Fuji X100 Digital SOMETHING from Fujifilm

[videogamemaker]

Originally Posted by tlitody

Think you need to read up on bokeh and the effect aperture shape has on it.

I did not say aperture, I'm very well aware aperture changes bokeh. You asserted the shutter would as well, which is incorrect.

[gavinlg]

Originally Posted by Matus

That is exactly what they are saying.

This would then co-incide with the article on the luminous landscape which stated that digital sensors couldn't make full use of fast lenses so manufacturers are raising the gain of the sensor to falsely boost the speed in lenses < f2.

This is extremely interesting to me... I usually only use fast lenses on my DSLRs and would love to know more...

[tlitody]

Originally Posted by videogamemaker

I did not say aperture, I'm very well aware aperture changes bokeh. You asserted the shutter would as well, which is incorrect.

The wedge shape shutter passing over the circular aperture means the actual aperture shape at any point during the exposure is never circular. It is the shape of the shutter opening unless as I explained the shutter fires the sensor if and when it is fully open. So half waay through the exposure what shape is the aperture as the shutter passes across the aperture and explain to us all why the straight edge of the shutter doesn't have an effect on the bokeh?

[videogamemaker]

Originally Posted by fdigital

This would then co-incide with the article on the luminous landscape which stated that digital sensors couldn't make full use of fast lenses so manufacturers are raising the gain of the sensor to falsely boost the speed in lenses < f2.

This is extremely interesting to me... I usually only use fast lenses on my DSLRs and would love to know more...

I agree completely. I find this blurb by Fujifilm and the open letter from LL to be dually interesting.

[videogamemaker]

Originally Posted by tlitody

The wedge shape shutter passing over the circular aperture means the actual aperture shape at any point during the exposure is never circular. It is the shape of the shutter opening unless as I explained the shutter fires the sensor if and when it is fully open. So half waay through the exposure what shape is the aperture as the shutter passes across the aperture and explain to us all why the straight edge of the shutter doesn't have an effect on the bokeh?

The shutter will not affect the bokeh, no matter the shape. If it's a moving object being used to control the amount of time the sensor is receiving light, it will not affect the bokeh. It has to be a stationary object for the duration of the exposure, such as the aperture, to affect bokeh. The shutter shape is irrelevant, and in a conversation I would brush it off, but other people with potential interest in the X100 could read and think is true, when it's not.

[Arjay]

Originally Posted by fdigital

"Designing an F1.6 or F1.8 lens is not so difficult; however, in the case of a digital camera, even if an aperture larger than F2 is used, the light receiving elements on the sensor cannot effectively use the brighter portion of the incoming light because of low incident light gathering efficiency."

Are they saying that f2 was the fastest they could go without IQ declining due to SENSOR light collecting abilities?

That's correct , and at the same time it says something about the sensor technology the X100 will use:

It will be a conventional sensor design, in which the light-sensitive parts of the sensor are located in a pit with steep walls that consist of the supporting sync and readout circuitry. The steepness of these walls makes it difficult for these sensors to capture light that arrives at a rather flat incident angle.

Latest generation mobile phones/cameras already use a different sensor technology: backside-illuminated sensors.

These types of sensors are initially manufactured in a similar way: Photosites and supporting circuitry are built up on a substrate in several layers, in which the photositers come first, and consecutively, supporting circuitry is added in further layers on top of the sites, effectively forming a grid of ridges all across the sensor chip (with the potential problem of shading the photosites from light that arrives at low incident angles). But then comes the crucial trick:

Once the sensor is 'finished' in a conventional way, the chip receives a covering layer on top that is fastened on some type of carrier. Then, the old substrate (the lowest layer) is etched away, exposing the back side of the photosites! Now, the photosites aren't buried inside a grid of circuitry ridges, but they are the topmost layer of that new structure. Being on the top, the photosites aren't shaded by any ridges and thus can also take up light that arrives at lower incident angles.

These new sensors offer two advantages:

1. Since the circuitry is located below the photosites, the sites can occupy a larger portion of the sensor's area. This translates into a higher photon efficiency, i.e. higher sensitivity at a given signal-to-noise ratio.
2. Since there are no ridges throwing shadows on the photosites, the sites will exhibit a less directional sensitivity behavior and thus will be more forgiving to low light incident angles. Of course, there's a limit to this - surface reflection.

