The newly published (March 19) US patent “20150077619” describes what will likely become the first Curved Sensor Full Frame camera (probably the RX2). That’s what Sony writes:
Patent Background:
“In recent years, the need for brightness of a shooting lens and an increase in the size of an imaging element which is effective in implementing low-noise shooting and a high dynamic range has increased, not to mention the need for an increase in image quality, a reduction in size, and a reduction in thickness.“
Patent Summary:
“The present technology is made to solve the above-mentioned problems, and it is desirable to provide a lens optical unit and an imaging device, which are capable of implementing high optical performance by performing size reduction and sufficient field curvature correction.
An imaging plane of the solid-state image sensor has a non-planar shape that causes a sag amount in an optical axis direction to increase as a distance from an optical axis increases, and a conditional expression (1) is satisfied (1) ρ×Sag>0, where ρ represents a Petzval curvature of an optical unit represented by“
SAR resume: The patent says “non-planar” (curved) sensor allow lenses to be more compact compared to lenses designed for “planar” (flat) sensors. And they actually share full specs of those lenses
Full Frame lenses (RX2?):
29.96mm f/2.06 (likely to become a 30mm f/2.0)
36mm f/1.85 (likely to become a 35mm f/1.8)
36mm f/2.85 (likely to become a 35mm f/2.8)
36mm f/2.26 (likely to become a 35mm f/2.0)
For smaller sensors (1 inch RX100m4?):
10,79-25mm f/2.8-5.4
110 Responses
A 35mm 1.8 with same IQ or better as well as same size or smaller than RX1(R) plus highly improved AF and a viewfinder like in RX100 mkIII would make my year! Almost forgot: Focus peaking must work without zooming in as well.
If this is the mythical RX2 and the patent is dated March 19, when would my dream-machine be released?
RX2(R) 50MP curved sensor with 35mm f/1.8 lens please! I will buy it in a heartbeat!
Nooooooooo. 12MP with a very compact 35/2 lens.
Why not have different variants for different customers?
RX2R w/ 50MP 35mm f/1.8 for Resolution
RX2S w/ 12MP 35mm f/2 for Sensitivity
I just want the widest aperture not for low light reason but for the type of artistic look that it can produce.
Low demand
I’m curious, I wonder how that has worked for Sigma from a sales standpoint? The idea of multiple fixed focal length cameras using the same sensor is nothing new. Sony must see some value in it. Personally I’d rather have interchangable lenses.
i think they make a mild loss on them, and if the body is small and light and affordable, its quite nice, as you can share them, quickly change camera rather than lens, downside is abit more stuff to carry, and needing 3x as much camera accessories in some areas. but its a popular way to go if you look at pro event togs.
curved ilc, it depends on if its better in some ways to design for curved sensor, and correct towards that, rather than a flat sensor, and that maybe true, i dont know about ele end, but dont some spotting scopes try yo match to eye curve?
It’s not a high volume camera. They simply wouldn’t sell enough of them to justify their development. Also, I read an article when curved sensors were first touted saying Sony were having problems curving sensors with high megapixel counts.
I guess you are right.
I will buy the rx2 the first day it comes out.. if i am not already dead by then. ahhhh so tired of waiting, waiting, waiting
Looking forewardcto see wat will come out of this, it might verry well be my next camera..
Seems just like this, but it is probably much closer to production now
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-patent-discloses-the-new-35mm-f1-8-for-full-frame-mirrorless-nex-with-curved-sensor/
30 f2 >>>>>>>>>>>
I really look forward to how the pictures out of this camera will look like. This will be the closest we have come to replicating how our own eyes work, might give pictures a whole new interesting look not available in any other camera to come to date.
RX2 should be made in two versions with curved sensor: 35/1.8 and 85/2. If AF was improved with all PDAF points and focusing to -2EV (and with dedicated AF back buton and 2 slots), it would be a dream combo for many photographers including weddings.
rx should be a zoom lense !! 35-60 in my opinion , if 35-70 even better. a 50 or 85 would be also a dream for fashion and wedding photographers , with electronical shutter.
but 35 is too wide for people , portrait photography.
I would prefer 2 compact primes 35mm and 85mm fixed on the body allowing to slide one or the other in front of the sensor.
