What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Contax is giving up on the N digital?

This is copied fro the ND-thread. After the rumour/announcement of the discontinuation of the current ND on the page of RG, there was a high interest in discussion the future of Contax in general and the ways to survive with new digital cameras in more detail.

I will also copy/move some intersting postings from the ND thread, which deal with general issues in chip design...
 
Austin,

Microlenses are now used on interline transfer CCDs, on full-frame CCDs, and on Canon CMOS sensors for their DSLRs. The imperative is quantum efficiency.

Research in microlens technology is moving fast because it addresses two pressing problems: fill factor, and off-axis rays. Both problems affect quantum efficiency or, in film terms, the ASA.

Ordinary full-frame CCDs are just 70% fill and do not address off-axis rays. Sony interline CCDs with their current microlenses are 90% fill, and do address off-axis rays:

"In 1998 we introduced the SIL (Single Inner Lens), an internal lens which is designed to improve light sensitivity. When the camera aperture is widened, a higher proportion of the light enters the CCDs on-chip microlens from a wide angle. The light coming from oblique angles can not be efficiently collected by the sensor of the conventional CCDs. Therefore light sensitivity decreases when the aperture is widened. The SIL lies between the color filter and photo-shielding film. It improves the collection of light entering from a wide angle by changing the light's path, allowing it to reach the sensor."

SIL lies under the microlens, and does exactly what I discussed in my previous message. I'm sure it's patented, but that's what Contax needs for the new C/Y DSLR!

Sony churns out CCDs for everybody's P&S digitals, where acceptance angle is particularly acute. The lack of mirror box, and consumer demand for truncated form factor, invites symmetric lenses (think Biogon).

Sony quote came from this (excellent) Web page:

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/info/sonyf/kumatec/

FillFactory has a silicon design that claims to need no microlenses, yet is sensitive to off-axis rays:

http://www.fillfactory.com/htm/technology/htm/high_fill.htm

This is a cute trick if it works. Does it work? Well, the first camera to deploy it is the Kodak 14n. Hmm.

The Nikon D100 uses a full-frame CCD with, oh yes, microlenses:

"Nikon is using shifted microlenses on the CCD-elements. The microlens layer looks to be a little contracted compared to the sensor layer below. This leads to less losses and microvignetting with slanted be&encils on areas out of the censor's center."

D100 quote came from this document:

http://www.uschold.com/pdf/Report%20SLR%20Public%2009.02%20N.pdf

While some patents may need licensing, I recap my claim that Contax has all the technology needed to produce -- dare I say it -- the RTS D.

With microlenses.
 
Austin, peace man. Please allow me to pick your brain.

Now if focal plane shuttered cameras cannot
be adapted to the needs of full frame digital capture, how did Canon (and others) produce their digitals from adapted EOS focal plane cameras? None of my Canon lenses are leaf shuttered. Yet, I can shoot digital at a shutter speed of 1/8000th of a second.

BTW, Hasselblad itself refers to the necessary digital interface as "Data Bus" when describing the 555ELD (which I use with a Kodak ProBack). According to your counter post on the subject, are you saying they are incorrect? You cannot use a single shot digital back on a mechanical Hasselblad V camera, even though it utilizes leaf shutter lenses with a flash sync port on the lens. There is no lens aperture information bring transfered via a data bus. To use a mechanical V camera, you have to place an adapter made by a 3rd party between the body and digital back.
 
Albert Lau. Placing a Kodak 645C digital back on your Contax 645 is the real answer to digital capture IMO. The complete set up is actually very close in size and weight to the Canon 1Ds and produces superior images to the Canon. The AF is slower obviously, but that is secondary considering the 645 is what you already own and are use to. I use this set up extensivly, e-mail me if you have specific questions. fotografz@comcast.net

Clarification, I did not say that the ND was a "blunder" as misquoted out of context above. I said it was a "marketing blunder". R&D, manufacturing, and marketing are different
corporate functions. IMO, Kyocera did not position this camera properly, allowing the prevailing marketing of other makers to dictate
expectations. Based on those expectations, the camera was tagged as a failure by many people, including the press.

If the expectations had been better managed, and a more unique positioning communicated, the camera might have made a better go of it.

When Canon initiated their marketing on-slaught it cost them very little. They simply handed the new 1D cameras to photojournalists shooting the winter Olympics.
Thousands of $ in free PR, and hundreds of successful images printed around the world.
Dealers could not keep any in stock when it launched.

By comparison, the Kodak 14n is struggling
because (like Contax), they allowed some crappy images to be shown before the camera was ready (on their own web site no less! ). I've yet to see a really great shot taken with the 14n.

In fact, the ND is a unique image making tool.
It is(was) the only full frame CCD 35mm SLRD available. It produces exceptional photos if you take the time to learn it's secrets.
And is second to none in making B&W conversion due to it's dynamic range.

IF they had handed the camera to a few known and accomplished photographers with a slant toward artistic achievement, and everyone saw what could be done, the short comings compared to photojournalistic needs would've been mute points IMO. That is called "Managing Expectations" in the marketing world.
 
