15D anybody?

Started May 10, 2012 | Discussions
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 27,824
Like?
15D anybody?
May 10, 2012

Nikon Rumors has gone to 60% on the D600 rumour, $1500 low end FF camera:
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/05/09/more-nikon-d600-specs.aspx/

NR has a pretty good record (better than CR). Anyway the corresponding Canon spec would be:

5DIII sensor (since Canon now uses the same sensor across a range of cameras)
5FPS
97% VF
7D 19 point AF
60D style body.
$1500

As for name, definitely not a single digit (and Canon numbering, the lower the better the camera). 10D has gone, so 15D it has to be.

Is that something you'd go for? If so - is it something that would tempt you into FF, or instead of a 5D (II or III) or as well as?
--
Bob

dwalby
Senior MemberPosts: 2,939
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to bobn2, May 10, 2012

What you described below specs out better than the 5D2, which are still selling for something like $2200 even after being on the market for a few years.

bobn2 wrote:

Nikon Rumors has gone to 60% on the D600 rumour, $1500 low end FF camera:
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/05/09/more-nikon-d600-specs.aspx/

NR has a pretty good record (better than CR). Anyway the corresponding Canon spec would be:

5DIII sensor (since Canon now uses the same sensor across a range of cameras)
5FPS
97% VF
7D 19 point AF
60D style body.
$1500

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 27,824
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to dwalby, May 10, 2012

dwalby wrote:

What you described below specs out better than the 5D2, which are still selling for something like $2200 even after being on the market for a few years.

That's what's called 'progress' - an if Nikon really does do it, how many 5DII's or even 7Ds and 60Ds would Canon be selling. Wouldn't they need to respond?
--
Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
x-vision
Senior MemberPosts: 1,035
Like?
Re: 15D anybody?
In reply to bobn2, May 10, 2012

The rumored $1500 price of the D600 is quite unrealistic.

It makes no business sense for Nikon to sabotage their own sales with a $1500 FF model, when even $2000 will be considered an excellent value for a new FF camera.

Other than that, the D600 rumors make a lot of sense.
Nikon will have a sub-D800 FF model, that's for sure - but not at $1500, IMO.

Which brings us to Canon. The naming choice of the 5DIII and its price suggest to me that Canon is not planning an entry level FF below the 5DIII.

We'll see what happens when the rumored D600 is out, though. The 5DIII price will certainly look way out of line if the D600 is priced below $2500.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dwalby
Senior MemberPosts: 2,939
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

I can still remember the conversations in 2004 about how FF would be down to $1000-1500 in just a couple of years.

FF sensors, by IC design standards, are absolutely huge. This means they're a huge target for fabrication defects, and because of their size there aren't many of them on a wafer. That means the yield per wafer is very small, so the cost per device is very high. Just how high is anybody's guess, as Sony/Nikon/Canon don't release information on yields, number of FF chips sold per year, etc. Another simple fact of IC fabrication is the setup costs are huge, but when you're making millions of chips per month, that can be amortized over a lot of parts. When you're making 10,000 FF sensors per month (if that many) your per unit cost for that setup is 1000x compared to a typical digital device. Again, we don't know exactly what that cost is, but its not negligible.

So given that, Canon is not likely to release a FF body with nearly 7D performance specs, for roughly the same price as they're selling the 7D today. Nikon is putting some pressure on them, but even their new FF went up in price from the D700, not down.

I think the big question is if Canon or Nikon cheapened up the body to the point of being able to offer a FF Rebel for $1500, would people really want to buy it? Let's say something like a t2i with FF. For now I think they've decided that FF without the better features isn't something they want to do. But I do agree with you that if Nikon makes a move, things could change, but I wouldn't get my hopes up for a $1500 price tag until I actually see it happen.

bobn2 wrote:

dwalby wrote:

What you described below specs out better than the 5D2, which are still selling for something like $2200 even after being on the market for a few years.

That's what's called 'progress' - an if Nikon really does do it, how many 5DII's or even 7Ds and 60Ds would Canon be selling. Wouldn't they need to respond?
--
Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 27,824
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to dwalby, May 11, 2012

dwalby wrote:

I can still remember the conversations in 2004 about how FF would be down to $1000-1500 in just a couple of years.

FF sensors, by IC design standards, are absolutely huge. This means they're a huge target for fabrication defects, and because of their size there aren't many of them on a wafer.

