ORGANIC SENSOR
Back in June 2013 here, Fuji & Panasonic announced a new partnership: the goal of this cooperation? Create the first organic sensor, which should deliver industries highest dynamic range, higher light sensitive pixels, a range of incident angle expanded to 60 degrees for faithful color reproduction and more.
An ambitious project, which encountered some difficulties. The last thing I’ve heard here is that the main issue is the high battery drain and heat production.
Now, if 43rumors is right, it will still take a 2 or 3 years before it will be ready for mass production. That’s at least the information 43rumors got from a reliable source here.
This means there won’t be any organic sensor in 2016… if 43rumors sources are right.
SONY SENSOR
Just yesterday Sony officially announced that its sensor division will become a separate company. As SonyAlphaRumors says, “this will help them give autonomy to accelerate decision-making and make them more accountable for their profitability.”
What does this mean for us X-shooters?
It’s a known fact that Fuji purchases its APS-C sensors from Sony. It’s also rumored that, since now, Fuji had to wait half a year before being allowed to use the latest Sony sensor (with X-Trans CFA) for their own cameras.
But now that the sensor division had been split off into a separate company, it’s safe to assume that also the agreements could change. That could explain why my sources said, the X-PRO2 will come in January, and they didn’t seem to be worried at all about the continuous Sony A7000 delay.
I’ll try to dig up more for you…
… and in the meantime, stay tuned and don’t miss anything by following FR also on Fuji X Forum, Facebook, Google+, RSS-feed and Twitter
74 Responses
Great news. So the X-Pro2 can arrive as scheduled, but surely with no organic sensor.
Now that it’s October, it seems clear that joofei’s claims of a joint announcement by Fuji, Panasonic, and Toshiba was goofy. Has this source made any correct predictions yet?
I was wondering exactly the same the other day
all wrong, until now. joofei also said organic sensor could earlier, but todays’ rumor is in conflict with joofei’s claims.
“It’s a known fact that Fuji purchases its APS-C sensors from Sony. It’s also rumored that, since now, Fuji had to wait half a year before being allowed to use the latest Sony sensor (with X-Trans CFA) for their own cameras.”
Sony spinning off their sensor division is a great news, but for Fuji less than for others. After all, first Sony IMX193 (24mpix APS-C available since 2011) and then IMX271 are available for a long time, and Fuji simply failed to use either of them. It is not Sony’s fault. And Samsung’s 28mpix APS-C sensor is better anyway, why don’t they use it instead?
And stop with this X-Trans stupidity already – a suboptimal color array is NOT an advantage even if it did not delay the release of cameras and increased their costs – and it does.
Sony newer sensor and even Samsung sensor are not ground-breaking. I prefer Fuji to skip some iterations of those sensors and implement in a good way the new one. I guess they need to make a totally new algorithm if they change the sensor and results may be disappointing if they do it in a bad way (ie : people are complaining that X-E1 IQ is better than X-T1!)
Most reviews underlined Fuji jpg quality, colors… I think one of the reason is because Fuji took the time to implement this 16mp sensor.
Colors is about RAW-JPEG processing, not sensor. And X-Trans is suboptimal, mathematically.
There’s also Samsung that is stopping their camera business but will continue produce sensors for third parties.
They have high-end technology, although I don’t think Fuji would use them (Japanese and Koreans, you know…)
Seems it’s a rumor.
So, if the XPro-2 in January, let’s hope the X-T2 for next spring ! 🙂
… if no more delay in product announcement….
I think they took a year off from releasing a new model because they’re working on a full frame. Their consumer line up is pretty much complete. Now it’s time to try for real.
The 56 1.2 is not consumer, neither is 23 1.4 nor 16mm 1.4.
Yeah they’ve matched the capabilities of the 1.8 and f2 lenses from the FF makes. Impressive. As soon as they launch their FF you’ll no longer see everyone on this forum evangelizing for APS-C just like with Pentax and Nikon before they went FF.
Yeah because if Fuji drop APS-C for FF, I’ll feel betrayed and won’t buy Fuji at all. I prefer a future-proof system over a marginally better one.
All your APSC lenses will most likely continue to work just as they do or better on a FF body via an adapter or possibly even without. What’s the betrayal? NEX-7 users accept the A7.
o.O? No! – physics?!!!
LOL
In short, you are willing to have a smaller focal length (APS-C) and lower pixel count (Cropped). Might as well just buy their APS-C sensor camera better.
