it, which is the only thing that matters to Neuro. The part could be awesome, terrible, decent, who cares, so long as it's MADE BY CANON.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > All good news...
> ...








More MP with no frame rate reduction, similar ergonomics. It ain't broke, they shouldn't fix it (contrasting with a prior rumor that mentioned significant ergonomic changes).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 5, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> mb66energy said:
> 
> 
> > Trying again as non-native speaker: If you can SEE some object or parts of it OUTSIDE the CROP frame but inside the viewfinder you have a better chance to control the camera view point to catch the object inside the frame at the RIGHT TIME as you want it. Shure, just crop in FF is limited by the max speed of the larger FF mirror assembly.
> ...



And maybe some are willing to leave with the chance of that on the bodies where RAW crop could allow for more fps and much better buffer performance (and, of course, less storage space). That can be particularly handy when shooting distant, non-currently flying birds and animals that you are never getting close enough to go past frame boundary. Or say surfers on a wave breaking at a particular distance that works out.

Such a mode would have made a ton of sense on a 5Ds, but marketing had to make sure people need a 7D2 too or snap up the 5Ds2.

Now granted, with the 1DX2, the buffer performance will probably already be pretty decent in FF mode and the fps will probably be mirror limited and the space isn't quite as big a deal 25MP vs 36-50MP. It could still take the buffer to essentially infinite (might not matter so much for the bird shot scenario above since the buffer is probably already fine for that, but it could possibly still help for surfing) and save some storage space though. But yeah on a 1DX2 the RAW crop wouldn't be nearly the huge deal it could be on a 5Ds or 5D4 (and is on a D810/D800).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 5, 2015)

pedro said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > I asked for improved DR and noise performance, 24-28MP, 1-2 stop improvement in high ISO and improved support for manual focus. It seems this is getting fairly close, so I´m looking forward to it.
> ...



Yeah no way it goes 2 stops better high ISO and even 1 stop would be really pushing it.
Cameras are simply already too good at high ISO mid-tone SNR. If some sort of sensor that captured color info perfectly with no filter array loss and itself was improved beyond that about as much as could be came out then you might get your 2 stops. But I don't see anyone releasing such a beast any time soon.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 5, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> More MP with no frame rate reduction, similar ergonomics. It ain't broke, they shouldn't fix it (contrasting with a prior rumor that mentioned significant ergonomic changes).



That's a lot of good news and possibly all good news, but not for sure all good news. The rumor also made a huge deal about sticking with only made by Canon parts, including the sensor, which isn't necessarily good news (unless it does use the dual-read thing and it works out as well as possible, still a big if).
When they bragged on the 5Ds sticking with Canon sensors it turned out to be rather less than ideal news.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 5, 2015)

Well my hopes for the new model are much simpler!
I would like up to 1 stop better ISO, and maybe re-position the AF-On button in portrait mode.

I know I am VERY demanding!


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 5, 2015)

johnf3f said:


> Well my hopes for the new model are much simpler!
> I would like up to 1 stop better ISO, and maybe re-position the AF-On button in portrait mode.
> 
> I know I am VERY demanding!



Do you mean at high or low ISO? At high ISO there is no way you're going to get 10.7 stops of DR at 6400, vs. 9.7 stops in the 1Dx. It is reasonable, however, to expect something like 12 or 12.5 stops at ISO 100.


----------



## 9VIII (May 5, 2015)

Edit: conversation out of context.


----------



## polarhannes (May 5, 2015)

I'm happy with minor improvements - a little more MP, a little more DR, a little better ISO performance - but what I really would like to see is a quieter mirror slap sound, like the 5D Mk III's silent mode or even the one from the 5Ds which is even a little bit quieter.
I know this does not go well with the high FPS of the 1DX and its possible successor due to the mechanics inside... But this is the single point I honestly do not like about the 1DX.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 5, 2015)

9VIII said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > johnf3f said:
> ...



You can NEVER be too sure here. Most people on here actually only care about ISO 100 noise, shooting lens captography. I had to make sure, that's all.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 5, 2015)

9VIII said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > johnf3f said:
> ...



