The RX100 camera series is a unique and very successful camera line. But Sony shared the RX100M3 sensor to Panasonic (for the FZ-1000). And according to two mroe anonymous sources they are also likely going to share it to Fuji and Samsung as well!
USA preorders: RX100M3 preorders in USA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Sony.
Europe preorders: RX100M3 at Sony DE, UK, ES, FR, IT, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, NO, FI, PT. And Wex UK.
0 Responses
The BSI 20 Mp “1 inch” Sony sensor is very good, by selling it to the others it can be mass produced which means lower production costs per piece.
It’s already by definition mass produced. This is a matter of SONY needing any revenue it can get, no matter where its coming from and the future consequences (like the RX100 selling less). Sad to see SONY being a prostitute.
Better than going out of business and more making Alphas
Yes you are right, I meant mass produced in a larger quantity :).
“Sad to see SONY being a prostitute.”
Really? What a ridiculous analogy. This is simply business. All over the planet companies supply components to other companies as well as use them in their own products. Micron sell flash memory chips to other manufacturers as well as use them in their own products (e.g. Crucial, which is a Micron brand). IBM sell the Power processor to other computer manufacturers, as well as use them themselves. The list goes on and on and on. It’s simply a business decision.
If Sony ceased selling their best sensor technology to other companies, then the likely result is that other companies will see Sony as an unreliable supplier and move their sourcing to another company. That would compromise the financial viability of the sensor business as it reduced market share, increased unit costs and threatened the ability to finance development.
I’d be amazed if major customers of the Sony image sensor business do not have contracts which guarantee them access to future technology for a given period. It would simply be madness to buy from a company which might seek to undermine your own business by denying you their best products. Such agreements are perfectly normal.
Exactly. When will it ever cease to be such a surprise – Sony has been in the core component business for ages and will continue to do so because it makes money which in turn enables development. LCD modules and sensors to Canon (LCD module in the EOS 20D and likely later models as well, smaller sensors in compacts) and Nikon among others, Trinitron CRTs to Apple, Sun, IBM, Dell and loads of other brands back in the day, laser diodes in probably most of the laser printers and photocopiers on the market, image sensors etc. Early Sony engineers had this mentality of keeping all components for in-house use and it’s daft because if a large customer wants a 1″ sensor it can easily go to Aptina for example.
Their Sensor business is more important than their camera business, silly. Check their quarterly / annual report for proof. The sensor business can exist without the alpha line, I doubt the alpha line can exist without their sensor business though.
Prostitute? They are an electronics company selling electronics. The rx100 line was in part an advertising brochure. The curved sensor rx will be too. They have Panasonic, Fuji, Samsung, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Hasselblad and Apple using different sensors of theirs in different products. I reckon they are doing ok in this department. Probably tens of million sensors sold a year and growing. Why should they give that up to sell a few more cameras? Seriously get over it! Competition is good for us. Watch the rx line come down in price and the quality of the important sensor tech go up.
“Competition is good for us.”
If that means the camera buyers, yes. These are stand alone P$S cams and why would matter it is branded as Sony, Canon, Sanyo, etc. As long the the price is low and the camera can deliver, the brand name does not matter. All SD cards will work on any of those cams.
Plus one.
Well, how many times has it been written here about Sony’s profits, turnover, market share, etc etc etc.
Let them make money. It’s not like Samsung will automatically make a better camera than Sony and Sony will loose money because of it…likewise with Fuji or Panasonic.
Also, its not like there is “the one” 1″ sensor alone. I’m sure there is a menu of them.
Outsource does not mean sell to another manufacturer. In fact it means the opposite, which is to procure components or services from another company. Hence many companies “outsource” their cleaning, IT or other services rather than do them “in house”. In this case, it would be Fuji and Samsung that would be “outsourcing” if they obtained their sensors from Sony.
Simply replace “outsource” with “supply”.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outsource
Someone’s been paying more attention than most of us…especially after last night’s match.
To be honest, the term outsource has been misused this way several times, but I just got round to commenting on it. Having dealt with a lot of IT outsourcing, it’s something that’s just irked for a while until I got round to noting it.
Of course it will outsource it, now that it’s 2 years old.
the fact that Sony supply other companies is no surprise. We have to keep in mind that Sony semiconductor is an independant division from Sony Imaging and that they are not under their supervision nor bound to any exclusivity to them (cf. Nikon D800 sensor). In fact in term of revenue they probably lead the game and Imaging is under their wings. Remember the interview of Maki-san during the release of the QX10/100 when he explain that he had to convince the heads of semiconductor to produce the 1 inch sensor before being able to launch the RX100 project. Also every heads of each division are in competition to become the next CEO of Sony and the more revenue they are able to pull out, the more their ranking is high in that race.
The real news is that Panasonic an Samsung are buying sensors from Sony while they produce themselves sensors. Nikon, Olympus, Fuji, Pentax/Ricoh don’t have the ressources nor the ability to do so and they naturally turn to largest sensors manufacturer for their needs.
But Pany an Sammy are in the same game as Sony, the fact that they buy the 1″ mean they reckon the technical superiority of the Sony’s one and that they can’t match it or it will cost them to much to be profitable.
The worst case scenario this supplying contract implies is that it’s the first step of quiting the sensors business for those two companies because it’s not profitable enough since Sony own 50% of the sensor market from cell phone to CCTV and high end camera.
The last ones standing are Canon and Aptina (large scale supplier or producer) to push Sony research further even though Canon have been very scarce in the innovation front lately.
Let’s hope Sony won’t stop to innovate since they seem to have won the battle but what they are doing lately seem to prove the contrary.
Panasonic and Samsung already use Sony sensors, as do Canon. It’s nothing really new. You said it yourself, that convincing the sensor department to produce such a sensor was hard, so Pana and Sammy would have likely been in very much the same boat! Remember their divisions are separate as well, so if they need a 1″ sensor they go to whomever can supply it, just as they have done in the past.
are you sure for Panasonic since they just admit it for the FZ1000 and the historic rivalry between the 2 companies ?(Japanese can be stupidly proud: cf. Nintendo/Sony deal).
I didn’t knew for Canon and I guess they use Sony sensors for their compact cam only.
For Samsung, I think it’s different, they are organize in division like the japanese companies but I think the synergy between each divisions is still strong while the japanese act as they are in competition between them. In this regard Samsung look much more like what the japanese were in the eighties when all the forces of the companies work together to conquer a worldwide market and If the photo division need something I think the semi conductor will be mor willing to help them.
Anyway dropping the sensor market was like I stated the worst case scenario and like you I believe the Sony choice was the one that make economically the more sense.
Now if Sony Imaging could have some kind of leverage upon semi conductor division that would be a good news but I guess we would have a boatload of strange but fun cameras and not so good news in the economic front.
Canon makes their own stuff. Kind of like apple.
And they use other sensors as well. S120 etc use the same 1/1.7″ Sony sensor as everyone else.
Apple outsources both components and manufacturing but does do system design and most software inhouse.
Yup
Canon use Sony sensors in their P&S cameras
Good. MAKE MONEY, SONY! Then we get new toys. We want Sony to make money, make money, make money.
Then we pray, they invest that money by hiring better lens designers and optical engineers. Maybe there’s a good recruiter in Wetzlar?
I agree about the money making! But the better lens designers? Look at the latest lenses (like the 55mm f1.8 and the 35 f2.8 70-200mm F4 OSS, and look at the older 50mm f1.8OSS, the 35mm f1.8 OSS, all very good lenses. Sony can make very good lenses as they showed.
True but they make a lot of rubbish ones, too. And all are overpriced.
I think you are wrong about that. Yes they made some substandard lenses for the E-mount, but most lenses are well priced and (very) good.
Look at the 10-18mm F4 zoom, it is almost $100 cheaper then the comparable Panasonic 7-14mm F4 and the Sony is stabilized…
Can you show me any new 1:1 macrolens that only costs you $278 new? Can you show me any stabilized 35mm f1.8 lens that cost just $448? (remember the comparable 25mm f1.4 from Panasonic goes for $600 and is not stabilized). The unstabilized Olympus 45mm f1.8 lens goes for about the same price as the stabilized 50mm Sony f1.8 lens.
The expensive 70-200 F4 lens is in the same price range as the comparable full frame 70-200 F4 FF lenses from Canon and Nikon.
Yes there are some pricy Zeiss lenses, and you can question if those lenses are good enough for their price, but they are not rubbish either.
So I think I am still right when telling that Sony is not overpriced and they are not mor rubbish then other brands…
Pansonic FZ1000 sports a Leica lens. If that matters to you. 🙂
Sony are already keeping them occupied. That shiny T uses a Sony sensor. 🙂
If you want new toys it’s more a question of leverage of the Imaging division toward the semi conductor division to get what they want/need, and that power come with money.
