androidlad

Sensor module MOQ unit pricing revealed: IMX410 (A7III, Z6, Mavo LF) 110000JPY IMX251 (A7R II/III) 120000JPY IMX309 (D850, Z7) 130000JPY IMX455 (future 8K camera) 150000JPY (Windowed 8K & 16Bit ADC) IMX435 (future 8K camera) 380000JPY (Ultimate all-in-one sensor with wide DR & high sensitivity)

http://amzn.eu/d/6IN9v8B

Film cameras can exhibit very mild rolling shutter effect, as the rotary shutter mechanism sweeps vertically across the film plane.

Just a reminder that film cameras/digital cameras with mechanical shutter aren't global shutter, that half moon shutter doesn't expose one complete frame at the same time.

Those datasheets are indeed intended for off-the-shelf sensors. But they represent sensor architectures Sony have developed, usually denoted by the number (IMX235 - A7S/A7SII, IMX410 - A7III, IMX251 -A7RII/A7RIII), the letter suffix denotes variants of sensors with different feature set, different interface or other alterations. Sometimes Sony change the number though, for example IMX455 and IMX551 are based on the same architecture. Low megapixel still means better low-light performance? Well based on the datasheet, many image quality metrics including sensitivity on the 36MP IMX435 are better than A7S II.

It was totally screen grab, based on empirical evidence from comparing with the original master, I don't care/need what you say. Of course your colours are way off.

Looks like IMX455 will be sold to Nikon

Screen grab from online video will never show anywhere near an accurate representation of colour, I wouldn't put them in vectorscope and use as critical reference.

4K is super-sampled from 6240 x 3510 (<30p), 5266 x 2962 (60p).

Nah. Take IMX455 vs IMX551 for example, IMX455 restricts video mode sensor readout to only 1 ADC while IMX551 can use all 12. The volume of data is the same, it's a drastic difference in speed.

These new sensors are specifically designed for industrial and/or consumer digital stills camera with video capabilities. And Sony have put just enough restrictions on the video side in these sensors so they won't cannibalise the cinema lineup.

A new sensor just surfaced, IMX455, a stripped down version of IMX551 available off-the-shelf. Effective pixels: 9600x6400 Recommend recording pixels: 60MP 11/12/14/16Bit ADC Full Pixel 9fps/14Bit ADC SLVS-EC 8Lane Single ADC in Video Mode 12-ADC in Still Picture Mode Native ISO 64/400

2K/HD on X-T3 is derived from weighted horizontal pixel binning and vertical line skipping, it's one of the main features of the 3.76um generation Sony sensor, it's an on-chip operation so less work for Fuji and less processing requirement.

X-T3 result on cinema5D is erroneous and that number exceeds the sensor spec on the datasheet. I'm an X-T3 owner and I have tested it myself. Again, rolling shutter performance is solely a sensor characteristic, Imaging Resource obviously didn't get that. The processor helps with off-chip tasks such as supersampling.

Current generation ALEXA/AMIRA have rolling shutter about 2ms. And rolling shutter on X-T3 in 4K is 20ms (<30p), 16ms (60p). Rolling shutter performance has nothing to do with processor (ISP), it's a sensor characteristic, largely determined by ADC design. X-T3 is able to achieve this relatively fast readout by sacrificing quality for speed with 12bit ADC (compared to 14bit ADC in stills mode). Regarding the 8K sensors from Sony, rolling shutter can potentially be even lower based on the chip design (18-parallel ADC which is more than twice that of A9). Combined with 12bit ADC, 8K readout could technically be well under 10ms (A9 electronic shutter in stills mode has a transit time of 6.25ms). But it's up to Sony to decide if they fully implement it in video mode (it wasn't available in A9 video mode).

That whole "low megapixels = class leading low light" notion is already a thing of the past. Using fewer pixels/large pixels used to be a way to lower cumulative read noise and hence increasing SNR. But with all of the rapid advancement in semiconductor tech, there are many more effective ways to increase SNR. One of the perfect examples would be A7III sensor IMX410, it performs better in low light than A7SII both in stills and video department, while having twice the pixel count.

Yes with X-T3, latency is minimal. It can even load calibration 3D LUT, then creative 3D LUT on top of it!

This is the best all around monitor: https://***URL not allowed***/swit-cm55-affordable-lutenabled-55-monitor/ Grabbed it on cyber monday sale for only 189EUR and free shipping!

IMX435AQJ datasheet, I'd be surprised if A7S III didn't use this sensor/variants of this sensor.

Another possible sensor candidate for A7S III - IMX435: Since A7S/A7SII use IMX235, it's possible that IMX435 is a successor. Also interesting that IMX435 only appeared briefly in the source database, then everything about it was wiped without a trace. Previously mentioned 60MP IMX551 could be A7RIV after all, since A7RII/III use IMX251.

I didn't know you have friends! ? Apparently word got out

Nah, it may work for tungsten/halogen lights that flicker around 50/60hz, but there are millions of different frequencies that modern lights could flicker at.

On an interesting side note, my friends over at ARRI Germany told me the response to ALEXA LF has been very underwhelming, and at the same time the demand for Alexa 65 has skyrocketed.

https://www.sony-semicon.co.jp/products_en/IS/sensor0/industry/products/industry.html

The global shutter variants come at the expense of significant dynamic range & sensitivity loss. Current off-the-shelf global shutter sensors, even from Sony, are not designed for consumer cameras. Of course the one used in F55 is not for sale.