The curved sensor will hopefully allow these to be fairly fast and compact at the same time. Also with low number of elements to allow high light transmission and respectively high contrast.
I always assumed part of the reason why they keep the fixed lens cameras at 35mm was because it’s difficult to make compact lenses at longer focal lengths. Having a 35 and a 85 is my dream as well, but a 85mm would probably ruin the compactness. The next best thing for me would be to settle for a 50mm.
I agree, but my hope was that the curved sensor will allow more compact short tele. But without being an optical engineer, although I studied some physics in uni, it just wishful thinking 🙂
I think what would make sense the most is a 35 with a dedicated 2x teleconverter, similar to the way the SEL28F20 has super-wide and fisheye converters. If the lens is 35/1.4, then the resulting outcome will be 70/2.8.
Make the front element of a teleconverter larger, and you’ve got yourself a 70/2.
Having a 2.4x teleconverter would result in an 84mm lens.
This solution solves the issue of having a mechanical support to shift lenses as well as proper sealing to keep the dust out. It also allows to keep the camera moderately small with a permanently attached 35mm, while allowing to modify the focal length whenever it is needed.
35/1.4 has too small backfocus for TC to be possible
“make the front element larger” doesn’t work this way
Pardon my ignorance, but how does it work?
I was always under impression that front element of a lens, dictates maximum arpeture. Make it a multi-element TC, that focuses the light into a tighter spot, and you preserve the T-Stop for the most part.
Also, how does short backfocus affect a front mountable TC?
I agree with you on that completely! This will be best solution. Of course they can do it, sony proved that with WA converters recently. The question is whether they want to do it. Around RX1 was quiet after release. I would dream of RX1mkII with all fixed bugs, improved usability, excellent AF and MF. May be EVF and/or 36/50MP. That’s it. Thank you sony for listening and providing us with that update. And of course you can additionaly release RX2Curved if you want to make also other photographers happy 🙂
35 1.4 would be too big of physical reasons, I hate converters not professionel , and making the lense slower, but if its an option okay give it a try.
If you know how to use 35mm, it isn’t too wide for portraits.
Some 35mm warp people more than others when you get closer to your subject. That being said, if you want to do head shots, you wouldn’t think of 35mm in the first place. Sony didn’t make the RX1 for portraits anyway, and that focal length is as popular, if not more so, than 50mm for the market intended for it: photojournalism, doc, the so called “street” photo, and many others where 35mm is great.
It would be nice to have a couple of RXs that will provide some basic focal lengths like 24, 35 and 50 and you pretty much cover a lot of people.
yeah also possible for me like the sigma series, a 35, 50,85 version would be great.
Rx100 has a 24-70 or a7II + 24-70
but these cameras , and I have the 24-70 with an A7do not have a global shutter or sync speed like the RX1 or future RX 2 thats the only reason I need it electronical shutter like already in an rx1 to sync a flash without HSS hassle , like 1/1000 of a second with a studio flash for overpowering the sun easily.
okay for photojournalism the 35 mm is very good , but I prefer even for that a 50 mm lense as you said a couple of RX would be great a 35, 50,70 mm or a zoom one for me the leaf shutter electronic shutter to sync over 1/250 of a second with this HSS, Hypersnync hassle . Thats what I think would be cool.
others have a different needing but as I said 35 mm is doing distortions with faces .but I love 35 mm for an allround lense.
Looking at the patent paper it looks like there are quite a few lens designs described there, not only a 35mm one.
Also I always thought that a curved sensor would be about simpler, more compact lenses with less things to be corrected, but the patent suggests that this will allow for higher resolution sensors as well as light always falls on the sensor at optimal angle.
and fast AF A6000 or manual focus availability
Labeling f/2.26 as f/2 is just low…
Not even Zeiss gives the actual focal length and aperture these days. Harsh times.
Transmission (t-stops) is the best way to index lenses.
Not for depth of field, however.
Not a Sony fanboy, but I love to see that Sony continues to foster innovation. Curved 35 mm sensor will of course need new lens designs, too. Less lens elements will be needed, therefore the smaller lens size. If Sony makes such camera with interchangable lenses, it will be a winner for sure (even I am certain we will first see a FF curved sensor based camera with fixed lens design).
