Canon says: more EF-S lenses

Started Oct 6, 2004 | Discussions thread
mfurman
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,281
Like?
How much can FF sensor cost?
In reply to Peter Kwok, Oct 8, 2004

I think that I understand electronics but I cannot accept that the sensor itself would cost $5000 regardless of the yield ratio.

Michael

Peter Kwok wrote:

bds231 wrote:

I understand there are many arguments to the contrary, but
personally I still think we'll be seeing consumer-level FF SLRs
somewhere in the 3-5 range.

The rapid price drop of digital electronics in the past decades
were mainly due to the ability to make transistors SMALLER. I.e.
more functions can be packed in less space. FF DSLR will never be
inexpensive. It will remain the domain of the professionals, just
like medium format 20 years ago.
I think Canon is trying to expand the 1.6x crop market, just like
what they did 25 years ago with the A series SLRs. They already
own the market of people with a collection of EF lenses. They want
to attract new users.

There are two simple reasons I think this:
1) There's clearly a huge number of FF lenses (and more importantly
lens designs ) out there, all of which can of course be used with
a 1.6x SLR, but all of which are still designed for use with a FF
sensor.
2) The megapixel race. We all know that a 1.6x 6MP sensor is far
better than a tiny 8MP sensor (as in Pro1, etc.). It's only a
matter of time before it's feasible (primarily in terms of cost) to
pack pixels onto a 1.6x sensor as tightly as they're packed onto a
tiny sensor, and at that point the FF sensor will have the same
advantage over the 1.6x the 1.6x has over the tiny sensor today.
You might argue that the general public won't pick up on this, and
they'll be happy with a 20 MP 1.6x sensor. I think the success of
the Rebel over the Pro1, et al., is proof to the contrary.

The megapixel war will cease for two reasons. One, the physics of
optics puts a limit on lens resolution. Two, consumers will see
megapixel as another marketing ploy. They don’t need more pixels
for 4x6s. New cameras are sold not as upgrades, but as 2nd or 3rd
units.

For those who say that FF will always be too expensive, I remind
you that just six years ago, the 2MP Kodak DCS520 cost $7500.

The high cost of the DCS520 was not just due to its primitive CCD
sensor, but also the low-density digital circuits in its huge body.
Canon’s ability to shrink the DIGIT chip leaves the sensor as the
only remaining costly electronic component.
--
Peter Kwok
http://www.pbase.com/peterkwok

-- hide signature --

Michael

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
4/3New
typoNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow