waiting for a full frame Sony alpha

[andrew robertson]

I doubt Canon is working on a Foveon style sensor. They have their own proven technology.

[craig_gillette]

There was just a recent article in one of the forums/news sides that discussed a maker with a diamond array, like Fuji has at times. Believe it was Sony but couldn't find it again to pull it back. I'd expect all are doing research and looking for new ways to beat the others. It's not cheap and it's not easy - yield is a huge consideration. Several years ago, a Fry's opened somewhat near me, one of the freebies Intel was giving away were key fobs with an embedded Pentium priocessor chip. Kind of makes you wonder about yield numbers when they can afford the chip in production quantities and to even consider making customer gifts out of the flawed items. Larger than full frame is going to be a whole new market and set of players as there is essentially no legacy lens using community. That menas, no one is held to the home brands.

[andrew robertson]

"Larger than full frame is going to be a whole new market and set of players as there is

essentially no legacy lens using community. That menas, no one is held to the home

brands."

 

I don't believe that medium format digital will ever be more than a niche market, and it is

likely that the only companies that release such a system are already in the MF business.

Designing and building medium format lenses is much more costly and labor intensive as

the coverage is so much larger.

 

Look at how hard the Mamiya ZD has flopped, despite the great image quality. That

example will chill camera companies for a long time to come.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Re <I>"I don't believe that medium format digital will ever be more than a niche market, and it is likely that the only companies that release such a system are already in the MF business. Designing and building medium format lenses is much more costly and labor intensive as the coverage is so much larger."</i><BR><BR>MF backs for a Hasselblad were used and available over a decade ago. Backs that fit 4x5 cameras are over 10 years old too. In both cases they work around existing lenses. The cost issue is not the lenses, but the sensors. MF and 4x5 lenses are plentifull, and dropping in actual used prices. Larger area sensors have always been expensive, and low volumes sold.

[craig_gillette]

Kelly is right on the 4x5s and other larger formats and Hassleblad, for example, has a serious new (well relatively recent) digital. Where there is a definable economic marketplace "demand," it makes sense for a manufacturer to supply that product.

 

I'm thinking at the cheap, "Wouldn't it be interesting?" level. Those who have a real business need for that level output have a tool with which to work. Down in the peanut gallery, the need is much less pressing and the real market is quite limited. When one considers how well they performa and how large current prints can be made with existing systems, the "need" to produce a whole new set of gear that's only advantage is to make larger prints, is just not economically viable.