Interesting Question about D2X sensors

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

pixby <pixby_douglas@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Nikon are going to great lengths to explain how they capture 12
> megapixels of data with their new "dual" sensor in the D2X. They are
> describing their sensor's photo collector points of the newly released
> Pro D2X cameras as being 2 different types/sizes of collector points...

Where are they doing that, exactly?

> Sigma did the same with their Foveon sensor SD9 cameras. I think because
> Nikon collect RGB data from each site, they cannot be lumped in with the
> Foveon "invention" of sensor size. Just the same, the Nikon sensor is
> different from a traditional bayer sensor as we know it in a Canon
> camera. How different is not as clear as it should be.

It's a regular Bayer sensor. I don't know what you're talking about.

> We are aware that smaller photo receptors have their own unique
> problems. Is using two different size receptors in the way inkjet
> printer makers get nicer looking images by using different size droplets
> of ink, have Nikon discovered how to make a high resolving sensor in a
> small size?

Why would this have anything to do with a D2x? They aren't using two
different sizes of photo receptors.

> So here's the question of the day for thinking people: How many sensors
> are in a D2X Nikon to achieve 12 megapixel images? Careful now... It's a
> loaded question!

There's one sensor, with 12.8 million photo detectors.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <11h9mams2kqsj25@corp.supernews.com>,
Jeremy Nixon <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote:

>> Sigma did the same with their Foveon sensor SD9 cameras. I think because
>> Nikon collect RGB data from each site, they cannot be lumped in with the
>> Foveon "invention" of sensor size. Just the same, the Nikon sensor is
>> different from a traditional bayer sensor as we know it in a Canon
>> camera. How different is not as clear as it should be.
>
>It's a regular Bayer sensor. I don't know what you're talking about.

I just looked quickly through the latest version of dcraw.c, and it
looks pretty normal except for one thing; it seems to have four
different color filters. The scaling factors for the sensitivities are
pre_mul(n), where n is usually 0 for red, 1 for green, and 2 for blue,
with green (1) usually unstated for each camera, assumed to be 1.0. The
D2X has pre_mul() values for 0, 1, and 3. Very few cameras have 4
multiplier values.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<JPS@no.komm> wrote:

> I just looked quickly through the latest version of dcraw.c, and it
> looks pretty normal except for one thing; it seems to have four
> different color filters. The scaling factors for the sensitivities are
> pre_mul(n), where n is usually 0 for red, 1 for green, and 2 for blue,
> with green (1) usually unstated for each camera, assumed to be 1.0. The
> D2X has pre_mul() values for 0, 1, and 3. Very few cameras have 4
> multiplier values.

Is what you're looking at the same as the TIFF CFAPattern? If so, 3
would be cyan. However, according to the metadata in my DNG files, the
CFA layout is given as 0,1,1,2 (R/G/G/B), suggesting a standard layout.
But if the values you're talking about are something else, I'm not sure
what to look for; the difference could be in the color matrices.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

pixby <pixby_douglas@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Jeremy is wasting his time... Been in my kill file because of his insults.

Not wasting at all. I don't answer your questions for *your* benefit, after
all. If you want to go on believing that the camera has different sized
photo sensors, that's up to you, but I'd hate to see anyone else think your
delusions have any merit.

> You'll be the next to go Brian, right along with canongirlie.

Pity you're missing the answers you wanted when you posted.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

<JPS@no.komm> wrote:

> Do you know where I can download sample RAW files?

