Full Frame

[maurizio_di_blasi]

Who really need a full frame sensor?

I think that in the future, probably not in the next future, but finally full

frame could be the only one format for the reflex cameras.

Perhaps until the next two years nikon will make a FF D400 and until four or

five years both Nikon and Canon will reduce prices of these cameras' level or

will introduce another, full frame yet, level of cameras.

The camera's price is an investment, but also the purchase of the lenses is an

investment, a bigger one yet!

[leopoldstotch]

What exactly is the point of this?

[colinsouthern]

"Who really need a full frame sensor?"

 

Those who need a 14mm lens to be 14mm.

 

For others who would rather have extra reach at the expense of width (like me) FF is a curse.

 

Horses for courses.

[shambrick007]

You're a few days late to the party - http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00My7O

[bueh]

Me! Full-frame 6x7, please (for the max price of an entry-level Canon dSLR).

[maurizio_di_blasi]

For those who didn't understand the question: I know the FF's merits, and that these merits have a cost. But I try to make a prevision on the next 10 years, what will be the scenario.

For example, is it possible to defend the APS-C format?

On last June Canon announced a 50 Mpx sensor APS-C format, 19 x 28 mm!

Let think to those that in the last years believed to nikon and its dx format.

For decades photographers worked with the same cameras and lenses: they changed, not too often, something in the darkroom, sometimes the film. Now we spend thousands of euros in cameras that will be dead after five years and photoshop is always photoshop.

Probably the run to the Mpx will stop in the next years: not so many people will change a 30Mpx for a 40Mpx? But the run surely will continue! How? Will we see a reflex with a 20 bit A/D converter?

[emre]

THe problem is that those 50MP are not going to be of the same quality as today's cameras, pixel for pixel. You need to enlarge the sensor to keep increasing the pixel count without sacrificing quality, and that does not even take lens limitations into account.

[dmanthree]

Who needs a full frame sensor? Well, I do. Without it my 5D wouldn't be able to capture any images.

 

;-)

[uncle_ziba]

I wonder if we EVER see a cheap full frame or medium format sensor.

I believe the main way to reduce cost of an electronic component is to reduce its footprint on a silicon wafer during production.

 

There is no way to fit more photo sensors on a standard silicon wafer without reducing the physical size.

 

Sensors used to cost more because there were a lot of rejects. My guess cost is now simply tied to the cost of silicon, which like gold or oil, does not become cheaper... Or may be I'm guessing completely wrong..

[ymages]

who needs half a car ?

a FF is a normal camera for normal 24x36 lens

 

the only reason not to buy (or build) a FF is the price or/and bad lenses

[gdanmitchell]

I tend to think that we'll eventually see full frame bodies move down into "lower" levels of

each companies product lineup. Frankly, I don't think we're that far from seeing a 12MP

Canon FF body that competes on price with the Nikon (crop sensor) D300 - in other

words, somewhere in the $2000 range.

 

The only reason that crop sensor bodies were built in the first place is that full frame

sensors were unavailable/too expensive. If the cost had been lower all along - and it

wasn't, for good reasons - we probably would never have seen the development of crop

bodies.

 

As costs come down the mix will change. There will likely continue to be crop bodies for

some times still, but eventually I suspect that SLR photography will once again converge

on a unified format.

 

For those who think that sensor costs cannot come down, note that the 22+MP 1DsMKIII

will cost about the same as the 16+MP 1DsMKII. Unless there are some new rules at work

here, the cost of a 16MP sensor isn't going to be the same as that of the 22 MP sensor.

What this means is that it is likely that a 16MP body could cost about the same as the

current 12 MP bodies, and that 12MP bodies could cost less than they did a couple years

ago.

 

On top of this, now that there is actual competition in the FF DSLR space, it won't be as

easy for a company like Canon to sustain the same price structure that worked when they

were the only option.

 

Dan

[dogbert]

In the film days 35 mm became a standard because there were economies of scale in processing a standardised piece of film. This no longer applies with digital. Canon have said they see multiple formats as an advantage with digital, and I think they are right. I shoot film and digital and I could see uses for both FF and 1.6 bodies in my arsenal.

 

FF and lots of megapixels suits studio photographers, 1.3 suits photojournalists, who want a bit of extra reach but also decent viewfinders and quality. 1.6 works for consumers who don't need the ultimate in quality but are happy that their zooms have a bit of extra reach. In the distant future, I would not be suprised if canon offered different formats in the drebel line - both crop and FF. They and other manufacturers already do this in the P&S line offering models with telezooms and the same models with wide (sic) 28 mm equivalent zooms.

[jimstrutz]

Well as long as Nikon asks a mega premium for their FF camera, prices will not coming down very quick. I agree, prices will drop, but they will drop for all DSLRs, and crop sensor cameras will continue to be considerably less than full frame versions. APS-C isn't going away for a long time.

 

As for pixels, it doesn't cost much more to cut a sensor into 20 million photo sites than it does to cut it up into *only* 10 million. The production cost is largely tied to the size and price of the silicone not the number of pixels. Obviously that cost has come down, but I suspect we're reaching the limits of diminishing returns and price erosion will slow in the future. Actually, it already has.

 

Getting a full frame camera to market at $2000 will probably happen in the next few years, but getting much below that will be a long time. Partly because of the costs and partly because there is no profit in driving the price down too quick. Sony isn't going to give away full frame sensors, and Nikon has no incentive to cut it's margins as long as they can sell what they make.

[steven_moseley1]

Hi,

 

An often forgoten PLUS of full frame is a decent larger viewfinder. I hate the pokey crap little viewfinders of smaller sensor or smaller format cameras...

 

cheers Steve.

[KenPapai]

Canon's $1999 full frame DSLR (16MP) will be in your hands within a year. It will be the FF version of the 40D (5D2). I would *BET* heavily on it.