I know all of that. That means the yield per wafer is very small, so the cost per device is very high. Just how high is anybody's guess, as Sony/Nikon/Canon don't release information on yields, number of FF chips sold per year, etc. Another simple fact of IC fabrication is the setup costs are huge, but when you're making millions of chips per month, that can be amortized over a lot of parts.

When you're making 10,000 FF sensors per month (if that many) your per unit cost for that setup is 1000x compared to a typical digital device. Again, we don't know exactly what that cost is, but its not negligible.

I am very familiar with the costs of semiconductor fabrication and the processes involved. Very, very familiar. Still, I think there is a possibility that Sony will produce this sensor at a good price. Why? Well the costs of semiconductor production are almost all in the process. Raw wafers are pretty cheap. For large producers such as Sony, there is the problem of what to do with old lines. The march of competition and progress means that their production is focussed on ever smaller pixel sizes which demand ever smaller technology nodes. So, with production of phonecam and compact sensors in the 16MP region demanding 1 micron pixels, APS-C going to 24MP and beyond, there is the question of what you do with the old lines which cant manage that geometry. They could be sold, but there is a bear market in semiconductor equipment at the moment. Another possibility is to find something that they can do to generate income. Anything is a bonus, since the investment in these lines was paid for long before, so making a line of cheap FF sensors makes a lot of sense. And the Reason Nikon might be pitching at $1500 is because that is where Sony is pitching.

So given that, Canon is not likely to release a FF body with nearly 7D performance specs, for roughly the same price as they're selling the 7D today. Nikon is putting some pressure on them, but even their new FF went up in price from the D700, not down.

I think the big question is if Canon or Nikon cheapened up the body to the point of being able to offer a FF Rebel for $1500, would people really want to buy it? Let's say something like a t2i with FF. For now I think they've decided that FF without the better features isn't something they want to do. But I do agree with you that if Nikon makes a move, things could change, but I wouldn't get my hopes up for a $1500 price tag until I actually see it happen.

bobn2 wrote:

dwalby wrote:

What you described below specs out better than the 5D2, which are still selling for something like $2200 even after being on the market for a few years.

That's what's called 'progress' - an if Nikon really does do it, how many 5DII's or even 7Ds and 60Ds would Canon be selling. Wouldn't they need to respond?
--
Bob

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: 15D anybody? The glaring thing.....what competition?
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

The glaring thing about this is that so many seem on tenderhooks waiting to see what Nikon or Canon 'will do'.

A clear case of oligopolgy, even if only by two.

That Sony remain steadfast in the EVF and will not even release one OVF camera, that Pentax have not released any FF recently and also have raised their lens prices to shocking levels (comapred to what you get for Canon/ Nikon) and do not have much at the tele end, that Olympus is so focused on M 4/3 it also seems not to be concerned baout FF or Por DX, has created a vacuum where Nikon and Canon are ruling very easily.

One can either say good for them, or rue the lack of competition, there is none.

Yes, Oly and Panasonic are making great strides with M 4/3, but lens wise and EVF wise, it is not really 'there' yet either.

They all seem focused on the 'fast buck' and seem to be ignoring serious amateur, enthusiast and pros.

Or have they just accepted that they cannot compete with Nikon and Canon?

Cheers
--

.....Just from an amateur......'Sometimes it's to your advantage for people to think you're crazy.”

 Bajerunner's gear list:Bajerunner's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisualNectarPhotography
Regular MemberPosts: 370Gear list
Like?
Re: 15D anybody? The glaring thing.....what competition?
In reply to Bajerunner, May 11, 2012

No sooner does one thread of this “rumor” die off then one opens up. We have gone over this before, and very recently.

This is just a rumor, I doubt we will see it at 1500 yet . Nikon is not going to endanger some of their own APS-C’s that are making money just to undercut the market and get a cheap FF out there. If it comes out it will be at 2000.

Even if it does come out at 1500, it will only take canon a year to build something better and have it brought to the market. That’s right, Nikon might get the jump but Canon will see what Nikon has done and then out spec them and introduce a better FF camera for cheaper.

This has always been the case, right now it seems as though Nikon is starting to climb on top after Canon dominated the Megapixel wars for a while.

But a 1500 D600 FF rumors are just that rumors. Speculation and arguing over rumors is a pointless waste of everyone’s time.

-- hide signature --

Be Content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you.

