DSLR with back illuminated sensor

Now that back illuminates sensors and their high ISO benefits are starting to become more mainstream, what do you think the chances are that Canon will put one in a DSLR? I'm thinking the 60D is a prime candidate to introduce such a sensor to crop body camera and would hopefully put the ISO performance on par with Nikon and still have somewhere around 15-18 mpixels resolution.

Isn't the high ISO noise already on par with Nikon? I'm pretty sure the 7D meets or beats the D300s and D90.

(No idea about the new sensor tech, though. Might be expensive to add to a large sensor)

From what I understand, on P&S cameras, a large percentage of the surface area of the sensor is taken up by circuitry so the actual light sensitive area is relatively small compared to overall sensor area. Backlighting just makes more area available to capture light by moving the circuitry to the back of the sensor. DSLR sensors have a much larger light sensitive area and space taken up by the circuitry is relatively small in comparison so the gains would not be as great as on P&S cameras. Backlighting is not a new concept, its just the small P&S cameras didn't have the on board processing power to deal with the extra noise that results from backlighting.

tkbslc wrote in post #10215875
Isn't the high ISO noise already on par with Nikon? I'm pretty sure the 7D meets or beats the D300s and D90.

(No idea about the new sensor tech, though. Might be expensive to add to a large sensor)

To answer your question, no. Canon isn't even close to Nikon's high ISO capability...unfortuna​tely.

mosesport wrote in post #10224998
To answer your question, no. Canon isn't even close to Nikon's high ISO capability...unfortuna​tely.

How are you coming to this conclusion? When I compare the two APS-C twins, the 7D and D300s at 6400 on imaging-resource, it seems like the 7D had loads more detail and lot less chroma blotches. Likewise with the T2i and D5000/D90

mosesport wrote in post #10224998
To answer your question, no. Canon isn't even close to Nikon's high ISO capability...unfortuna​tely.

Yeah, if you can afford a D3s
(I still struggle with not having one and having a savings account big enough to get one..)

The D90 came out years ago, and the ISO 2000+ STILL looks better than even 1600 on the 7D/T2i. Nikon is lightyears ahead. I'm a Canon user myself...so it's not like I'm trying to start a fight with you about it. Haha. It's just true.

mosesport wrote in post #10225132
The D90 came out years ago, and the ISO 2000+ STILL looks better than even 1600 on the 7D/T2i. Nikon is lightyears ahead. I'm a Canon user myself...so it's not like I'm trying to start a fight with you about it. Haha. It's just true.

I'm happy to concede to Nikon if the proof is there. But, like I said if I look at the tests I am just not seeing it.

http://www.photography​bay.com …-vs-nikon-d300s-iso-test/

D90 is not better than D300s, either. Same sensor but newer processor on the D300s.

Also: http://www.cameralabs.​com …Rebel_T2i/noise​_RAW.shtml (and remember T2i has 50% more pixels)

I don't have a D300s to do a comparison with real world shots, but looking at the ISO 6400 test shots on imaging-resource the D300s gets its ass kicked.

mosesport wrote in post #10224998
To answer your question, no. Canon isn't even close to Nikon's high ISO capability...unfortuna​tely.

That's true, Canon isn't close to Nikon's noise performance, they FAR exceed it. The fact is, Canon matches Nikon's high ISO performance at considerably higher resolution in many cases.