Since Semi Conductor make a boatload more cash than Imaging It won’t happen soon and those deals will make the economic gap even larger.
It’s kind of ironic since It’s Sony Imaging that convince Sony Semi conductor to produce them but at the end it’s always Semi Conductor that makes the best out of it.
Emphasis on the pray part….heavy, heavy emphasis.
I very much doubt Sony will OUTSOURCE sensors.
It is much more likely they will sell thier sensors as thy should be. Doing
Ad, please revise your title; “outsource” is not the correct word and it causes confusion. As another poster said, try “supply.”
As others have said, in English, outsource is not the right word. Outsource, the way you have written it would mean that Fuji and Samsung would be producing the sensors for Sony to use which is the opposite of what you mean. You mean that Sony may SUPPLY the sensor to Fuji and Samsung 🙂
It is an opportunity to increase revenue on a legacy product which is typically very profitable. I would think that Sony is already starting to produce the next generation of sensor that will not be shared for 6-12 months.
what about nikon 1?
Unless Nikon make a few lenses for E-mount they are not getting the sensor!!
Nikon source their 1 inch sensor from Aptina, and it has some specific features in video and very high frame capture rate which the Sony doesn’t have. I suspect Aptina tailor the sensor specifically to Nikon’s requirements, so I there probably won’t be a move to Sony to source this component as it would take a lot of re-engineering.
I think when Nikon use Aptina sensor it mean that its full Nikon design. Aptina is just here to mass produce it since Nikon doesn’t have the ability to produce semi conductor parts. It’s a kind of Nikon’s own sensor so moving to a Sony’s one is unlikely.
Aptina do rather more than just produce the sensor. What they will do is design the processor in conjuction with Nikon in determining how best to meet that company’s requirements, but when it comes down to it the real fundamental expertise is provided by Aptina. Semiconductor design is a highly specialist area, and it’s not something Nikon do. What they do is integrate the components into working systems.
I’ve come across one of Aptina’s semiconductor sensor designers on other forums. He’s pretty good at clarifying the current state of play in the technology and what is theoretically possible.
nb. I should add that what Nikon mean by “it’s their design” will undoubtedly by that they have the sole rights to use that particular design (as they will have commissioned it). However, Aptina actually sell a sensor of very similar capabilities so I’d characterise the Nikon design as a particular version of that sensor with a few extra tweaks (like phase detection) over which they might have unique rights.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/09/24/nikon-1-series-sony-rx100-face-more-competition-as-aptina-sensor-goes-mains
Aptina is a sensor designer and in exception of phone sensors and the 1 inch sensor being their biggest one, they produce nothing, most of what they do now and anything they design beyond that gets produced by outer sources. But, Aptina has a close marketing joint with Sony for the design of the 1 inch sensor, what means that there could be a possible integration of technology of both sides in a common sensor layout in the future and even a possible production of the sensors by Sony for Aptina. The future will tell us, until there all information we get can only be speculation. Note that even Sony outsources sensor production and some are made by Toshiba.
I’ve read somewhere a spokeperson from Nikon who claim that the D4 Sensor (produce by Aptina) was a full Nikon design. But I guess that what he mean was all the specifications of the sensor were established by Nikon and then they let Aptina figuring out how to create a sensor that match their requirements.
What you read is wrong, d4 sensor can’t be made by aptina for the reason I already mentioned. Most close guess by industrial analysitcs is it is made by renesa, which happened to under same enterprise as Nikon
It can’t be made by Renesa since Nikon Stated that Aptina supply the sensor and Aptina do sell sensors even though they outsourced the production (look at their website). Outsourcing doesn’t mean it not your product, you still held responsability for the product and ensure the availbity and delivery. If not then the Iphone is an Foxconn product and not an Apple one.
What was unclear was who made the design of the sensor and the claim of Nikon was misleading. It seem that the design and production (outsourced probably to their former mother company Micron Technology) was made by Aptina and Nikon is just the client who define the specification of the sensor to ensure the exclusivity.
nikon only states 1 series sensor is from aptina, It never said FX series sensor is from aptina. Since nikon indeed never shy of put their brand name on some sensors (some FX and DX sensor), so a sensor bears aptina brand can be concluded as not nikon-designed.
I’m sure they were part of the design team and contributed things like what optimisations ought to be made. Anybody whose been involved in a complex customer/supplier relationship like this will understand the issues. What will have come out of it is a design that Nikon can claim to “own”, assuming the legal stuff has been done right.
Aptina is a fabless company, which means it can’t produce sensors, it can only design sensors. So, it’s pretty funny to say Nikon design it, aptina produce it.
It’s the other way around. Aptina is semi conductor factory with engeneering expertise. Nikon doesn’t have any semi conductor factory. Why do you think they bought all their sensors from Sony, Toshiba an Aptina
You don’t know what fabless mean. It is mean they can’t produce, they don’t have any factory. So why a sensor designed by Nikon and manufactured by 3rd party has aptina brand?
I assume the Nikon/Aptina 1″ sensor specific features are lower overall quality, lower ISO range, lower resolution and lower dynamic range.
Your question is, of course, rhetorical but I’ll answer none the less. Of course no camera manufacturer is going to specify something worse than the competition, but it might happen because of compromises in order to achieve some other feature (like a fully electronic shutter, or very high video frame rates). Alternatively, Aptina might not be able to match Sony’s technology, or maybe the silicon fabricators haven;t the same technical capabilities.
My thoughts exactly The Nikon 1 Aptina 1″ sensors are complete rubbish. It needs to dramatically up its game for the failing Nikon 1 system.
Samsung are already using it, have been for a few months… great ‘rumour’ 😉
Poor samsung, no one gives nx-mini a single look, which uses same 1″ sensor
Thanks to your post, I looked up the NX mini. I will buy one. 🙂
Me too, in pink, for my daughter 🙂
If anything it’s Samsung that will spring a surprise in whatever it does. If Samsung does 4k in their APS-C nx 2000 or NX300 cameras I’ll buy..
you need glasses, and look what pictures it does first. Once Samsung has a wider set of lenses, and this will come in near future, this camera becomes an outperformer for RX100 on pricing level. Only RX100/3 can keep the market running with it’s EVF, despite the overpricing Sony does on it. I wait the competitors to bring similar cameras, possibly with EVF, we will then see the prices drop on it, same as they do actually with RX10. Thus, let us wait Fuji and Pansonic’s new pocketable to be on the market to see what will happen.
I’d sell it to Fuji, but not to Samsung. Samsung is a worldwide conglomerate that is not averse to copying other people’s designs. Fuji is a competitor, but maybe Fuji can give Sony some “tips” on lens design. People forget that Samsung and Sony had an LCD TV partnership a while back. There was one beneficiary in that deal. Hopefully, they won’t make the same mistake twice.
It’s the semi conductor division that conduct the deal, Sony Imaging is not involved, so they won’t have any “tips” exchange. Sony already supply all the X-trans sensors to Fuji and you don’t see any exchange so far so don’t hope too much.
Yes Samsung f*ck Sony in their TV partnership but it was a joint venture with a technology exchange (Sony gave their LCD technology and Samsung pay for the common factory while they made a second one in Korea to double their capacity to flood the market with cheap panel), nothing like is involved in this deal: Sony supply the sensors, no technology exchange, sammy just bought it like you do in a supermarket .
As stated somewhere else in this page, Sony are already selling their 1″ sensor to Samsung, look under ‘Samsung NX Mini’.
Admin, do you have any rumors? You know (from you disclaimer):
Here is the definition of the word “rumor” according to Merriam Webster dictionary:
Pronunciation: ˈrü-mər
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English rumour, from Anglo-French, from Latin rumor clamor, gossip; akin to Old English rēon to lament, Sanskrit rauti he roars
Date: 14th century
1: talk or opinion widely disseminated with no discernible source
2: a statement or report current without known authority for its truth
3 archaic : talk or report of a notable person or event —-
This page is not about rumors. It is about “Look how clever we are!”.
I could 10000+ this comment
You are wrong, it’s about “click here and I earn money”, It is a godly game, getting rich by earning pennies. That is why this site has become a scam site, not a real information site, but, let’s say it is not the only one, 95% of all such sites are. DPR even makes you click around 4 pages until you can finally read what you where looking for. Most camera sites have become really annoying with the pay per click system.
this admin must be drunk, posts this kind of news and rank it as SR3…
Hi! Hello! How did the lobotomy go?
Not well apparently.
Does it really matter to you?
We’ll get a better result if they give some of these 1″ sensors to Pentax.
I don’t really know what you really meant to say. Is sony selling the sensors to them? they are selling the technology to produce them in their own factorys? what did you really mean?
He mean Supply instead of outsource. Sony is just selling their sensors to 2 new clients who’s used to produce their own sensor, no technology exchange involved.
Yes it was bad terminology. I read it that way too at first. Outsource to Fuji means get Fuji to make it. But I think it means that Fuji will buy it off Sony.
I read on the forum at Digital Photography Review that Sony produces (manufactures) more than half of all imaging sensors — including cell phones as well as cameras. The Nikon D800/D800e/D810 cameras all use a sensor manufactured by Sony. This should come as no surprise, since the vast majority of lenses manufactured by Japanese companies come from three plants, with lenses often carrying more than one camera label.
I can only imagine Sony’s alpha mount line barely makes money. I wish there were numbers to look at. They seriously cannot go on forever supporting two mounts. I just don’t see it that way. I’d like to see just how much it brings in and the past two year trend.
The prophet margin on the A-Mount cameras is likely small, the lenses on the other hand have a much larger margin. I think this is typical across the board with other manufacturers full sized cameras.
Sony is making plenty of profit off the A-Mount. They’re actually derive more income from the A-Mount than the E-Mount.
Sony’s failure to design, and build lenses is the Alpha’s tragic flaw. This summer I’m buying a mirror-less camera to use alongside my A77II, and A99.
I intended on buying a mirror-less Sony until I had a chance to use the Fuji XT-1. I don’t want a FF. If Sony produced a weather-sealed A7000 I would have been happy, but they don’t.
Fuji’s lens selection just makes sense. I’ll be buying the 23mm f/1.4, 35mm f/1.4, and 56mm f/1.2 immediately.
How come we all are so sure how much profit Sony is making on the A-Mount? Where is that info published?
The info was provided @ the A77II presentation in London. It’s on http://www.youtube.com.
The A-Mount earns almost all of its money from sales of cameras, and lenses worth over a thousand dollars.
Sony’s imaging division has been losing money for a few years now. The reports seem to suggest that Sony’s DSLR/SLT market share is at its lowest ever I would take these sort of company promos with a pinch of salt
Good for long term as it keeps so many players reliant on Sony’s sensor fabs and paying. It’s like Sony wants to be the TSMC of sensor fabs, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Sensors aren’t that hard to make compared to some other semiconductors out there like CPUs, anyway, so it’s not like they can pull an Intel–and even Intel is starting to open up their fabs to third parties. Sony’s patents are probably more helpful in protecting its sensor lead than refusing to sell.
Sony silicon soon will be copied by Samsung. Short term profit, long term disaster.
Not really, when you copy you’re always one generation behind. Samsung will do whatever is more profitable for them, in this case it’s sourcing sensors from Sony.
something on horizon 🙂
6.Sony Alpha A92014-2015 Sony Alpha A7
7.Sony Alpha A9R2014-2015Sony Alpha A7R
XACV S XACV S XACV S XACV S XACV S XACV S XACV S XACV S
Not bad. it’s XAVC S. Now let’s try again.
The title is misleading – it suggests that Sony will be buying the sensor from Fuji and Samsung (outsourcing means that you buy goods or services instead of producing them on your own). But they are actually doing exactly the opposite.
Thanks for letting us know
What is the sensor model name?
Why not? That will be a good business.
yes, go ahead with it. I think 1″ is a nice little form factor that could well establish. It is just big enough to enable high class photography. Provided the makers remind themselves that little sensors should get comparably higher light gathering lenses. f1.2 would make for a perfect standard power on that size.
1-inch sensor size is great for fixed lens compact cameras like RX100 etc. However for interchangeable lens mirror-less segment, it doesn’t seem to offer much of an advantage over the larger m43 sensor (considering Nikon 1 vs m43 lens body and lens sizes). I think for compact interchangeable lens cameras m43 provides the best balance between size and image quality.
I think I would eventually settle for: FF for times when highest IQ is needed, m43 for a small carry-around system, and a 1inch fixed lens compact for the times I don’t want to carry a system.
Can’t the author of this website afford to ask someone to help with the language? Totally wrong usage of the word “outsource”, changes the entire meaning of the post.
I mean, come on, typos are understandable…
English is my third language too, I am not native. But I know my limitations, and I do ask for, or hire, help when I need it.
Thanks for letting us know for the 23rd time. And appreciate your righteous indignation.
I don’t think Samsung needs it. It seems the 1 inch sensor in the NX Mini is as good as the RX100m3.
Samsung is already using a 1-inch sensor in the NX mini – so they are either already using the Sony 1-inch sensor or they already have their own 1 inch sensor and don’t need the sony.
Could you PLEASE correct the headline (wrong usage of the word “outsource”). Or do you not have the ability to edit the title of a post once you’ve made it?