 VisualNectarPhotography's gear list:VisualNectarPhotography's gear list
Canon EOS 300D Nikon D2Hs Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dwalby
Senior MemberPosts: 2,939
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

With Sony stock at a 30 year low, and 4 straight years of losing money, it would seem that trying to sell a very small quantity of FF sensors at rock bottom prices would be low on their priority list.

Since pixels are very large compared to typical digital geometries like 40nm and 28nm, I don't think camera sensors have to be migrated to state-of-the-art fab facilities just because the pixel size shrinks by a micron or two. The support logic keeps getting faster every generation, which would imply some advance in digital logic, but I'm not sure that it requires cutting edge digital processes.

I also suspect that since each fab line requires real estate, that they rotate an old fab line out and bring a new one in to take its place, rather than just keep adding new lines as geometries shrink. So I'm not sure that they actually have old lines just sitting there idle, waiting for a new product line like a cheap FF sensor.

bobn2 wrote:

The march of competition and progress means that their production is focussed on ever smaller pixel sizes which demand ever smaller technology nodes. So, with production of phonecam and compact sensors in the 16MP region demanding 1 micron pixels, APS-C going to 24MP and beyond, there is the question of what you do with the old lines which cant manage that geometry. They could be sold, but there is a bear market in semiconductor equipment at the moment. Another possibility is to find something that they can do to generate income. Anything is a bonus, since the investment in these lines was paid for long before, so making a line of cheap FF sensors makes a lot of sense.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 27,824
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to dwalby, May 11, 2012

dwalby wrote:

With Sony stock at a 30 year low, and 4 straight years of losing money, it would seem that trying to sell a very small quantity of FF sensors at rock bottom prices would be low on their priority list.

Sony is a huge corporation and its different business units are operating differently. The Image sensors company is doing brilliantly, on its way to being number one in the world again. In any case, the business logic that a company in trouble would not welcome a bit of additional income escapes me, sorry.

Since pixels are very large compared to typical digital geometries like 40nm and 28nm, I don't think camera sensors have to be migrated to state-of-the-art fab facilities just because the pixel size shrinks by a micron or two.

Pixels may be large, but in an active pixel sensor the size of the circuitry is critical to fill factor. Most of the image sensor manufacturers newest products are made on 65nm lines or below, generally ones released as processors and memory shrink (Sony got theirs from Toshiba). So, the old DSLR size lines, 180nm or so are having difficulty finding application. Canon has just this problem, and thus silicon progress in the 5DIII came to a full .

The support logic keeps getting faster every generation, which would imply some advance in digital logic, but I'm not sure that it requires cutting edge digital processes.

You're not sure of much. Just keep making it up. The 'support logic' is pretty much standard application processors, TI Da Vinci or Fujitsu Milbeaut. Milbeaut is 65mm, just like the most modern sensors.

I also suspect that since each fab line requires real estate, that they rotate an old fab line out and bring a new one in to take its place, rather than just keep adding new lines as geometries shrink.

They do both. You don't have to speculate. Sony's business reports are quite detailed about which plants they are extending, rebuilding or refurbishing.

So I'm not sure that they actually have old lines just sitting there idle, waiting for a new product line like a cheap FF sensor.

Your model of how businesses work is very simplified. If the owner of an obsolescent fabrication line found a way of making it generate revenue, they would jump at it.
--
Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisualNectarPhotography
Regular MemberPosts: 370Gear list
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

bobn2 wrote:

dwalby wrote:

Your model of how businesses work is very simplified. If the owner of an obsolescent fabrication line found a way of making it generate revenue, they would jump at it.
--
Bob

They (nikon, canon not sure about but sony wouldn’t be surprised if they fall into this as well) are generating money on their 1500+ APS-c’s. Why would they want to cut into their own profit margin? We just saw a massive price drop in the X0D line it will be a while before we see another massive price drop and a FF sensor DSLR at $1499. IF they make it at that price it will have only the essentials, the build quality would be complete low budget crap and it would be very limited in function when compared to a APS-c $100-200 more.

-- hide signature --

Be Content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you.

 VisualNectarPhotography's gear list:VisualNectarPhotography's gear list
Canon EOS 300D Nikon D2Hs Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 27,824
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to VisualNectarPhotography, May 11, 2012

VisualNectarPhotography wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

dwalby wrote:

Your model of how businesses work is very simplified. If the owner of an obsolescent fabrication line found a way of making it generate revenue, they would jump at it.
--
Bob

They (nikon, canon not sure about but sony wouldn’t be surprised if they fall into this as well) are generating money on their 1500+ APS-c’s.

