Canon CEO: Semi-Pro APSC DSLRs are following the Dodo ...

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0336328811/cp-2013-interview-with-canons-masaya-maeda

" Now that full frame is appearing in cameras the size and price of the 6D, the future of APS-C at the semi-pro level is in doubt, he says: 'That's something we're considering at the moment. From our semi-pro users there's still demand for APS-C but in the future, I think we will see an increase in the number of full-frame models.' "

Whither the K-5 (and its successor?)

--
Cheers,
sfa

Well, I suppose that is partially true and very biased towards their own product lines. Others would say all DSLRs are slowly moving into mirrorless and there is a number of arguments for that as well. However, I believe APS cameras will remain in production for as long as manufacturers can - they need cheaper cameras so prices for FF remain higher. And if the IQ gap remains as small as these days (it's only been getting smaller in the last 10 years) there will always be a market for good IQ, smaller than FF and 50% cheaper cameras. As a person with a 5-7 Canon lenses stuck in a drawer until Canon comes up with a reasonably priced, high IQ and good built camera, I genuinely hope they can support that; if the 6D falls close to the K5 prices at 1200 USD / EURO it will be closer to my potential budget. But why would Canon do that if they can push me towards an updated 70D that will be in my price range and make more money for them?

Well, I think that's all true for now, but sensor prices will probably change – look at computers and prices for memory and processors. (and yes, mirrorless is obviously a growing thing)

Pentax needs to have a plan (they probably do) for a suitably timed transition to full frame.

Perhaps some combination of aps-c and FF will be out there, but multiple lens lines can be tricky to maintain. Old FF sized lenses don't seem that much bigger to me than the current aps-c ones. E.g. my Pentax 50mm f1.4 doesn't seem any bigger than the DA35mm f2.4 I have.

Anyway, FF for now is more than I could afford.

Ian

--
http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/iangoldring

For semi-pro, maybe you are right.

Edit

Sorry, the Canon CEO may be right, but he would say that since he wants to sell FF cameras and generate more income from them.

End edit.

But for 'enthusiast' shooters (like me) I don't see APS-C format needing replacement for a long time. The IQ is extremely good and is arguably better than film was, it is certainly fine enough for my purposes.

As FF prices fall, APS-C prices will also fall and become more available to people who otherwise may not have spend so much.

By a long time I mean 20 years or more.

Just my 2p.

Rod

--
All I want is a digital back for my trusty K1000 . . .

I wasn't aware that Canon was in charge of setting the product planning agenda for other manufacturers

Luckily, I never said they were. And of course they are not. But that doesn't necessarily stop what he says applying to the whole camera market in a general sense, nor does it mean that what he says does not have a grain of truth, viewed objectlvely (although I take the point made by Ron Herdman that he may have an agenda to sell FF cameras in greater numbers).

--
Cheers,
sfa

For primes anything from roughly 35/2 covers the FF sensor even if it's designed only for APS-C.  There might be different compromises in a crop design and a FF design so edge performance might suffer (or it might not).

Where the difference shows is (a) in lenses wider than about 35mm and (b) in zooms.  This example (by my brother on his D700) shows how the Sigma 10-20/4-5.6 vignettes at 14mm.  The outer rectangle is the full FF frame; the inner one is trying to show a 92% VF.

--
---
Gerry
_______________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne

While the Canon CEO has a point, there is still a market for smaller and ligher cameras.  The APSC crop factor is favored by wildlife shooters and as IQ imrpoves over time I would prefer smaller bodies and lenses.

Dale

--
http://www.pbase.com/abundant108
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/daledoram

From a size PoV, I believe manufacturers are getting smarter and able to make smallish FF cameras. i am pretty sure a FF sensor can be fit now inside a K5-sized (almost) body - the mount and flange distances are there already, as for all other DSLR bodies - Basically all manufacturers have preserved a lot of unused space in the APS cameras by keeping them compatible with 35mm-standard lenses. I for one truly hope to go FF one day (ideally in one year or so) if prices go down as the IQ advantage cannot be denied; However, I need the right compromise for the move and the 6D is getting closer, but not close enough - it is still crippled in the style Canon does to maintain their ranges.

Sensor prices will probably go down somewhat, but definitely not at the same rate or to the same extent as computer processors, memory, and most other integrated circuits.  The reason for this is pretty simple:  much of the cost reduction for these other circuits has come about because improved technology has enabled them to be made on physically smaller chips.  An image sensor, on the other hand, obviously requires a fixed physical size for the chip; an APS-C sensor cannot be made smaller and still be an APS-C sensor.  (The cost of a chip as a function of chip area goes up at something like an exponential rate, as both the yield—the percentage of chips on a wafer that are usable—and the number of chips made per wafer decreases with larger chips.)

I suspect full-frame camera sensors are pretty much the largest ICs in semi-volume production today, though I don't know for sure.

--
--DrewE

A company does not plan in a vacuum.  It's naive to think that with the huge market share Canon and Nikon have that they don't influence the direction of the market.

