How soon for full size/affordable CMSO sensors on Canons?

[rodger_ricks]

As an amateur film user presently shooting with an EOS 5 and who

likes to shoot with wide angles, I'm an impatiently waiting for the

day when there is a comsumer priced DSLR that has a full size sensor

so I can use my current collection of lenses without the 1.6

factor. I know there is the new Canon wide angle available that

will do an admirable job, but it sounds like such is an $800 stopgap

until the full size CMSO sensors become available because I buy into

the theory that Canon has such an investment in the EOS lineup, they

ultimately will go to full size sensors. I'm also afraid to make

the plunge and buy a Digital Rebel or 20D for fear the pricing of

full size sensor begins to drop, and I will feel a need to re-tool

my camera bag again.

 

Does anyone have real perspective or rumors as to timing when a full

size Canon DSLR for an amateur becomes sub $1500? Thanks. Rodger

[godfrey]

Large sensor cameras 24x36mm in size will cost a lot of money for the foreseeable future.

There are good reasons to stick with the APS-C sized sensors, from a manufacturing point

of view.

 

Figure 5 years and the 24x36mm sensor cameras should drop about 30% in price, that's

my prognosis.

 

Canon and Nikon (and virtually everyone else) are standardizing their popularly priced

cameras around the current 1.5-1.6x sensor format, which means you'll see more lenses

tailored to this format in coming years rather than lower priced, consumer larger format

bodies.

 

Godfrey

[jimstrutz]

Its all rumors. Some say 2 years, others 5 or more. Personally, I'm thinking 10 if ever, but would love to be surprised. The typical Moore's Law concept doesn't apply to this, because we're not talking about denser electronics, but larger slices of crystal. That's a lot more difficult to make ecconomic. Who knows, there just might be a breakthrough right around the corner. But I doubt it.

[jimstrutz]

What Godfrey said.

[phule]

http://www.photo.net/oped/bobatkins/full_frame.html

[david_kieltyka]

As I see it digital SLRs simply continue the trend toward ever smaller formats that the photo industry has been following since the beginning. 24x36mm sensors will likely become the new medium format while APS (1.5x & 1.6x) sensors will supplant 35mm to become the prosumer SLR format of choice. Predicting prices leads you into highly speculative territory, though, because something could always happen or be announced tomorrow that would turn the whole game on its head...for good or bad.

 

Personally I like the APS-C format. I don't think it's a stopgap at all but rather just a format that makes sense given current technology. It'll be around for awhile--years, decades, who knows--before being supplanted by something else. As always happens.

 

-Dave-

[jon_austin]

You're in good company awaiting an affordable, full-frame sensor dSLR. I think the 5-year-out estimate is as good as any right now.

 

You can safely invest $1500 in a new 20D and acquire a body that produces images nearly as good as the 3x more expensive 1D Mark II, and that should give you years of service. And you're not the only one who has decided to stay away from the new small-frame (EF-S) lenses.

 

But for true wide angle, your only choices today are: sticking with film, buying a very expensive ($8,000) dSLR body, investing in EF-S lenses and gambling on the long-term viability of the format, or shooting with a fish-eye lens and defishing in post processing.

[mark_chappell]

<I>But for true wide angle, your only choices today are: sticking with film, buying a very

expensive ($8,000) dSLR body, investing in EF-S lenses and gambling on the long-term

viability of the format, or shooting with a fish-eye lens and defishing in post

processing.</i><P>

 

... or maybe buying the Sigma 12-24, which works on full-frame cameras as well as APS

DSLRs (roughly a 18-20 mm equivalent with the latter) and is quite a good optic (if not

very fast at f4.5-5.6)

[carl smith]

<i>As I see it digital SLRs simply continue the trend toward ever smaller formats that the photo industry has been following since the beginning. 24x36mm sensors will likely become the new medium format while APS (1.5x & 1.6x) sensors will supplant 35mm to become the prosumer SLR format of choice. </i><br><br>I completely agree. If we look at it as a performance/imager size issue, digital will probably move everything down an arbitrary step. I'm pretty sure I've said the same thing on this site before, the 24x36mm frame size in the digital world is almost going to be like the new medium format.<br><br>I have no idea when prices will drop. I also don't know what size silicon wafer Canon is using, however improvements in yield and going to larger wafers can make the process more cost effective resulting in less expensive products. The 1.5/1.6x sensors 4 years ago were many times more expensive than what they cost now. It's unreasonable to assume the full frames won't follow the same pattern, however it may take longer and I certainly don't ever expect to see full frames selling at the same price as smaller sensors. At least not the quality ones.

[frankleung]

David Kieltyka wrote: 24x36mm sensors will likely become the new medium format while APS (1.5x & 1.6x) sensors will supplant 35mm to become the prosumer SLR format of choice.