Drop me an email so I'll have a valid address, and I'll get you a couple.
I use DNG and delete the NEFs but I can take a couple shots and put the
NEFs somewhere for you and send you a download link.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <4314cfc0$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, pixby_douglas@hotmail.com
says...
> Nikon are going to great lengths to explain how they capture 12
> megapixels of data with their new "dual" sensor in the D2X. They are
> describing their sensor's photo collector points of the newly released
> Pro D2X cameras as being 2 different types/sizes of collector points...
>
> Sigma did the same with their Foveon sensor SD9 cameras. I think because
> Nikon collect RGB data from each site, they cannot be lumped in with the
> Foveon "invention" of sensor size. Just the same, the Nikon sensor is
> different from a traditional bayer sensor as we know it in a Canon
> camera. How different is not as clear as it should be.
>
> We are aware that smaller photo receptors have their own unique
> problems. Is using two different size receptors in the way inkjet
> printer makers get nicer looking images by using different size droplets
> of ink, have Nikon discovered how to make a high resolving sensor in a
> small size?
>
> So here's the question of the day for thinking people: How many sensors
> are in a D2X Nikon to achieve 12 megapixel images? Careful now... It's a
> loaded question!

I know a few D2X shooters who couldn't give a rats arse as to how Nikon
do whatever they do to get the pics. They simply use the cameras for
(gosh!) taking pictures.

--
Save Photography | Shoot some film today!
Email: drop rods and insert surfaces

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <MPG.1d7ef289ea85bee9899ef@news.verizon.net>,
Brian Baird <no@no.thank.u> wrote:

>In article <e35ah191l0a5hi1o29a7ldtfv6e6748bu9@4ax.com>, JPS@no.komm
>says...
>> >Is what you're looking at the same as the TIFF CFAPattern? If so, 3
>> >would be cyan. However, according to the metadata in my DNG files, the
>> >CFA layout is given as 0,1,1,2 (R/G/G/B), suggesting a standard layout.
>> >But if the values you're talking about are something else, I'm not sure
>> >what to look for; the difference could be in the color matrices.

>> It could also be that every other green has a different sensitivity.

>> Do you know where I can download sample RAW files?

>Is it possible these are masked edge pixels and just labeled weird?

I don't think so. The pre_mul[] values are for light-collecting pixels.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <lrcch1ljk77vq5qi1bp3n00qeamidcacad@4ax.com>, JPS@no.komm
says...
> >Is it possible these are masked edge pixels and just labeled weird?
>
> I don't think so. The pre_mul[] values are for light-collecting pixels.

Strange. If the sensor had an extra (or different) color filter, I'm
sure the marketing and PR guys would be trumpeting it.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:15:28 GMT, Brian Baird <no@no.thank.u> wrote:

>Strange. If the sensor had an extra (or different) color filter, I'm
>sure the marketing and PR guys would be trumpeting it.
>--
>http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird


They were for the last 6 months or so in every magazine ad I saw.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>>If the sensor had an extra (or different) color filter, I'm
>>sure the marketing and PR guys would be trumpeting it.
>
>They were for the last 6 months or so in every magazine ad I saw.

Example please, McLeod? I'm genuinely interested. As I mentioned
above, it would be no real surprise - Sony built the sensor, and they
have already used an RGBE sensor on the F828. But no-one seems to be
trumpeting it now on the D2X (inc. Nikon), and the review sites I've
seen don't mention it.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JPS@no.komm wrote:
[snip]
> I'd see what's going on with it, but dcraw.c is a bit thick for me. I
> can write C code, but I am not good at reading other people's,
> especially when it has grown the way dcraw.c has. What would be a lot
> easier is just having a D2X NEF of a gretag-Macbeth color checker.

http://www.moosepeterson.com/d2x/noise.html

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <1125563071.123080.83020@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"Barry Pearson" <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote:

>JPS@no.komm wrote:
>[snip]
>> I'd see what's going on with it, but dcraw.c is a bit thick for me. I
>> can write C code, but I am not good at reading other people's,
>> especially when it has grown the way dcraw.c has. What would be a lot
>> easier is just having a D2X NEF of a gretag-Macbeth color checker.
>
>http://www.moosepeterson.com/d2x/noise.html

Thanks. This is the kind of stuff I like to see; too much speculation
based on JPEGs going around.

--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><