Rico,

> Microlenses are now used on interline transfer CCDs

They have to be used on Interline sensors, it just didn't happen "now". The reason is interline sensors only have a %30 sesing area, and REQUIRE the use of the microlenses. Full frame sensors have an above %70 sensing area, and do not require the use of them.

> on full-frame > CCDs, and on Canon CMOS sensors for their DSLRs.

What true full-frame CCD (as in 24 x 36) cameras uses a microlense? In fact, the new full-frame sensors used by Kodak and Canon don't even use an anti-aliasing filter, much less microlenses.

The D100 uses a smaller than half frame sensor the sensor fits WELL in the image circle, so if they in fact do use a microlense, it is NOT to solve the well depth issue, as there is no well depth issue with this camera. I believe the article you qoute is mistaken as to the reason they would use them for this camera. Don't believe everything you read on the web. There is no peer review for publishing things on the web, so you'll get a lot of people who present themselves as knowing something they just don't.

Reports are that the Kodak 14n has vignetting problems, so that technique apparently does not mitigate the well depth issue. This was a known issue, and people in industry circles were surprised that Kodak tried this.

> Research in microlens technology is moving fast because it addresses > two pressing problems: fill factor, and off-axis rays.

The amount of off-axis adjustment is limited, and this is the problem, and why they won't work in certain circumstances.

> SIL lies under the microlens, and does exactly what I discussed in my > previous message.

If you believe they solve the light ray issue for every case, you are mistaken. They do not. Not for the extremes that are required for something like a C/Y mount camera, or the Nikon, to incorporate a 24 x 36 sensor. If it DID work, then people would be using it, and they are not.

My comment still stands. Your claim that the changing of the lense mount was not necessary is incorrect. If Nikon could solve this problem with simply using microlenses, they would.

Contax also needed to change the mount to allow for auto-focus lenses. They are the only manufacturer, aside from Leica, that has not made the move to autofocus. The market for manual focus cameras is very limited. In order to move ahead, Contax needed to address this issue, and IMO, this was the right thing for them to do.

Austin
 
Hi Marc,

> Now if focal plane shuttered cameras cannot > be adapted to the needs of full frame digital capture, how did Canon > (and others) produce their digitals from adapted EOS focal plane > cameras? None of my Canon lenses are leaf shuttered. Yet, I can shoot > digital at a shutter speed of 1/8000th of a second.

IF the shutter is designed to be full open at "a point in time", AND you can sync to it, then it will work, obviously. The problem is, not all cameras are designed to operate this way, as they did not need to. I'd bet that these cameras all use vertical shutters, so they travel the short side, not the long side.

Also, you can sync a digital image capture to happen in nano-seconds, so synchronization, if available, is easy.

> BTW, Hasselblad itself refers to the necessary digital interface as > "Data Bus" when describing the 555ELD (which I use with a Kodak > ProBack). According to your counter post on the subject, are you > saying they are incorrect?

My initial point was what they call "Data Bus" was specifically developed for the 205TCC cameras, FE lenses and E backs, specifically to transmit aperture/shutter/film info to the camera meter, and had nothing to do with facilitating digital imaging, that is simply a by-product of a flexible digital interface. It's basically an I2C bus. Since I2C has the ability to provide unique addresses, they are using this connection to allow digital backs to sync up with the shutter. The 205TCC was introduced, I believe, in 1990...and the 555ELD was introduced only within the past few years, and, I believe, is the first camera to use the DataBus connection for synchronization. I have the spec for the DataBus, but it doesn't have any provisions for this type of synchronization, and must be something that they just added recently.

Regards,

Austin
 
If Rob Galbraith's report about Contax "giving up" on the N Digital is really true, where does that leave the rest of the N system (such as it is)?
 
This speculation is irrelevant. Guys, the post does not say "GIVING UP" for one. Two, it's already obsolete and overpriced, so why not discontinue it? Three, and it's obvious y'all don't get the computer industry, once you buy it, you buy the bugs and pray, yes, pray, that it gets fixed. Most likely you gets what you pays for.

If you don't LIKE what you are getting with digital cameras, suggest you use film and get a film scanner or learn to use a darkroom.

It is really p___ing me off to read these speculation on discontinued and vaporware digital products every day. You all seem to want digital junk, non-archival, buggy, overpriced, bulky c___ you wouldn't dare take on a trek to anywhere remote because your *&^% batteries would go dead in half a day, so learn to live with it. You want to make Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and Intel richer for stuff you'll have to replace in a year - go right the f___ ahead.

"If Rob Galbraith's report about Contax "giving up" on the N Digital is really true, where does that leave the rest of the N system (such as it is)?"
 
Perhaps Rob Galbraith's report might have some credibility, but then why it is the only place has such a news?

On the other hand, if there is something big coming down the pipe, one would expect the company will talk about it. So far, there is no info at all from Contax. They did announced the ND couple years before it is available to the market. Although, I was told, Canon announced the 10D a couple days before the PMA show, as they did the same thing for the EOS1D couple year ago

Can anyone in this forum check with Contax? I, for one, am interested in the new and improved ND.

Marc, thanks for your suggestion and your offer for sharing additional information. I will drop you a note from time to time for photography questions.

Albert.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top