 

I totally agree with David's opinion. Whatever standard camera industry takes is driven by consumers' desire. From technology point of view, it is extremely hard to process 24mm x 36mm CMOS sensor, and it is very expensvie. Semiconductor industry always try to shrink the die size to lower the cost by diminish the layout geometry, not to blow up the die size.

 

By if consumers insist on 24mm x 36mm CMOS sensors so that they can utilize their existing 35mm film lenses, plus if they refuse to buy any APS lenses, camera industry will pack several small CMOS sensors into one single 24mm x 36mm geometry. That will create huge mega-pixel cameras and compatible with the existing 35mm film lenses.

 

It is up to you to make it happens.

[tom_burke3]

I'm with Jim, Godfrey and everyone else on this, with a feeling that it will be longer rather

than quicker. One additional reason why is this: enthusiast digital photographers are just

about the only people wanting bigger components. All other users of electronic circuitry

are perfectly content with the alternative soution, which is the same functionality on ever

smaller (and thus cheaper) components. I suspect that the number of enthusiast digital

photographers is far too low to shift the electronic fabrication industry into a new course.

[mike_elek]

Canon has no incentive to drop the prices. As one of only two full-frame digitals on the market, it would be foolish for them to drop the price of any full-frame camera below a certain price point, which seems to be $8,000.

 

I'd be interested in knowing the actual cost of production. I think it's safe to say that it's not anywhere near $8,000. But they seem to have found a price that the market will bear.

 

Only if/when other camera makers enter the full-frame sensor market with a comparable quality product will we see a decline in Canon's price. In the meantime, Canon will continue to update its top-of-the-line product with real and/or imagined improvements to keep the product line fresh and the price where it wants.

[chiswick_john]

You will never see cheap full frame sensors - it's much easier and far cheaper to design and make shorter focal length zooms like the 10-22 than make bigger sensors. Shorter focal length lenses are existing technology - cheap large sensors are in the distant future. Many 3rd party manufacturers are now bringing out wide zooms for small sensors - in 6 months this will be a non issue.

[erick_kyogoku]

No one has yet mentioned the possibility of $1500 proam DSLRs making an iterative step

to a 1.3 factor such as in the <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/

cameras/canon-1d-mkii.shtml

">1D Mark II</a>. When the D60 was around I told myself I'd wait for the next body,

expecting a 1.3 or 1.0 factor. That was overly optimistic. I bought the 10D anyhow, it was

a compelling body and I've

been exceedingly happy with it. Yet I still hold on to the hope that a D30 or D40 will have

a 1.3 factor. That would please me very much. A 1.3 factor is quite liveable, while 1.5-6

is a little bit cramped.

[chiswick_john]

"No one has yet mentioned the possibility of $1500 proam DSLRs making an iterative step to a 1.3 factor " - why would Canon do this - it would make their EFS lenses obsolete at a stroke. The 1.3 crop factor on the 1D 2 is an interim and temporary step until they can fit a full frame sensor with very good low light/high ISO capability. Get with reality people - 1.6/5 crop APS sized sensors and EFS lenses are here to stay and are intended to replace traditional 35mm film capture. Full frame sensors are for pro's who want to replace med format film capture. There will never be full frame cheap sensors for consumer use.

[robert_g]

Does anyone know what happened to the 4/3 system?<br/><br/>

<a href="http://www.four-thirds.org" target="window">http://www.four-thirds.org</a>

[erick_kyogoku]

"No one has yet mentioned the possibility of $1500 proam DSLRs making an iterative step

to a 1.3 factor " -<i> 'why would Canon do this - it would make their EFS lenses obsolete

at a

stroke.'</i> To the contrary John, most of Canon's lenses are not EF-S. In fact there are

only

a few of these and one can imagine that they don't account for a large portion of the

aggregate EOS lens market. The D10, D1 Mark II, D1s Mark II, and the entire range of EOS

film bodies do not accept EF-S lenses, yet they do not render EF-S lenses 'obsolete at a

stroke.'

<p>

In fact, employing your own logic: <i>" The 1.3 crop factor on the 1D 2 is an interim and

temporary step"</i> -- one can point to the EF-S as a temporary step to deal with the 1.6

crop

factor's limitations, hence pointing an accusatory finger at EF-S as the stopgap measure.

This doesn't mean it isn't economically viable for either a 1.3 crop factor or EF-S to coexist

in the market. I assure you if a 1.3 crop factor D30 were released, there would be plenty

of rejoicing people who dump their cheap EF-S lenses on eBay to win the benefits of a 1.3

factor.

<p>

<i>"Get with reality people"</i> - An eloquent addition to fortify your post. John, forgive

me

for

stating the obvious: your mild manners and politeness toward others is commendable. If

only

the rest of us could be so considerate and thoughtful, what a wonderful world it would

be... Thank you for sharing.