This said, personally I am not ready to settle for a new set of lenses for this kind of camera….
Fixed lens cameras with curved sensors, yes, we will see more of them pretty soon. Hopefully in more interesting configurations than the selfie cam KW1. ILCs with curved sensors… Hmm… Not seeing it happen yet. Add IBIS and zoom lenses and the equation will be quite a difficult one. But yeah, maybe in a future not too far away.
The exit point for light rays from the rear of the lens can never change when using curved sensors. You will never see an interchangeable lens camera with a curved sensor for that reason alone. It has to be a fixed lens.
Another guy talking about what he doesn’t understand… like
“E-mount cannot accommodate FF”
“E-mount cannot have IBIS”
It seems to me you’re the one who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Do some research and you might understand.
Of course you could produce a system camera with a curved sensor, but any lens would then have to have the field curvature to match that of the sensor. What would be the point of that? The primary idea of using a curved sensor is to avoid having to correct the lens for a flat plane, thereby simplifying the design. As different lens designs will all have different natural field curvatures you end up producing lenses corrected for one arbitrary curvature. You might as well correct for a flat plane in the first place.
Then there’s the little issue of not being compatible with any existing exchangeable lens system. So you’d end up with a whole new lens range, all corrected for one particular curved sensor which would be unable to exploit any existing lenses.
It simply doesn’t make any sense. Curved sensors are a natural fit for fixed lens cameras. They seem to have severe disadvantages for real-world exchangeable lens cameras. Perhaps if somebody can design a sensor which can adapt it’s curvature, then maybe. However, that’s a big “if” and, until that point, I don’t see it happening.
>curved sensor is to avoid having to correct the lens for a flat plane, thereby simplifying the design
It doesn’t work like that. They will have to design a lens for non-zero, but specific curvature. Have you ever worked in optical CAD?
If you had read that sony’s patent, you’d have known that none of designs in it use “natural” field curvature — Sony doesn’t have a method for producing sensors with such strong curvatures. The sensor with 50 mm curvature will make 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 smaller than those designed for a flat sensor, and only after 100mm the curved sensor will be worse fit than a flat one.
I suspect that 35mm curved sensor is only for fixed lens cameras, because it works much better with primes.
If Sony plans to release interchangeable lens system with curved sensor, this would be medium format system, because such systems include only prime lenses due to their quality.
It’s really ONLY practical with fixed lens cameras. I doubt there will ever be an interchangeable lens camera with curved sensor.
I hope the corners are as sharp as the center.
there are even concentric lens designs where sharpness is the same…
All of the innovation is great! if Sony would improve their customer service i could see conturing to invest in their products. Right now i just can’t they have the worst customer service probably because they use a subcontractor to do the work.
Corner sharpness as good as as center sharpness, also wide open. No field curvature, meaning center and corners are sharp at the same time? Smaller lenses. Yammy, yammy…
As there is already the 35mm f2 Sonar on the RX1, why not bring out a potrait lens for the RX2 first? Or make it a 75mm, hopefully 1.4!
And when it all moves to ICL and DSLR it’ll need another new mount for Sony!
But to be fair, I think Curve sensors will spread across all brands and they’ll all come up with new mounts for it
Never going to happen. Curved sensors need fixed lenses.
.. a 75mm lens would be ridiculous if it is permanently mounted on the camera. 35mm is far more useful on a day to day basis.
It is not necessary to curve the sensor to achieve corner and edge sharpness. This solution is only helpful when trying to build smaller cameras, not better. Planar sensors and specifically designed primes, like the RicohGR do perfectly fine in avoiding chief ray angle issues. The FE55 is also a good example and this is why most telephotos also resolve well and have low CA. The Distagon design (the Zeiss 21mm) is also a good example for WA mainly because the back focus distance allows for a friendly CRA versus Leica’s RF back focus on a WA. If the light is allowed to collimate, you’re good to go. (That is unless Sony’s sensor glass doesn’t get in the way.)
You miss the point entirely–the point being, that the industry needs a shot in the arm, and curved sensors and associated lenses are the only revolutionary thing out there.
While curving a sensor may not be the only way to achieve certain benefits, it is definitely a good–and more importantly NEW–way.