I'm really not sure that Nikon is. Its only $1500+ APS-C is the D300s, and I would guess, somewhere in the world, someone buys one, every other day. The 7D is probably selling better but it too is long in the tooth.

Why would they want to cut into their own profit margin?

To maintain their bottom line in a competitive world.

We just saw a massive price drop in the X0D line it will be a while before we see another massive price drop and a FF sensor DSLR at $1499. IF they make it at that price it will have only the essentials, the build quality would be complete low budget crap and it would be very limited in function when compared to a APS-c $100-200 more.

Well, I'm not so sure. The point is that most of the extra camera feature that make a 1500+ DSLR don't really cost very much if anything. Multi point AF? Same number of components as a low end system, just more pixels on the sensor chips. Dual card slots? Just a double decker connector which probably costs cents more than the single deck one. 100% VF? Just make the VF a bit bigger (the manual alignment thing has gone away). More FPS? Just take out the firmware restriction. Magnesium shell costs a little more, because it needs to be painted where a plastic one doesn't, but I guess a good plastic shell won't be a deal breaker.

So, this is what I'd guess Nikon is thinking. What would be the killer feature against the 7DII? Someone in a sandpit said 'what about FX', and when you think about it, it is. So long as the camera has actually got all the features, trading an FF sensor against a magnesium shell is a tricky one. I guess a lot of people would go for the FF sensor. Plus, well my future was as a dual system user, now I'm not so sure. There will be quite a few looking a this and thinking if I have a second body, do I go DX as in old, or how about a second FX, particularly if you have a D800, you have reach enough.
--
Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
OlavM
Forum MemberPosts: 89Gear list
Like?
Re: 15D anybody?
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

What about naming it 13D ? ......

 OlavM's gear list:OlavM's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 40D Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
robert1955
Senior MemberPosts: 1,611
Like?
Re: 15D anybody?
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

1500 is not a realistic price. Canon can market the 5D2 at present for 2200 (B&H).

If the split of the line-up were to be similar to when went from 50D to 7D and later 60D, you'd expect a body with 60D spec's. Price? $1999 would be very aggressive, a marketing breakthrough.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisualNectarPhotography
Regular MemberPosts: 370Gear list
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

bobn2 wrote:

Well, I'm not so sure. The point is that most of the extra camera feature that make a 1500+ DSLR don't really cost very much if anything. Multi point AF?

The cost of developing such systems is translated into the final product price.

Dual card slots? Just a double decker connector which probably costs cents more than the single deck one.

Yea I hear that

100% VF? Just make the VF a bit bigger (the manual alignment thing has gone away). > More FPS? Just take out the firmware restriction.

This is due to the processor not firmware. If it was firmware adding ML to a 60 or 7D would increase the FPS to whatever number they chose (within the mirrors limits)

Magnesium shell costs a little more, because it needs to be painted where a plastic one > doesn't, but I guess a good plastic shell won't be a deal breaker.

It was for alot of people looking at the 60D even though I agree with you.

So, this is what I'd guess Nikon is thinking. What would be the killer feature against the > 7DII? Someone in a sandpit said 'what about FX', and when you think about it, it is. So > long as the camera has actually got all the features, trading an FF sensor against a > magnesium shell is a tricky one. I guess a lot of people would go for the FF sensor.

And loose the benifit of extra zoom that a crop sensor provides? My guess is the BIF photographers using a 60 or 7D wouldn't want to give up their 1.6x magnification.

Plus, well my future was as a dual system user, now I'm not so sure. There will be quite > a few looking a this and thinking if I have a second body, do I go DX as in old, or how > about a second FX, particularly if you have a D800, you have reach enough.
--
Bob

I think its a killer idea but as I have stated before we would see Nikon repositioning their entire line, shifting it down. Making their APS-C's more affordable. That way they could keep their linies intact and still offer a FF camera cheaper than others. But we really havent seen this yet. Maybe the D3200 is the start of it but I am less than impressed with that camera as many others are too.

anyway its all speculation

Also they know what they can charge for a FF camera and aren't going to slash their profit margins just to be on top for 6 months

-- hide signature --

Be Content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you.

 VisualNectarPhotography's gear list:VisualNectarPhotography's gear list
Canon EOS 300D Nikon D2Hs Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dwalby
Senior MemberPosts: 2,939
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

Bob, I'm just trying to have a casual discussion on a topic which I know little about, and maybe learn a thing or two in the process. I asked a few questions, made a few assumptions/guesses, but I didn't make anything up.