[donald_choi]

"I assure you if a 1.3 crop factor D30 were released, there would be plenty of rejoicing people who dump their cheap EF-S lenses on eBay to win the benefits of a 1.3 factor. "

 

I don't think too many people will be rejoicing when their D30 costs $4000.

[franklin_b]

Your best bet is wait for the price of used 1Ds to drop to $1500. It will happen sooner than canon will a full framed DSLR targeting amateurs at that price point. Some used 1D are already selling between $1700-$1800.

[david_kieltyka1]

Forget 1.3x...the 1D MkII is likely the last Canon camera you'll see with that format. Unlike APS-C it truly is a stopgap. Canon is concentrating on their full-frame and APS-C fabrication and has managed to improve yields and data throughput as well as reduce costs with both. So their next photojournalism D-SLR will almost surely use a 24x36mm sensor. Feel free to rake me over the coals in public if I'm wrong on this. But I'm not. :-)

 

-Dave-

[ilkka_nissila]

Why would a PJ want a large sensor? I thought that was one of the applications where the small-sensor DSLRs are loved, because they do make the rig smaller for equivalent shots.

[carl smith]

<i>Forget 1.3x...the 1D MkII is likely the last Canon camera you'll see with that format. Unlike APS-C it truly is a stopgap. Canon is concentrating on their full-frame and APS-C fabrication and has managed to improve yields and data throughput as well as reduce costs with both. So their next photojournalism D-SLR will almost surely use a 24x36mm sensor. Feel free to rake me over the coals in public if I'm wrong on this. But I'm not. :-)</i><br><br>Well that would be nice except if you actually had that information you wouldn't be talking. I suspect the current 1D is either the last or there might be one more revision in a couple years before full frame cameras from Canon drop below 5000 with similar speed performance to the 1D.

[peter_phan]

<i>Does anyone have real perspective or rumors as to timing when a full size Canon DSLR for an amateur becomes sub $1500? Thanks. Rodger</i>

<p>

It's probably still a very long ways off. Even if they were to drop the price of full frame in half (from the current $8000 price) that only gets you to $4000. Now lets say they downgrade the body to decrease cost. That might get you to $3000. But that's still twice as much as $1500. And none of this is likely to happen for at least a few more product cycles. Canon's current product cycles run about 1.5 to 2 years.

<p>

Your best option for the near future is to get a used Canon 1Ds, or a Kodak SLR/c.

[mark u]

The idea that reduction in form factor is the holy grail of photography seems to have reached practical limits. Tiny sensors are available in digicams, but they come with the penalty that the pixels are too small to capture low light levels while operating at higher ISOs - and this is a limitation of the physics of light. The alternative is to accept lower resolution to increase pixel size. But APS sensor cameras are as large as their full frame film bretheren, and this is unlikely to change unless someone can devise a way to make pixels that have a much wider acceptance angle, and thus allow lens elements to be closer to the sensor. That might allow something the size of an Olympus mju to boast an APS sensor and thus useable high ISO at acceptable resolution. Full frame sensors remain much more expensive than APS ones primarily due to low yield. Yet yields on full frame sensors are now up to the levels achieved with APS sensors a few years ago, while APS yields have increased dramatically. Yields are well approximated by the formula exp( -(sensor area)x(average error rate per unit area)). Manufacturing cost is then roughly (wafer cost per unit area)x(sensor area)/(yield). Reducing the error rate per unit area to 40% of current levels would increase full frame yields to current APS levels (since APS is about 40% of the area of full frame), producing sensors at 2.5 times the cost of current APS ones. Now, APS sensors and associated electronics sell for about $600 retail including a healthy profit margin (say $800 for a low end DSLR of which $200 is the retail value of the equivalent film body). Multiply the $600 by 2.5 for full frame, and you'd get $1500, plus a bit for the body, less a bit for the effects of competition reducing profit margins, and the lower than pro rata cost of ancilliary electronics. This seems eminently achievable in a few years, given trends in rates of improvement in yields. The rest is down to marketing.

[charlie_vigue]

"If you had that info you wouldn't be talking"

 

Everyone has that info - it was stated publicly, by Canon Executives, that the 1.3 crop is gone after the 1D2, and the the next 1 series digital (Mark 3, I suppose) would be a unified full frame high speed body. Look in the photo.net press releases, Bob quoted it. Makes complete sense too, now that Canon has folded and is embracing APS-C as a long term solution.

 

And I suspect that with more competition, from Kodak, Nikon (high resolution, but still 1.5) as well as medium format players the price is going to drop. I'd be shocked to see $2000 in the near future though. Maybe more like $5000 is reasonable in the next 2-5 years I bet.