Normal people can care about high ISO SNR and/or low ISO DR and/or high ISO DR.

There have been high ISO DR improvements in recent years. I forget, but I think the 6D does more than 1/2 stop better high ISO DR than the 5D2, maybe it's even more like 2/3rds? It can be nice to pick up more DR higher up the range since, so long as you are OK with some general noise, it makes it more possible to pull off shots that start looking compromised because the tonal range seems to small or the highlights clipped if you make the shadows not too a mess. Anyway, no brand seems to have their best with much of a lead over the best of any other brand for high ISO DR at the moment and the same goes for high ISO SNR. I guess the A7S pulls ahead a little on those respects, but it also has a low MP count and in some ways, a high MP count can sometimes make things look better to the eye even if the numbers report a bit worse, depending.


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 5, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



Are you SURE?

_You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension - a dimension of no sound, a dimension of static sight, a dimension of measurebation. You're moving into a land of both extremely pushed shadows and little substance, of qpcard thingys and barbecue ideas. You've just crossed over into the Exmor Zone.
—Rod Serling_ (...well, sort of  )


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 5, 2015)

LOL!


----------



## raptor3x (May 6, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Yeah no way it goes 2 stops better high ISO and even 1 stop would be really pushing it.
> Cameras are simply already too good at high ISO mid-tone SNR. If some sort of sensor that captured color info perfectly with no filter array loss and itself was improved beyond that about as much as could be came out then you might get your 2 stops. But I don't see anyone releasing such a beast any time soon.



In terms of SNR, you're right that it's unlikely we'll see a 2 stop improvement in terms of luma noise, but I think there could definitely be two stops of improvement still available in terms of reduced amp glow and color fidelity.


----------



## 9VIII (May 6, 2015)

Edit: conversation out of context.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (May 6, 2015)

So by my maths: 
1Dx - 18mp @ 14fps = 252mbits / sec
1DXII - 24mp @ 14fps = 350mbits / sec

To my mind, the resolution is answer to the equation of Dual Digic 7 through put / frame rate. 
I think the 25mp has little to do with marketing and intent, but purely the output of the above equation...if we have these processors and we jump for the standard 14fps...what resolution do we get...oh...25mp. Sweet...

If you want more resolution but with the same processor...then the fps will drop proportionally. Lets see....50mp...7fps.
If we drop the processor to a single Digic 7 (250mbits /sec) we get some interesting figures: 31mp @ 8fps. Sounds like a nice spec for a 5D4 anyone?

The stock DR for this sensor is likely to be the same as the current models, but I'm wondering if there will be a high DR mode (using an exposure raw blend idea) that would drastically reduce frame rate but produce crazy 15 stops of DR. It's certainly been rumored and there's little change needed in the basic design of the sensor, it's all done in the operating system and processor. It's an easy win for Canon and addresses some criticism when compared to this single metric with Sony sensors.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 6, 2015)

dilbert said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > johnf3f said:
> ...



Exactly. Which is why it won't happen unless you make the pixels bigger but of course then you take a resolution penalty, which no one wants.


----------



## exquisitor (May 6, 2015)

GMCPhotographics said:


> So by my maths:
> 1Dx - 18mp @ 14fps = 252mbits / sec
> 1DXII - 24mp @ 14fps = 350mbits / sec
> 
> ...



It makes sense. About 5D IV: there was a rumor about 28 mp, which would fit in your calculation nicely. The DIGIC in 5D can't be stressed so much like in 1D because of less effective cooling system, so a bit less mp or fps would be a consequence.
About high DR mode: the implementation still needs some minor hardware changes, but all off the sensor. I think Canon is on purpose avoiding the placing of A/D converter on the die with sensor. Probably because of heat dissipation? The serial analog front end from Analog Devices has a power dissipation of ~ 0.5 W, which is a considerable amount.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 6, 2015)

I don't think you're getting it. There's a huge technological gap between the 5D1 and 1Dx. We're not going to see such a huge improvement here. How in the world are you going to improve the FWC that much, to gain a whole stop of DR at ISO 6400 when it is already 9.7? Maybe they will, but do you really think so? I don't.


----------



## GuyF (May 6, 2015)

Screw the DR and FPS mass debate. I won't get one unless we get clear confirmation it'll start flicking lube onto the sensor after the first 2 months. _That's_ what we want from big ticket bodies!


----------



## 9VIII (May 6, 2015)

Edit: conversation out of context


----------



## neuroanatomist (May 6, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> Sorry, I will post nothing but serious, factual, evidence-based comments from now on...



Was that a joke? I couldn't tell. Try using a winky emoji to clarify your intent. 

No, not this one:  in my experience it's ineffective. 

One like this:


----------



## applecider (May 6, 2015)

I'd be thrilled with a real three quarter to one stop high ISO improvement and improvement at all the lower ISos as well. Any more than one stop is hoping for unicorns with golden horns. 25 MP would let me feel better about 100% cropping. 

My buy decision will be based on ISO performance, but I also want open wifi so I can use an iPad screen for computer linked shooting without dongles, and really give us gps and intervalometer tho buying not dependent on that. I mean the 1dx is heavy enough without adding weights to it.


----------



## Deleted member 91053 (May 6, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> johnf3f said:
> 
> 
> > Well my hopes for the new model are much simpler!
> ...



I was talking about noise performance at high ISO.
DR is not an issue.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 6, 2015)

The two aren't related in any way?


----------



## 9VIII (May 6, 2015)

Edit: Joke flew over my head, clubbed me in the back and stole my kidney.

Bdunbar, if what you posted was all in sarcasm I apologise. 
I've posted similar things occasionally, and occasionally been misunderstood.
Over the years I've come to the conclusion that best practice is to literally write out somewhere in your post that you were joking.
Unfortunately the emoticon Neuro suggests is also invisible to me because I've been doing 90% of my forum browsing on mobile with images turned off (gets rid of ads and uses virtually no bandwidth).


----------



## 9VIII (May 6, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> The two aren't related in any way?



Ironically it does look like Canon's dynamic range at high ISO is limited by noise, and the two are practically the same subject at the moment (reducing high ISO noise practically produces better high ISO dynamic range). But the statement I objected to obviously was not intended to be practical.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 6, 2015)

9VIII,

No problem. I understand. To reciprocate I will remove my posts. Water under the bridge. I apologize.


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 7, 2015)

dilbert said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think you're getting it. There's a huge technological gap between the 5D1 and 1Dx. We're not going to see such a huge improvement here. How in the world are you going to improve the FWC that much, to gain a whole stop of DR at ISO 6400 when it is already 9.7? Maybe they will, but do you really think so? I don't.
> ...



Here we go again dilbert. First, nobody said it was ONLY dependent on pixel size. Did they? You couldn't be that stupid. Please explain then, how you could take the sensor of the 1Dx, and increase DR at ISO 6400 1 stop. How would you do that dilbert?


----------



## Aglet (May 7, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



Dilbert sez to double the QE


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 7, 2015)

I want to assume the pixels won't get larger. That's really the only way I know to increase the FWC in the current 1Dx sensor. If that won't happen, can the DR improve at high ISO by a 1/2 or a full stop? If so, how will they do it?


----------



## bdunbar79 (May 7, 2015)

dilbert said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I want to assume the pixels won't get larger. That's really the only way I know to increase the FWC in the current 1Dx sensor. If that won't happen, can the DR improve at high ISO by a 1/2 or a full stop? If so, how will they do it?
> ...



Another helpful response. Thanks for that in-depth discussion...


----------



## Don Haines (May 7, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> I want to assume the pixels won't get larger. That's really the only way I know to increase the FWC in the current 1Dx sensor. If that won't happen, can the DR improve at high ISO by a 1/2 or a full stop? If so, how will they do it?



One way would be to move to a finer fabrication process. This would result in less "wasted space" and would improve the quantum efficiency... they MIGHT get a third of a stop from that, but it would be pushing it....


