waiting for a full frame Sony alpha

Even if the new alpha seems to be the best in its class, Sony is well able to

provide for a full frame sensor to accomodate for the full potential of

Minolta and Zeiss glorious glass.

The question is not what Sony is able to do, but what will be the most profitable for them. The only camera manufacturer who has found it profitable to make "FF" sensors for DSLRs is Canon. That is not likely to change.

As much as I would love for this to happen (I have a TON of Minolta glass), I have serious doubts it will.

Full frame or not when should we expect the next Sony Alpha DSLR to be release? Is there going to be more lenses from them?

Keep waiting.

If someone was going to make a sensor and have it even more cost effective than Canon, it would be Sony.

Why do you think Sony has so many full frame lenses while they make not one full frame camera?

How long do you intend to wait, and how much are you ready to spend? I hope you don't expect a $1500 FF camera next year.

Nuno, I'm also waiting for one. For those who think it won't happen because it's "too expensive" don't realize that we're talking about an electronic component. Prices for electronic items keep dropping in price as technology advances.

I expect the next release will be something along the lines of a Nikon D200. Semi-pro build with an APS sensor.

If I were Sony, I'd be considering the success of that camera into whether or not to release a camera with a full-frame sensor.

Nate, with a 'legacy' of 16 million lenses, the vast majority designed for the 35mm frame size, Sony would have little to lose by offering a full-frame DSLR. It would make them stand out from most of the other players in the DSLR field. That is until they sell the sensor to Nikon.

 

No one is going to put down Sony for doing so, except for those users who bought the lenses designed only for the APS-C format. And even those probably have one or two lenses that are FF capable.I don't think you'll hear much moaning and groaning from the majority of former Minolta/Konica/Minolta owners.

I forgot to add to my previous post-

 

Perhaps, Sony will incorporate a switch on a full-frame DSLR that is switched on when a lens designed with the smaller sensor size is put on the body. This way, when the image is displayed on the LCD screen the image is displayed as it would look as if the sensor were an APS-C sensor, and not shown with all the dark area around the image. And the image is captured as if shot in the APS-C format. That way ALL of the lens owners will be accommodated. It is a simple feat and do-able if the sensor itself has enough mega-pixels. It will also allow the Sony to advertise it as a built-in '1.5X tele-converter'. The loss of the extra pixels may limit the maximum size you can comfortable enlarge to, but will allow at least an 8X10 or 11X14 enlargement.

 

Only from the mind of Minolta... I mean Sony.

And what about a circular sensor? ;-) That would use the lenses optimally, using the full image the lenses are providing. And while making the picture one would be able to choose the desired format in-camera, portrait, landscape, square (that would be odd), and even circular.

Neither Sony nor Km or Nikon has released a full frame camera for the same reason. There isn't an appropriate sensor available, if there is one hidden away, it's not inexpensive enough or ready for production volume at a marketable price. The lenses are ff lenses ofr the same reason as Nikons and Pentax's. They are legacy from the film design era. Outside of a handful of "new" small sensor lenses from the usual suspects (or the 4/3s but that's a different effort), essentially all the current lenses are hold-overs from film era design efforts. They work fins and all of the design and manufacturing is amortized. Truly "new" lenses of any sort would require design and manufacturing capabilities to be developed and paid off. Free is free.

"Neither Sony nor Km or Nikon has released a full frame camera for the same reason. There isn't an appropriate sensor available, if there is one hidden away, it's not inexpensive enough or ready for production volume at a marketable price."

 

Craig, perhaps you forgot Sony develops and makes sensors. Just because they didn't have one in the past doesn't mean Sony won't have one in the future. Canon didn't have a full-frame sensor until they developed one. Sony is not an assembler of someone else's parts but a manufacturuer of parts. Just as there were at one time no plasma TVs, someone developed one. There were no airplanes, so how can we fly from city to city? Because someone invented one. As for price, how do you know what new production techniques are out there which will drive down prices. No one had a DSLR for under $1000, until Canon came out with one.

 

"The lenses are ff lenses ofr the same reason as Nikons and Pentax's. They are legacy from the film design era."

 

Okay, but what about the three Zeiss lenses? They are new designs, not 'legacy' lenses, so why not make them as an APS-C design? By doing so, they would be lighter and less expensive.

 

Craig your arguement is full of holes.

Nah, Sony will never release a full frame camera. It is too difficult. The sensor is too expensive. It is too high tech. Only Canon is able to do something like that. (And a few companies who make medium format sensors.) Look at Sony's first DSLR entry. It is basically a mixture of KM 5D and Nikon 200 at half the price of the latter. If Sony made a similar mixture of 1Ds and D2X, nobody would buy it and it would not work. Sony will surely stop making more SLRs and go back to digicams. In any case, they are not a pro oriented company, except in video and audio and... Come on guys, keep on dreaming. I, at least, am waiting.

You will be waiting a LONG LONG LONG time.

Andrew, when you say, "You will be waiting a LONG LONG LONG time" How LONG are you talking about?

I can always change my mind and stop waiting if it feels like too long. I will first wait until Photokina. Then until end of the year. Then I will decide how much longer based on what Sony actually does introduce.

Ilkka, if nothing is shown at Photokina, a trade show held every other year, the next two major shows would be CES in January, and PMA in February. Both will be held in Las Vegas. Some posters to this forum feel that Sony will only be showing the A100 at Photokina. That may be. However, with all the questions of why there are so many lenses that are suited for a full-frame DSLR, not only on this forum, but the photo magazines as well, Sony may show something under the table.

To do a cost effective sensor, Sony needs to go to CMOS technology (as Canon) and stop their CCD ones.

CCD tech is more expensive so a FF in CCD will cost a little fortune, beeing this the most expensive component.

 

But maybe they can get the money back trough selling expensives lenses.

I do not think you need to wait so long, wait until the end of the year maybe....

Gustavo, one of the reviews I read seemed to be surprised that the sensor in the A100 was a CCD and not a CMOS. I don't remember eading that Sony gave a reason for this. Sony is fully capable of producing a CMOS sensor, whether an APS-C or Full-Frame sized one. Whether we'll see one in another camera is up in the air. Perhaps they want to really have some NEW technology in their next presentation. I hope so.

"Sony needs to go to CMOS technology (as Canon) and stop their CCD ones"

 

Why does one have to stop making this sort of sensors to make another type?

 

I thought many medium format backs use CCD. If CMOS is better and cheaper why do they use CCD in MF? Or is this again something that only Canon is capable of doing?

CCD is an older and proved technology, CMOS sensor is a "newer" tech.

Satelites and space cameras uses CCD and larger than FF.

 

Why do you think Canon do their own sensors? (in the DSLR, they still buy CCD from Sony for som P&S), their are be able to earn more money.

 

The CCD tech is more expensive, you need more clocks (inside the chip)to control the transistors, while the CMOS has a simpler clock strategy.

Sure SOny can do a sensor big as an stadium but who is going to pay for that?

 

Comparing sensor mm2 prices I am sure the CMOS is cheaper.