So, the future of imaging sensor design will continue to be exciting.

[Matus]

Originally Posted by videogamemaker

The shutter will not affect the bokeh, no matter the shape. If it's a moving object being used to control the amount of time the sensor is receiving light, it will not affect the bokeh. It has to be a stationary object for the duration of the exposure, such as the aperture, to affect bokeh. The shutter shape is irrelevant, and in a conversation I would brush it off, but other people with potential interest in the X100 could read and think is true, when it's not.

I think that videomaker is trying to say that any possible effect of the shutter gets "averaged out" because of its motion. Think of all the focal plane shutters in SLR cameras. None of the leaf shutters in LF or MF lenses produces a circular opening either.

_________
In an extreme case (if the shutter slit would be very narrow - academic type of "gedanken experiment") the shutter could cause lower contrast of the image because of diffraction (on a narrow slit), but I guess that in reality it does not play any role - the focal plane shutters are very close to film plane - few millimeters at most - so to get some f/32 you would need a slit only about 0.1 mm narrow.

[videogamemaker]

Originally Posted by Arjay

That's correct , and at the same time it says something about the sensor technology the X100 will use:

It will be a conventional sensor design, in which the light-sensitive parts of the sensor are located in a pit with steep walls that consist of the supporting sync and readout circuitry. The steepness of these walls makes it difficult for these sensors to capture light that arrives at a rather flat incident angle.

Latest generation mobile phones/cameras already use a different sensor technology: backside-illuminated sensors.

These types of sensors are initially manufactured in a similar way: Photosites and supporting circuitry are built up on a substrate in several layers, in which the photositers come first, and consecutively, supporting circuitry is added in further layers on top of the sites, effectively forming a grid of ridges all across the sensor chip (with the potential problem of shading the photosites from light that arrives at low incident angles). But then comes the crucial trick:

Once the sensor is 'finished' in a conventional way, the chip receives a covering layer on top that is fastened on some type of carrier. Then, the old substrate (the lowest layer) is etched away, exposing the back side of the photosites! Now, the photosites aren't buried inside a grid of circuitry ridges, but they are the topmost layer of that new structure. Being on the top, the photosites aren't shaded by any ridges and thus can also take up light that arrives at lower incident angles.

These new sensors offer two advantages:

1. Since the circuitry is located below the photosites, the sites can occupy a larger portion of the sensor's area. This translates into a higher photon efficiency, i.e. higher sensitivity at a given signal-to-noise ratio.
2. Since there are no ridges throwing shadows on the photosites, the sites will exhibit a less directional sensitivity behavior and thus will be more forgiving to low light incident angles. Of course, there's a limit to this - surface reflection.

So, the future of imaging sensor design will continue to be exciting.

My memory might be fuzzy, but I seem to recall an article by I believe Sony, explaining how the back illuminated sensors are most beneficial on the ultra small sensors like cell phones and point and shoots, and less on larger crop and FF sensors, I seem to recall it even saying it might be near irrelevant on FF sensors. Take that with a grain of salt, but maybe this jogs someone's memory with a link to the article?

Are there any large sensor cameras out yet with back illuminated sensors?

[Arjay]

I presume making FF back-illuminated sensors is a lot harder than making cute breadcrumb-sized sensors. Of course, surface reflections could still be a problem.

[semilog]

Originally Posted by videogamemaker

My memory might be fuzzy, but I seem to recall an article by I believe Sony, explaining how the back illuminated sensors are most beneficial on the ultra small sensors like cell phones and point and shoots, and less on larger crop and FF sensors, I seem to recall it even saying it might be near irrelevant on FF sensors. Take that with a grain of salt, but maybe this jogs someone's memory with a link to the article?

Are there any large sensor cameras out yet with back illuminated sensors?

If Sony said that, it's their marketing people trying to lower expectations for larger-sensor cameras.

Large backthinned sensors are DEFINITELY beneficial. (I use a rather expensive one on one of my research microscopes — >90% quantum efficiency :^) ). But they are still very expensive and they are (due to their thinness) very fragile. Not what you'd want to put in a D3 or any other cam that sees abuse...