----------



## pedro (May 7, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I want to assume the pixels won't get larger. That's really the only way I know to increase the FWC in the current 1Dx sensor. If that won't happen, can the DR improve at high ISO by a 1/2 or a full stop? If so, how will they do it?
> ...



Why are Canon increasing MP count in a low light pro beast if it has a worsening effect on high ISO IQ, as guess to understand based on this explanation? Aren't Canon shooting themselves in their footby doing so?


----------



## jrista (May 7, 2015)

pedro said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



Technology, if Canon employs it, can go a long way towards making high ISO BETTER with smaller pixels. Multi-layered photodiodes, used in a bayer design, could increase the FWC of each pixel. That means more light gathered per pixel, which increases SNR. So, if Canon employs some of the technological edge they have at least described in patents, they very well could make the 1D X II better at high ISO with smaller pixels. It's not impossible.

The big question is what kind of technology will Canon employ...


----------



## Don Haines (May 8, 2015)

pedro said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...


The finer fabrication process is only one way to improve things, and I am sure that there are a lot more. Look at the 7D replacement 7D2.... The megapixel count went up, yet the ISO performance went up by about 1 1/2 stops, only about a half stop could be explained by a fabrication change. I would expect that going from a 1DX to a 1DX2 would be at least a similar gain.... unless Canon has a few more surprises for us...


----------



## Orangutan (May 8, 2015)

dilbert said:


> You asked "how will they do it". Surely the best answer to that question is to ask "they."
> 
> Anything else is just guess work.



Hmmm....That's a surprising answer to come from you.


----------



## jrista (May 8, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> pedro said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Aye, more than one way to skin a sensor.  

Backside Illumination. Multi-layered Photodiodes. CCD backing stores (i.e. multi-bucket pixels). Deep photodiodes (the photodiode is deeper, and the charge separation layer reaches deeper, increasing it's surface area, which increases charge capacity).

There are also more out of the box concepts, like continuous readout. This is where during exposure, the pixels are basically photon counters and bit flippers, and constantly read out. Rather than accumulating charge, you simply ratchet up an infinite count. To be effective (i.e. to not accumulate massive amounts of read noise at the same time), other technological improvements are necessary to keep read noise extremely low, and Q.E. apparently needs to be very high (basically 100% for them to actually act as photon counters, and I don't know that 100% is actually totally necessary), but it is technically a means of achieving infinite dynamic range. (And that might even be possible if counts were done in/converted to a 32-bit float rather than a 16-bit int.)


----------



## Aglet (May 8, 2015)

jrista said:


> There are also more out of the box concepts, like continuous readout. This is where during exposure, the pixels are basically photon counters and bit flippers, and constantly read out. Rather than accumulating charge, you simply ratchet up an infinite count. To be effective (i.e. to not accumulate massive amounts of read noise at the same time), other technological improvements are necessary to keep read noise extremely low, and Q.E. apparently needs to be very high (basically 100% for them to actually act as photon counters, and I don't know that 100% is actually totally necessary), but it is technically a means of achieving infinite dynamic range. (And that might even be possible if counts were done in/converted to a 32-bit float rather than a 16-bit int.)



I'd like to see such a system as it'd be able to effectively create as low an ISO value as you'd like. You could expose for as long as you want and just scale the numbers, no more ND filters!
I'd like that... but that could imply a lot of readout noise potential too, pending how it's done.

OTOH, I don't think anyone's yet made use of "black silicon" surface treatment to improve QE by drastically lowering reflections. Altho I think Panasonic had that interesting looking patent for a graduated sort of surface, something-or-other method that would have worked in a similar sort of way... who's got the link for that?..


----------



## pedro (May 8, 2015)

Thank you,* jrista *and* Don Haines*. Well, then there's plenty of stuff to look forward to. Surely some of the tech will become standard in a 5DIV as well...great perspective...!


----------



## exquisitor (May 8, 2015)

jrista said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > pedro said:
> ...



I've read also about electron multiplier CCD sensors. This thing can essentially raise ultra-low signal above read noise level. In this way both DR and high ISO could be improved dramatically. But I can imagine even APS-C sized sensor would be insanely expensive.


----------