Uh no. I am not willing to have a 23mm lens instead of a 35. I never said I was.
Nex-7 users are waiting for A7000. The day Sony say they drop APS-C would be a sad day for them.
A7 is just a way to wait or recycle lenses.
There are very few people getting excited about the A7000. It will fill the same kind of market the high end rebels fill. Tech inclined consumers.
Every people who own an APS-C E-mount lens and want to change the body should consider a A7000 in my opinion.
E-Mount and FE-mount use the same bayonet. Full frame Fuji won’t use the same as X-mount.
An adapter should be possible without any of the compromises Sony had to make to enable PDAF, since it’s already in body.
And then you need to use a crop-mode on your full-frame sensor or find a way to expand your circle of confusion and you lose image quality.
No thanks, I prefer an APS-C body !
highly doubt a “FF” will pop out, make no sense to made massive losses for the APS-C lenses useless, unless the FF series has unfavorable pricing.
Plus Fuji mentioned before “high chance” not jumping on the FF sensor.
Currently, the only none mirror-less in the market segment is the “MF” hehz
They should make the right choice and not anyhow focus unless they have large R&D funds like Sony.
Or the alternative is they stick to APS-C and continue to be ignored by more and more enthusiasts and pros alike because Sony cameras saw the writing on the wall and matched Fuji on size and is slowly catching up on lenses and functions, meanwhile FF options from Canikon go down and down on price and used models are still great. Nikon said they would never go APS-C too, until the day they did. So what Fuji says now doesn’t mean squat, they want you to keep buying their APS-C gear! Fuji has plenty of resources available to design a FF camera and lenses. That’s what they do! It’s not that hard actually, for a company like Fujifilm.
is never hard and money does not grow on trees but if you read the article which I re-posted in another reply, just go read.
FF, if you want the “PRO” market, Personally I think MF is a better options than FF.
Except that enthusiasts [and many pros] aren’t ignoring Fujfilm at all. That group understand that you don’t need a full frame camera in most situations to get great images. On the other hand, many of them do appreciate reduced size and weight in the field.
Ever tried a Sony A7 camera with a 70-200 f/2.8 lens attached? It’s like towing a big RV with a VW bug. Hahaha. More than that, Sony is characterized by poor lens selection, many poor quality lenses, bodies with the ergonomics of a Walkman [oh, that’s right, Sony is a consumer electronics company, NOT a camera company. lol] … and little commitment to mounts or the sorts of system accessories that “pros” demand.
Sony should stick to making sensors. THAT they do well.
There’s where your fanboyism reveals you… To argue that the lenses for Sony haven’t been universally praised is ludicrous. Sure Fuji has more options but the Sony and Zeiss lenses for the FE mount don’t have a dud among them, save maybe the 28-70.
ALSO the A7Rii with the 70-200 is just about the same size and speed as the XT1 with the 50-140. Not entirely sure what kind of comparison you’re trying to make there…. You do loose an F stop with the Sony but as you keep repeating details like that shouldn’t get in the way…
“To argue that the lenses for Sony haven’t been universally praised is ludicrous.”
Carl Zeiss Vario Tessar T* FE 24-70mm F4 ZA
—-
“ALSO the A7Rii with the 70-200 is just about the same size and speed as the XT1 with the 50-140.”
Sony 70-200 f/4 you mean. Not the same thing. And PLEASE don’t start with the moronic “equivalence” argument. That’s been falsified and beaten to death.
What are you coughing about? You found one lens that doesn’t perform great and it suddenly condemns the whole lineup? Btw, if APS-C is good enough, why isn’t a lesser lens good enough?
Get real, you simply can’t make a single proper argument; everything you wrote can be debunked, or, best case scenario, is arguable.
“Btw, if APS-C is good enough, why isn’t a lesser lens good enough?”
You’re kidding, right? If you don’t understand that optics trump sensor size when comparing “full frame” vs APS-C, then perhaps it’s time to hang up your hat as a pro photographer.
Yikes.
Didn’t say they trump sensor size – I am saying the same logic applies. You call the difference in sensor size academical and subject to diminishing returns. It is exactly the same thing with lenses. Sure, it does depend on what specific lenses we are talking about (and it is exactly the same thing with sensor sizes, generations and technology). Same as you can work around the disadvantages of a somewhat smaller sensor, you can also work around the disadvantages of a somewhat slower (or less sharp, or more flare-prone, or whatever) lens.