[Alpacaman]

Large backthinned sensors are DEFINITELY beneficial. (I use a rather expensive one on one of my research microscopes — >90% quantum efficiency :^) ). But they are still very expensive and they are (due to their thinness) very fragile. Not what you'd want to put in a D3 or any other cam that sees abuse...

Interesting - I kinda want your job now

[jsrockit]

My god, the level of geekery has hit a new high in this thread... and after 68 pages, that is saying something.

[Brian Sweeney]

I can one up the geekery. This thread seems to have ventured into a discussion of shutter design of any camera and whether or not the design and placement of a shutter can have an affect on Bokeh.

Some shutter mechanisms, such as in the Minolta Hi-Matic E, affect Bokeh. The single-set of blades of the shutter control the full exposure. It only opens to the aperture required for the exposure, thus setting exposure time and F-Stop simultaneously. So the shape of the Shutter blades at opening, and the placement of the shutter mechanism within the lens, does affect Bokeh.

So- if a between lens shutter is being used on the X-100, it depends on the type of shutter used. If the shutter always opens beyond the selected aperture, it is not an issue. If the electronic between-lens shutter similar to the Hi-Matic E is used, it is part of the equation. I'm thinking that after this discussion, Fuji will absolutely omit Hi-Matic E types of shutters from the trade-space. But they do save space in the camera. Only one mechanism to execute shutter speed and aperture.

[monochromejrnl]

Originally Posted by fdigital

This would then co-incide with the article on the luminous landscape which stated that digital sensors couldn't make full use of fast lenses so manufacturers are raising the gain of the sensor to falsely boost the speed in lenses < f2.

This is extremely interesting to me... I usually only use fast lenses on my DSLRs and would love to know more...

Can you point me to the LL article you mentioned above. Thanks!

[skibeerr]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

My god, the level of geekery has hit a new high in this thread... and after 68 pages, that is saying something.

How many angels can jive in the focal point of a pinhole

[Brian Sweeney]

I keep clicking on the wedges but the picture won't play!

[BillBingham2]

I'm wondering if it's in camera software rather than shutter as the pattern looks like something software would do. No highlights to speak of.

B2 (;-?

[Brian Sweeney]

If you cut a couple of wedges into a focal plane shutter, and fire a strobe-light with a very fast rep rate during the exposure , the wedge shapes would appear as shown. The focal plane shutter takes ~1/60th of a second to travel over the image area.

[Matus]

I think this thread really needs "X100 - part 2"

[Brian Sweeney]

X100... The Legacy.

[ChrisN]

Some more on the viewfinder:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...der-story.html

[Matus]

Originally Posted by ChrisN

Some more on the viewfinder:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...der-story.html

Here is the direct link to part Viewfinder

..

Interesting

Nr.4:
quote: "The viewfinder magnification of 0.5 is generally considered the easiest to see in the case of a camera equipped with a lens with a 35mm focal length (135 equivalent) – not too low and not too high."

The "not too high" - seriously? Have you guys ever had the problem that the image in the viewfinder of the R3A was too big?

On the negative side - not a single word about the manual focusing - I hope it will come in later chapters.

[Frankie]

Originally Posted by Matus

......On the negative side - not a single word about the manual focusing - I hope it will come in later chapters.

See here: http://www.finepix-x100.com/latest-u...tails-revealed

Manual focusing via the lens focusing ring.

[Matus]

Originally Posted by Frankie

See here: http://www.finepix-x100.com/latest-u...tails-revealed

Manual focusing via the lens focusing ring.

Thanks. I knew about the ring on the lens, but only after reading the text I realized that focus confirmation (I mean - to actually see where the lens is focused) will be possible via the electronic viewfinder. So this should be similar to current digital mirror-less cameras using EVF, right? Let's just hope that the delay will be minimal (I never used EVF so I have no feeling about it).

[gekopaca]

Originally Posted by Matus

Thanks. I knew about the ring on the lens, but only after reading the text I realized that focus confirmation (I mean - to actually see where the lens is focused) will be possible via the electronic viewfinder. So this should be similar to current digital mirror-less cameras using EVF, right? Let's just hope that the delay will be minimal (I never used EVF so I have no feeling about it).

I use EVF for manual focusing on my Pana GH1 and there's absolutely no delay.
I'm sure it will be the same with the X100.
What I'm waiting now about that camera :
- Silent shutter (does anybody have news about it?)
- black paint version