Why not fix the 2 main items that cripple Sony mirrorless cameras now? Lack of 14 bit color, and astigmatism caused by sensor glass thickness. That would be true innovation.
Because only 0.1% of customers care. Canon has shitty ADCs and have largest marketshare, still
____________________
Ahh, I almost thought you forgot the 11+7 bit rant in your initial post. But here it is. Cheers!
Will you need a curved monitor to view the images?
this question has been asked many times before…. NO.
those who shoot jpegwill notice nothing unless the camera is smaller
They’ll notice more than the size of the camera. To create a lens that works with a flat sensor, you sacrifice image quality across the board. Removing that problem improves the potential image quality…….across the board.
And avoiding corner distortion is better than just compensating for it in software.
Possibly less field curvature too.
No, the same way you don’t need curved paper to print them.
If this allows the RX2 to have a retractable lens the size of the RX100, and it has an EVF, then sign me up!
Good luck making that 35/2 Zeiss Sonnar retractable. The lens on the RX1 is bigger and takes more space than the whole camera itself. Its the most important part, it HAS to be that size.
Actually the curved sensor allows for a smaller lens. Creating a lens that works with a flat sensor is harder and requires more space.
This is the whole point of the curved sensor, to simplify the lens and make it smaller.
Yeah smaller is cool and all, but how much smaller are we talking here? Will it allow such a reduction that the RX1’s lens will be shrunk to the size of an RX100 lens? I doubt so.
YES.
Did you even read the article?
I don’t like retractable lenses at all. It’s the only real drawback of my beloved Ricoh GR. I like the compactness, but the lens mechanism is quite prone to physical damages. Even if the camera body is sturdy and weather sealed, a retractable lens would make the entire camera quite fragile.
Did you ever experienced what happens if you accidetally push the power button of a compact camera in your jeans pocket? I have.
By the way, the current RX1 lens has a rear element that is only a few millimetres away from the sensor. Such a lens would be hardly retractable.
For those that own the A7II- is it a worthy ugrade from the A7? I can’t stand the stupid grip on the camera- it’s driving me absolutely nuts. It’s to small and grip is..it’s just…horrible. I thought I could resist, but I don’t think I can live with it much longer.
That’s one thing that made me hold off for the II (though that’ll be waiting a bit now that I just plunked down for the 77ii). I’ve played around with the A7 in the stores, and whereas I liked the features, IQ, etc., I just didn’t like that grip (and I was also holding out for IBIS). Otherwise it’s really a nice camera, but ergonomics do matter.
Same here, the grip is one of those checkboxes that had to be checked. Hopefully A7000 will follow the same route.
I found the grip is actually much better than the one on A99 or A77ii. But yeah, who still use the dead A-mount thingy…
How about a curved EVF to minimize the distortions in the viewfinder.
Or at least use the same quality optics in the Emount viewfinders as the a99/77 have. My a7II has far more distortion in the EVF than a99/77. My NEX7 had terrible smearing on the edges of viewfinder. My a7R seems to have excellent viewfinder optics though, better than the other Emounts.
You ask Sony to improve the optics in E-mount, then go on to say the optics in your A7R are excellent???
Are you hard of hearing? What’s the problem with noticing the difference between them? I give kudos where kudos are due. a7R has excellent viewfinder optics and a lousy lens mount. a7II has decent, but not great vf optics, and better lens mount. Certainly not comparable to a99/77II.
Why does that make your head spin? Must it be so black and white all or nothing for you?
How about commenting on the actual substance of my comment, instead of asking me to repeat what I just clearly said.
Just pointing out the obvious contradiction in what you said.
My hearing is fine. Not sure what that has to do with reading your post.
Does it make you feel better if I amend my comment to say “most Emount that I’ve owned”? Perhaps your hearing is fine, but your comprehension is lacking. Otherwise you’d have noticed I spoke of three specific Emount cameras, and noted the qualities I’ve experienced with each.
But thanks for browsing the web and righting the wrongs you perceive. It’s nice to know there are folks out there like you who would rather pass judgment than exercise a wee bit of insight. Well done.
If they could get rid of the mechanical shutter too…
*IF* its a RX2, they’ll likely have a leaf shutter so I’m not really sure what the problem is.