And I still do not see how you can put down all Sony lenses based on a single weaker one. Which of the following are “poor”? 16-35? 28 2? 35 2.8? 35 1.4? 55 1.8? 90 2.8? 70-200 f4? All of these lenses combined with either the 36MP or 42MP Sony sensor will deliver IQ significantly better than any Fuji combination. It won’t be academical. Of course, that doesn’t make Fuji useless or bad quality. It simply depends on personal needs.
As for ergonomics and design I quite agree with you, which is why I’m here asking Fuji to stop wading in mediocrity and make a camera based format we used to call miniature (24×36).
See, here’s the thing – even today’s m43 sensor massively outperforms yesterday’s miniature “full frame” 24×36 format when it comes to color accuracy and ultimate acuity.
The future for the sweet spot of the market is not bigger sensors, it’s higher performance technology in smaller sensors, because then the whole system comes down in size … something an increasing number of enthusiast and pro shooters are asking for.
Now, allow me to anticipate your next argument, which goes like this: “Yes, but the bigger sensors will benefit from that technology, too.”
Sure. But at a certain point you hit the law of diminishing returns with respect to human visual perception under 90% of viewing conditions. At that point, the equation swings to size, weight and convenience.
What you’re leaving out is that the A7II is roughly the same size as the XT1. Only the OMD is practically smaller and that’s only because it has tiny prime lenses. The RX1 is TOO small!
Don’t give me that crap about human visual perception. Photographers don’t make pictures to satisfy 90% people with bad vision, they make pictures for that satisfy themselves personally and if you have standards at all you’re going to meet them, which is to say nothing of the ‘look’ of a format has. FF is a compromise because we can’t shoot 6×6 anymore to begin with. APS-C is no replacement for a Rolleiflex. Sure you can get nice sharp pictures from tiny sensors, my iphone does great in a lot of situations, but the tonal transitions, draw, and detail get better as you use a larger format. There is a reason why there were 8×10 cameras in addition to 4×5 cameras, just as there is a reason you can still buy ludicrous formats like 11×14. It’s all different in it’s own way and certain people have standards they’re trying to fulfill. A ‘shuper sharp’ 25mm lens for an OMD is not a replacement for an 80mm Planar, a 150mm Sironar, or a 360mm Nikkor (just to name some examples). 24×36 is a compromise because even the 645Z is prohibitively expensive for people like myself who work professionally and have to consider the workflow overall.
You’re dragging large format cameras used for highly specialized purposes into an argument about “small format” camera sensors. No-one in their right mind is going to suggest that large format doesn’t produce a unique look that trumps all others for depth and resolution. It also represents a tiny fraction of photography [even pro photography].
But we’re comparing m43, APS-C and 24×36 digital formats here, where the differences are significantly less pronounced, and which, over time, will be affected more by technological advances than simple dimensions.
Case in point: today’s m43 sensors easily offer better acuity, color accuracy, tonal response, and high ISO performance than a “full frame” Canon sensor from eight years ago. Technology trumps size.
What I’m saying is that at a certain point down the technological highway, the human eye’s ability to perceive improvements in resolution, acuity, and color will begin to diminish as sensors get progressively better. Put another way, when tomorrow’s Nikon D900 can, for all intents and purposes, offer the same IQ as today’s medium format cameras, and tomorrow’s APS-C or m43 cameras can offer the same IQ as today’s Nikon D750 [the latter of which is arguably enough for most practical applications], then the advantage will shift to the smaller system for many, many photographers looking to shed size, and particularly weight, out of their kit.
Yes, the shallow DOF/perspective effect will always be enjoyed by 24×36 size sensors [you can’t defeat physics], but by the same token, that isn’t always preferable or desirable. Sometimes you want more DOF while maintaining a larger aperture [to keep ISOs lower], whereupon the advantage goes to the smaller sensor cameras.
Now, if you want to argue that 24×36 sensors offer the largest possible overall image quality that still maintains the greatest overall capability vis-a-vis frame-rates, autofocus capability, speed, workflow, etc, etc. … then I would agree that “full frame” DSLRs, to date, hit that sweet spot the best. So far.
And fyi: I shoot 24×36, APS-C, and m43 all professionally, and pick the best tool for the job, depending on the circumstances.
These debates can be fun for pixel-peeping enthusiasts, but they mean little when shooting out in the real world.
To be honest, a good shot can be even taken using a phone camera. Holy…
there is one mirror-less MF – phase one A-series
https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/A-Series/Introduction.aspx
I actually missed it. I was so curious over their OnePhase XF model… can transform LOL.
Except that Fujifilm has no plans to make a full frame camera. So there goes half your “argument” right there.
You can’t possibly know that and I’ll expect your apology when the announcement is made. 🙂
Actually, I do know that. So you’ll be waiting a long time.
Give it up DrunkenRant… some people think having a FF-sensor makes them a Pro… others think buying a Porsche makes them a race-driver…
It’s a similar dogma as a few years ago… the ones who don’t knew better needed more megapixels to make good photos… meanwhile it’s “I need less DOF to make good photos”…
Yes. Those fools who shot large format for years when minox would do. They just lacked true vision!!!
By the same token, how many spies during the Cold War used large format cameras to capture clandestine photos behind enemy lines?
Horses for courses.
I’ve seen stunning 20″x30″ prints from m43 cameras, too.
Bottom line: If you think you can’t make good pictures with anything other than a “full frame” camera … maybe you’re not a good enough photographer.
The end.
Lol the “you’re not a good enough photographer” comment always comes out eventually. You can chase that all the way down to camera phones buddy. Aren’t you good enough for instagram??? Guess not…. See how that’s a stupid argument when someone is simply asking for a better tool?
Can I get a better “tool” to discuss this with me, while we’re at it? LOL.
Yep, you definitely ran out of arguments.
Well then here’s another argument for you: From same-generation APS-C to full frame, the qualitative differences are largely academic, for the most part.
Perhaps more importantly, lighting trumps cameras. Try it for yourself.
I wouldn’t call them academic, as I can certainly see a tangible difference even between my NEX-7 and an E-M5, but I’d have to agree that they are minor and that light trumps all.
However, every claim that a certain sensor size is sufficient (i.e. a sweet spot) is nothing more than a random subjective standard. Same goes for size and weight, it is hardly a clear cut argument. Based on my usage, a Sony FF setup will be as lightweight as a m43 one, for example.
There is much more to FF than DoF. Also, how good of a photographer one is or what professionals use is ultimately irrelevant to the individual buyer.
And don’t get me started on this : “Sony is characterized by poor lens selection, many poor quality lenses, bodies with the ergonomics of a Walkman”, where the first issue stems from the fact that aX series appeared merely two years ago (Sony is releasing lenses faster than Fuji was); the second one you base on a single lens, while almost all of the lenses are of very high to excellent quality; and we can have a huge discussion about ergonomics leading nowhere, but I personally can’t stand dedicated shutter dials – it is simply arguable.
“The future for the sweet spot of the market is not bigger sensors, it’s higher performance technology in smaller sensors, because then the whole system comes down in size … something an increasing number of enthusiast and pro shooters are asking for.”
To reiterate, the sweet spot is a subjective thing, based on usage. FF is already coming down in size and we don’t see the same differences as before – m43 vs DSLRs. Some of these differences may even be called “academic”.
“But at a certain point you hit the law of diminishing returns with respect to human visual perception under 90% of viewing conditions. At that point, the equation swings to size, weight and convenience.”
Same goes for size reduction.
Fuji’s system is great, that’s why I am checking this site, but it is limited, the lenses are overrated (in my experience of reading through different threads) and there is some amazing competition out there.
FF for real, there was a real article on if Fuji are going to make FF
sensor.
New lens line up? (Where the R&D funds going to come from?)
http://fujifilm-blog.com/2015/06/30/interview-with-mr-takashi-ueno-from-fujifilm-tokyo-why-dont-fujifilm-make-full-frame-dslr/
If they pop an “MF” that is called a breaking point because currently no one offers a mirror-less version.
They don’t need a full frame sensor. The existing sensor in the NIkon D7200, for example, offers 24mp and low light performance already slightly ahead of the current X-Trans cameras.
If a next-gen APS-C sensor offers at least 24mp [perhaps even 28 or 30] with BSI and other tech that can match or exceed current DR and high ISO performance, then it will offer a significant improvement over X-Tran II and all the IQ and capability MOST people will ever need [including pros]. I would expect a commensurate bump in autofocus performance, too.
Fujifilm isn’t targeting pro sports shooters or those wanting to make wall-sized fine art prints. There are D4s’ and D810s for those applications … and they’re not worried about competing there.
Need more DOF, you say? It’s likely Fujifilm will eventually introduce one or two f/1.0 lenses.
I don’t need DOF, is an illusion for me. I just need to take what I see via the viewfinder and I am a happy man.