I think the comment you made below was unnecessary.

bobn2 wrote:

The support logic keeps getting faster every generation, which would imply some advance in digital logic, but I'm not sure that it requires cutting edge digital processes.

You're not sure of much. Just keep making it up.

FWIW, your comment about support circuitry being 65nm confirms my assumption that it's not using cutting edge processes. By that I meant 28, or even 20nm geometries.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 27,824
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to VisualNectarPhotography, May 11, 2012

VisualNectarPhotography wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Well, I'm not so sure. The point is that most of the extra camera feature that make a 1500+ DSLR don't really cost very much if anything. Multi point AF?

The cost of developing such systems is translated into the final product price.

And the system is already developed.

Dual card slots? Just a double decker connector which probably costs cents more than the single deck one.

Yea I hear that

100% VF? Just make the VF a bit bigger (the manual alignment thing has gone away). > More FPS? Just take out the firmware restriction.

This is due to the processor not firmware. If it was firmware adding ML to a 60 or 7D would increase the FPS to whatever number they chose (within the mirrors limits)

In Canon's case, yes there is the limit of a single Digic, but the cameras rarely go up to that limit. A Digic chip would cost them about $10-$15 (that's the commodity price for that chip)

Magnesium shell costs a little more, because it needs to be painted where a plastic one > doesn't, but I guess a good plastic shell won't be a deal breaker.

It was for alot of people looking at the 60D even though I agree with you.

Not really, I guess they had their moan and bought anyway, if they couldn't afford a 7D. If they could Canon still won.

So, this is what I'd guess Nikon is thinking. What would be the killer feature against the > 7DII? Someone in a sandpit said 'what about FX', and when you think about it, it is. So > long as the camera has actually got all the features, trading an FF sensor against a > magnesium shell is a tricky one. I guess a lot of people would go for the FF sensor.

And loose the benifit of extra zoom that a crop sensor provides? My guess is the BIF photographers using a 60 or 7D wouldn't want to give up their 1.6x magnification.

Yes, BIF is a particular case, but a TC does the same job.

Plus, well my future was as a dual system user, now I'm not so sure. There will be quite > a few looking a this and thinking if I have a second body, do I go DX as in old, or how > about a second FX, particularly if you have a D800, you have reach enough.
--
Bob

I think its a killer idea but as I have stated before we would see Nikon repositioning their entire line, shifting it down. Making their APS-C's more affordable. That way they could keep their linies intact and still offer a FF camera cheaper than others. But we really havent seen this yet. Maybe the D3200 is the start of it but I am less than impressed with that camera as many others are too.

anyway its all speculation

Also they know what they can charge for a FF camera and aren't going to slash their profit margins just to be on top for 6 months

They already did. If they had charged $4000 for the D800 no-one would have batted an eyelid and they would still have sold all they could make.
--
Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bobn2
Forum ProPosts: 27,824
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to dwalby, May 11, 2012

dwalby wrote:

Bob, I'm just trying to have a casual discussion on a topic which I know little about, and maybe learn a thing or two in the process. I asked a few questions, made a few assumptions/guesses, but I didn't make anything up.

I think the comment you made below was unnecessary.

It was correct though, you were not presenting any facts or information, you were suggesting supposition. An 'assumption/guess' is making things up. I haven't accused you of mendacity. Sorry if you thought I did.

bobn2 wrote:

The support logic keeps getting faster every generation, which would imply some advance in digital logic, but I'm not sure that it requires cutting edge digital processes.

You're not sure of much. Just keep making it up.

FWIW, your comment about support circuitry being 65nm confirms my assumption that it's not using cutting edge processes. By that I meant 28, or even 20nm geometries.

But the use of cutting edge geometries is not the point, the point is that the tech has moved on so that the old 180nm lines (which by the way the technology node of Canon's new line) are no longer up to the job of mass market sensor manufacturing. Their old line is 350nm. I think keeping that in use is one reason that the 5DIII stuck at 22MP.

