I would think it is more likely to be as Mark said; that they don't want to
spend money on this project right now in view of the economic climate. On
the other hand they probably don't want to can the project either because if
somebody big was interested, and willing to put money up front they could
afford to get the part into full production. Initial yields on
semiconductors (particularly large ones) are always very low and it takes
investment of millions of dollars to get the yield up from those seen in
initial batches, to a good enough yield for profitability and sensible
retail cost, involving months of redesign, tweaking and experimentation.
Regards,
/\/\ick...
+----------------------------+
| |
__/) Mick Maguire |
((((| Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
(\\\\_/) ICQ: 48609010 |
\ / |
\ /---------------------------+
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kent Gittings
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 10:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Pentax digital info
Probably means they had some kind of production glitch and little or no
useable yield on the initial runs. And now with Pentax jumping ship they may
not be able to continue for cost reasons.
35mm size CCD arrays are also the preferred size for medium format digital
backs, which up till now I think are made by using multiple smaller arrays.
Kent Gittings
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mark Roberts
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 9:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Pentax digital info
I considered that but my sources tell me it's not the case: Philips simply
isn't making this part at all at this time for anyone; their fabs are
producing
just parts they can sell in big quantities.
>Don't forget that the bigger the chip die size the lower the initial yield.
>Possibly they have found that they can't produce enough good chips to meet
>their contract requirements for both Contax and Pentax so Pentax may have
>bowed out because they could not get guaranteed enough chips to have the
>required number of cameras for sale at introduction.
>Lots of possible scenarios. Maybe a low yield on the contract allows them
>to
>charge more per chip and Pentax didn't want the camera to get even more
>expensive while maybe Contax didn't care because their target consumer
tends
>to be more affluent than Pentax's.
>Kent Gittings
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mark Roberts
>Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 9:07 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Pentax digital info
>
>
>From what little more I've been able to dig up I'm pretty sure the reason
>Philips is not making the CCD is for financial reasons rather than
>technical:
>The semiconductor business was in a big slump *before* the Sept 11
terrorist
>attacks and is doing even more poorly now. They just aren't in a position
>to
>produce anything that isn't going to sell in big numbers (and a 6 megapixel
>CCD
>falls squarely into that category).
>
>I suspect they're hoping to produce this part when the economy picks up
at
>a
>later date (they insist it's an active part in their catalog even though
>they
>won't give me pricing or availability). This would explain why Pentax was
>so
>diplomatic in their announcement, not saying "Philips has bailed out and
>left us
>holding the bag". They want to be on friendly terms so they can use this
>part
>when it finally does become available. (A little company like Pentax is
in
>no
>position to upset a multinational behemoth like Philips even slightly.)
>
>
>"lbparis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Mark,
>>
>>I'm personally pretty sure you are right. I expect to see a
>>Pentax digital SLR body in the 5MP range for no more than
>>$2KUS (maybe less). In which case, I'll be right in line with
>>an order.
>>
>>Len
>>---
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Mark Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 1:40 PM
>>Subject: Pentax digital info
>>
>>
>>> Philips is almost certainly having some *major* problems with
>>the production
>>> of the 6 megapixel CCD.
>>>
>>> Since I'm the Components Engineer responsible for
>>semiconductors (mostly
>>> discretes but including all optoelectronic devices) at my
>>company I've been
>>> doing some investigating. I've been going back and forth with
>>their North
>>> American distributors for over a week and they still won't
>>cough up pricing
>>> *or* availability information. The latest voice mail I got
>>from the local
>>> rep tried to steer me toward looking for alternative devices.
>>It seems that
>>> no one at, or associated with, Philips even wants to *talk*
>>about this device.
>>>
>>> Considering that they've just lost one significant customer
>>for this part
>>> with the cancellation of the Pentax 6MP digital SLR,
>>unavailibility of this
>>> part is more than suspicious, IMO, and indicates they're
>>having major problems
>>> of some kind. Perhaps yield issues, perhaps the soft
>>semiconductor market
>>> has forced them to cut back in general and this part was one
>>that got the
>>> axe. Who knows.
>>>
>>> Don't know if this the same CCD that was to be used in the
>>Contax digital
>>> SLR. The Philips press release only mentioned Pentax
>>(http://www.semiconductors.philips.com/publications/content/file
>>_735.html)
>>>
>>> I'll post more information when/if I get it but I think I'm
>>getting about
>>> as much as I'm going to find out without a personal spy inside
>>Philips!
>>> We'll see.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mark Roberts
>>> www.robertstech.com
>>> -
>>> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To
>>unsubscribe,
>>> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't
>>forget to
>>> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>>-
>>This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
>>go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
>>visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
>--
>Mark Roberts
>www.robertstech.com
>-
>This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
>go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
>visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
>
>
>**********************************************************************
>This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
>intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
>are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
>the system manager.
>
>This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
>MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
>
>www.mimesweeper.com
>**********************************************************************
>-
>This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
>go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
>visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
>
>
--
Mark Roberts
www.robertstech.com
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