What ever sensor it is, if you see the picture and no ones tell you. It could be a normal compact camera image but looks beautiful because the person behind it captured it well.
There will be no full frame camera from Fujifilm anytime soon, if ever. Sorry.
Oh, my! Havent you forgot at least 2-3 exclamation(!) marks in your header?! I like your blog, but your abundance of “!” makes me !!! since not everything is a sensation or need to be screamed! It also makes the news feels less valuable and the blog less serious.
I like the :: though.
It’s not a separate company in the sense you are thinking. It’s company still owned 100% by Sony. It’s just being separated from battery and storage part. So instead of there being one entity, now there are three, sensor, battery and storage, all three companies owned by the same parent company, Sony.
Same parent company, yes. But they all operate autonomously from one another. The decisions of one are compartmentalized from the decisions of another.
The six month rumor is an example of one of those memes that gets started on the Interwebs and is then quoted all over the place as fact. The reality is that Sony Semiconductor would never be able to justify its budget [or existence] waiting around to sell its latest and greatest sensors only to Sony cameras.
The Nikon D800 is a great example of another manufacturer getting Sony Semiconductor’s best tech before Sony Imaging did [with the A7r].
However, sometimes a sensor is exclusively design by Imaging division. When RX100 was released, the imaging division publicly stated that the sensor was designed by imaging division and was exclusive to them. It stayed exclusive for a couple of years.
If you seriously believe that this “split” will affect anything outside of Sony, imho you are mistaken. As to the “six months delay” rumor, I have seen nothing that supports it. However, the idea that “Sony Semiconductor would never be able to justify its budget [or existence] waiting around to sell its latest and greatest sensors only to Sony cameras” doesn’t make much sense to me. (1) The FF and APS-C sensors are probably a tiny drop in the overall sales. (2) They certainly can allow themselves to wait given that there is literally no competition.
“If you seriously believe that this “split” will affect anything outside of Sony, imho you are mistaken.”
Never said it would.
—-
“(1) The FF and APS-C sensors are probably a tiny drop in the overall sales. (2) They certainly can allow themselves to wait given that there is literally no competition.”
Those two statements are contradictory.
I don’t see the contradiction. I doubt Sony are making the majority of their profits on the bigger sensors; hence, they can allow themselves to wait. And, given that there isn’t much competition for the bigger sensors, they can allow themselves to wait.
Contradictory in the sense that if Sony Semiconductor have little competition, then large sensor demand would hardly be a tiny drop in their overall sales if they’re [almost] the only game in town.
It has been such a long wait, I am not sure if I will be interested in it when it is finally released. If it will only come with minor improvements over the X-T1, then they should have released it a year ago. Now, it needs to be great
Personally, I am tired of using the in-camera raw converter to get the most out of the files. If they don’t wake up and provide their own bare-bones raw converter, I may pass on Fuji anyways. The X-Trans colour filter offers no real improvement over bayer. So, unless they provide their own RAW converter, they should drop it.
Capture One ? Even Lightroom isn’t that bad today.
I wish Fuji would hurry up and offer a proper 1-inch compact camera.
The new Canon G5X looks ideal, but I would rather buy Fuji.
Where’s the X40 with 1″ sensor?
Where’s XE-3?
2-3 years? so that means it comes out before the X-Pro2 after all? but in which camera? The Instax Mini 120?
the comments never stop to surprise me
It think it might be possible
to make great photos with my X-E2 or with one of the other X’s 😮 😉 please correct
me if I’m wrong… I can’t see any worrying new obstructions or big limitations
that were’nt there when I made the switch from Canon FF.
New sensor, new X-PRO2, FF so what… if you can’t use what’s available today
maybe you rushed your decision and did’nt do the right research up front especially
if you’re an pro photographer? I can’t see a new sensor or camera model will do
any miracles for an amateur photographer… improvements yes but not miracles. And
we all have different preferences wishes demands so whatever Fuji makes someone
will complain.
Sit back take it easy and concentrate on making the most of what’s available now
and invest in great glass instead.
After nearly two years with Fuji I still don’t regret the switch
Fuji is a very nice anti-GAS option trully speaking 🙂
Guys, this is fujifilm we are talking about. Expect something odd or something brilliant you never new you needed. But never ever expect something you hope for.
The organic sensor will most likely first appear in something like a ga645 that’s only sold in limited numbers in japan or a whole new system with swapable sensors depending on what grain quality the photographer prefer. The only thing we can be pretty sure of is that it will never make miracles for the current x system.