How do you swab a curved sensor?
With your tongue
Mmm, yummy!
If the lens is fixed, you can’t swab it anyway
This patent describes 5 “embodiments” summarized in tables 1,4,7,10 and 13. The sensor radii of curvature for these are -70, -100, -85, -27.363 ASP and -50 mm. So, each lens is paired to a different sensor. All but the 4th have a flat cover glass on the sensor. Does this imply interchangeable lens camera? Probably not. I suspect that the curved sensor poses a challenge for designing a zoom lens or even a range of prime lenses.
It’s not a challenge in sense it’s difficult to do it at all — it’s difficult to achieve the same size reduction as with prime lenses.
having a ff mirrorless mount system, i see no point in RX1 or any upgraded model
RX1 came a year before a7 line, now its dead in the water
had you see how much the KW1 cost? and thats the curved version of a super cheap sensor
if RX2 see the ligth of the day it will be close to $10000
even the simple lense will reduce elements just half
did anyone will rush to buy the RX2 with a lense just half the size of RX1 and everything else equal but with a higher price… i really doubt it
sony may shot his foot if they release that camera, they are ruling ff mirrorles, they miss competition so they will release a product that go againts their ff mirrorless…NUTS
if sony really want to release a curved sensor for profesionals, they should skip ff and go for a bigger sensor
make a compact premium new mount medium format camera with just a couple of primes, the very pro very expensive alpha line
RX1 is dead in the water?
I better check mine.
If you dunk it, i’m sure it’ll be dead 🙂
In your opinion. I’d like to see a replacement, and I know others who would too.
That’s the problem with opinions, they’re personal.
Why is that a problem?
Compact FF 35mm F1.8 with build-in EVF, I want it sony thank you.
Reason for the new tech implemented. There is a niche market for these types of products. I bet the performance is absolutely ridiculous given the fixed lens and curved sensor. For some, that’s simply enough.
“…now its dead in the water…” How do you know that? The RX1 is still one of the coolest cameras on the planet and it has still plenty of supporters who prefer it to the (in comparison) clunky A7.
Can Sony make interchangeable lenses for the same curved sensor or is the sensor always dedicated to one lens?
To one type of lenses. Most lenses have built in corrections for the sensor flatness. Curved sensor wouldnt work well with these lenses.
Yes, they can. It’s just lens’ designer needs to know sensor curvature in advance.
The difficulty is that sensor curvature has to be reproducible between samples.
As said, each lens must be designed for the same curvature. Where you get into difficulty is designing longer focal lengths; they do not want as curved surfaces. Now imagine trying to design a zoom; it’s world of hurt to the IQ to maintain a specific curvature constraint over a range. (It’s doable, just negates any advantage and can even work against you.) Fixed primes (or very limited zoom) is where this shines.
35f1.4 and less than 2500 euro, sold!!
I really don’t understand the rumor about rx100 m4
Can any one explain it to me ?
Yes that lens would be awful for a RX100m4
Who cares what Sony will do with that sensor, pros will be waiting for what Nikon will do with that sensor and then buy pro Nikon gear 🙂
it has very little of use for a DSLR, because mirror clearance requirement effectively cancels any advantage it has for making small lenses. also Nikon doesn’t want to start a new line of optics.
Mirror cancels it, but so does the OVF prism as you need to correct the optics after mirror for the eye, otherwise your eye doesn’t focus correctly, and you don’t know where the focus really is.
This curved sensor isn’t a new idea, I don’t know why it have been able be patented. As even on since pinhole cameras the idea to use curved paper and film has been there (and used efficiently as well).
So the idea should be how to get the square pixels to work with curvature.
I’m quite surprised, that you even make the effort to answer to such a retarded troll post. I usually try to ignore that kind of bulls**t.
Too bad curve sensor cannot be used in an A7 body because the lens have to be designed for the curved sensor.
Nice, they could be the creator of a electronic eye which could be used in Medicine.
What about 50Mp 35mm f/1.8 with digital zoom X2 to get your 70 mm 😉
High megapixel does go well with a fixed prime lens so I’m hoping for an increase as well, but I prefer to call it cropping instead of digital zoom.