Camera manufacturers are no different than car manufacturers.  There is ZERO business incentive to drive price point down after a certain point.  You want to keep price point moving upward and add features to justify that.

What will be telling is the sales of the D600 and 6d from Canon/Nikon.  If you watch the prices of high end lenses you'll see the same thing - lenses are much better than what they replace but price is going way up.

So, yes, Canon and Nikon want to sell more full-frame cameras because it allows them to drive the prices back up.

And, as we saw with the megapixel war - perception is HUGE.  If the market perceives full-frame is better they'll be willing to spend more for it.

Pentax cannot compete on cost alone.  It hasn't worked before and it won't work now.  I've said it before and I'll say it again - Pentax needs a camera that is better than a 5diii / d800.  Better AF, better flash - and the pro grade lenses to compete.  If they can do that with APS-c that's great.  The real problem Pentax has is they are using the same sensors as sony and nikon - the sensor gives them no competitive advantage.

And as a result, that probably makes FF "worth it" to the semi-pro.

At some point, Pentax will have to respond w/ a FF body.  The D600 could be had for $1400 if you sold the lens off in their kit successfully. The K5-ii is $1300 for arguably similar specs (the D600 is basically FF in a D7000 body which competed well against the K-5).

If nothing else, the lowered FF price point is putting a dent in Pentax's pricing plans if the $2400 rumor of a FF body are true.

So when is the next big show?  CP+ has come and passed w/ no new body announcement as others predicted

The show goes to Sunday doesn't it? Still time for an interview to get people talking.

Thank you
Russell

Camera makers in general seem to be in an identity crisis at the moment. Perhaps the social and economic situation in Japan is partly responsible, or a fierce sense of competition, but in general the camera making companies are driven to change their products in a way that I have not seen in digital photography before. I had to sell all my high end Olympus lenses, simply because Olympus decided to discontinue a product line that had not even reached its ten year anniversary yet. Also with Pentax there are now sounds about dropping the k-mount or the OVF. And now Canon of course, about dropping Apsc.

For those that simply want to use their lenses, and upgrade to a new and improved body every now and then, these are not the best times....

All I want is a k5IIs, and after that a K7 with improved auto focus accuracy and perhaps 24mp sensor.

I hope we are not all going to end up victims of a market that is going nuts on its own dynamics, meaning products are expected not to last a long time anymore, and manufacturers are developing product lines aimed to replace others that get discontinued untimely.

Of course you can still choose to use what you have until it stops working, but my Olympus adventure still tastes a bit weird.

Chris

I took a vacation with the K 01 and it was fantastic, light, small, with incredible IQ. However, most people who were reasonably serious were using N or C lower end SLR models with kit lenses. There was the occasional monster FF. Small - serious cameras were not all that common. I saw one M9, and a couple nex's.

Price and brand will drive the market. FF will help, as there is a rather large gearhead market looking for the biggest baddest toy. Small - high quality is a tough sell. I just do not see it out there.

--
Variance is Evil!

Are the Nikon V and J cameras "serious"?  To me, any camera that uses a sensor bigger than what's found on 95% of P&S cameras plus can accept multiple lenses is a serious camera.  I've seen a number of those Nikons lately.

Interesting take.  A couple points come to mind:

1) Canon hasn't said they're getting out of APS-C.  What he said was - he sees prosumer line going full-frame.  APS-C is going to still have a place and would continue.

2) I don't see there being an identify crisis.  Let's take Oly.  Their entire strategy in the DSLR market was:

a) quality glass

b) small system

When mirorless and similar technologies came along a huge chunk of their competitive advantage went out the window.  4/3 stopped being the smallest footprint.  They had to respond.  And, I agree with their direction from a business standpoint - get m4/3 working properly.  They need to be leaders in the smallest form factor.  That isn't an identify crisis - it's the market forcing them to change. It's very unfortunate 4/3 users get the shaft.  Very similar to Canon going from FD to EF mount in the 80s.  They had to do what was best long-term.  Long term they were right.  Short term, all those Canon FD users got hosed.

The big unknown in the industry is what Pentax is going to do.  I think they're the only company with an identify crisis here.  Canon, Nikon and Sony are all pretty clear on their approach.  And Oly has clarified their approach.  Pentax is the one left to decide what they want to be.

Now - as for manufacturers producing cameras designed for replacement in 5 years or less - that has always been the case with digital.  That's the nature of electronics in general.  Computers are very much the same way.

I have seen a couple of them out in the field. I took some test shots a while back and they are marginally better than a P&S. With the kit zoom lens, they are in the same ballpark size wise as a K 01. Price is not all that different either. They may be considered a serious camera but there are not all that many out there. People feel compelled to buy that DSLR when getting serious. Even then, I see a lot out there but the users are not taking all that many photos as compared to those with more compact cameras.

--
Variance is Evil!

Is this his excuse for Canon's APS-C sensors being so out of date?