-- hide signature --

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jpr2
Forum ProPosts: 13,648
Like?
Bob: NOT with a 60d-like body
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

bobn2 wrote:

Nikon Rumors has gone to 60% on the D600 rumour, $1500 low end FF camera:
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/05/09/more-nikon-d600-specs.aspx/

NR has a pretty good record (better than CR). Anyway the corresponding Canon spec would be:

5DIII sensor (since Canon now uses the same sensor across a range of cameras)
5FPS
97% VF
7D 19 point AF

down to this line it is all roses :),

60D style body.
$1500

but NOT with a 60d-like body (price point gets immaterial); give me
a 7d-like body and performance with FF sensor above, and I'd be game,
even if lusting for 5dIII AF = so the price needs to take this into account !!

jpr2
--
~
street candids (non-interactive):
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157609618638319/
music and dance:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341265280/
B&W:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623306407882/
wildlife & macro:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157600341377106/
interactive street:
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/qmusaget/sets/72157623181919323/

Comments and critique are always welcome!
~

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisualNectarPhotography
Regular MemberPosts: 370Gear list
Like?
Re: ha, ha
In reply to bobn2, May 11, 2012

Well, I'm not so sure. The point is that most of the extra camera feature that make a 1500+ DSLR don't really cost very much if anything. Multi point AF?

The cost of developing such systems is translated into the final product price.

And the system is already developed.

Doesn’t mean that they still don’t want to see a return on the money that went into developing that system. Or to put money into developing future systems. They aren’t going to make a camera that won’t allow them to get paid for technology just because its “already been made” if that was the case we wouldn’t have moved past the orginal Canon D10

This is due to the processor not firmware. If it was firmware adding ML to a 60 or 7D would increase the FPS to whatever number they chose (within the mirrors limits)

In Canon's case, yes there is the limit of a single Digic, but the cameras rarely go up to that limit. A Digic chip would cost them about $10-$15 (that's the commodity price for that chip)

It’s a balance between how many shots a second the manufacture wants to how many shots until the buffer is full. The 60D could go 8fps and it would fill up the buffer 50% faster. So yes they do use firmware to “de-tune” the camera so that action photographers can fire off 20+ RAW’s or 50+ JPEGS in one sitting. If the buffer was larger they could raise the speed easier, but it is always limited by the buffer and amount of information that the DIGIC or Nikons EXPEED processors can push through. When the buffer is full the camera is at that limit, it cannot (no matter what you do to the firmware) cram any more picts on the buffer or through the processor until the processor catches up.

Magnesium shell costs a little more, because it needs to be painted where a plastic one > doesn't, but I guess a good plastic shell won't be a deal breaker.

It was for alot of people looking at the 60D even though I agree with you.

Not really, I guess they had their moan and bought anyway, if they couldn't afford a 7D. If they could Canon still won.

People still gripe about this. I personally would like to have a mag body on my 60D but the fiber glass reinforced polycarb is plenty strong. It is a fair amount cheaper to produce this type of body vs a metallic one.

So, this is what I'd guess Nikon is thinking. What would be the killer feature against the 7DII? Someone in a sandpit said 'what about FX', and when you think about it, it is. So > long as the camera has actually got all the features, trading an FF sensor against a > magnesium shell is a tricky one. I guess a lot of people would go for the FF sensor.

And loose the benefit of extra zoom that a crop sensor provides? My guess is the BIF photographers using a 60 or 7D wouldn't want to give up their 1.6x magnification.

Yes, BIF is a particular case, but a TC does the same job.

I think more than just BIF photographers would care about this. But maybe not I have no scientific evidence to back this up.

I think its a killer idea but as I have stated before we would see Nikon repositioning their entire line, shifting it down. Making their APS-C's more affordable. That way they could keep their linies intact and still offer a FF camera cheaper than others. But we really havent seen this yet. Maybe the D3200 is the start of it but I am less than impressed with that camera as many others are too.

Also they know what they can charge for a FF camera and aren't going to slash their profit margins just to be on top for 6 months

They already did. If they had charged $4000 for the D800 no-one would have batted an eyelid and they would still have sold all they could make.

Yes prices have been moving down and they will continue too. However with your logic these cameras will eventually be $500 and then 50 years from now they might actually pay us to take a camera! Not likely as our money is devalued and time based inflation continues we will see the bottom floor on where theses cameras will be sold at. Is it 1500… 1000… 500 or 2000 I don’t know. But they certainly aren’t going to take a loss on these cameras and I mean not just in we are making x dollars on each sales, Im talking about all the R&D that goes into the technology old and new. The revenue has to be generated somewhere and they get it from each and every sale.

-- hide signature --

Be Content with what you have; rejoice in the way things are. When you realize there is nothing lacking, the whole world belongs to you.

 VisualNectarPhotography's gear list:VisualNectarPhotography's gear list
Canon EOS 300D Nikon D2Hs Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads