Reading mode: Light Dark

PMA 2006 - Inside Scoop for New Cannon Products?

Go to last post
Moore's Law is in effect with all consumer electronics.

There is nothing wrong with the 5D except the price. However Moore's law dictates that in 18 months it or a similar item will cost half as much, and there's no getting away from it no matter how I spell CaNon.. :-)

I'm sure a FF Canon camera will come out in the next 18 months that is half the cost of the 5D, but all 5D owners should already have factored that in.

Digital Cameras are computers with an electronic eye, and just like any computer I've seen in the past 40 years the price drops in half every 18 months, and the speed doubles every 18 months.
 
There is absolutely nothing to imply that Canon will ditch 1.6x in the prosumer 20D/Digital Rebel lines. In fact, the 5D seems to reinforce that 1.6x will remain in the sub-$2,000 realm. Hard to believe Canon would introduce FF in a $1,500 cam. Likewise they're not going to abandon the $1,000 - $1,500 market by putting a FF senor in and bumping it over $2k.

Mark
 
I thought back in August when 5D was announced, all of went berserk because we were amazed at how a FF camera could be launched at under $4K. And now you are saying 5D is high priced? At least not for today's market. If you keep on waiting you will certainly see continued drop in price but what about the photos you will not be able to take all these days?

Net-net, what you are asking for is not really whether or not a new camera will be launched but when a 5D look alike will cost a whiole lot cheaper!

--
Speed is significant and interesting but accuracy is downright fascinating
http://www.pbase.com/pradipta
 
Moore's law say performance is doubled every 18 months. It doesn't say anything about cost, the cost is reduced mostly by shrinking the size of components.

Shrinking a full frame sensor wouldn't achive the desired results.
 
Pradipta Dutta said:
Pradipta Dutta said:
HaplessClick wrote:
There really is no technical reason why
APS sized (or even full frame) sensors can't be in small bodies.
Click to expand...
That's totally wrong. The main technical limitation is that when
you put a bigger sensor, you need more glass - lenses with larger
diameter compared to what you would need when you are using the
regular tiny sensors that typically in use in the P&S cameras.
Click to expand...
Bigger sensor equals more glass/larger lens element diameter???

Have you taken a look at the Nikon 50mm f1.8 lens (for "full frame" 35mm film)? The elements on that lens are VERY small and the front element is smaller than almost all current "small sensor" prosumer camera front elements.

True, IF you want to keep the lens bright/fast AND have a huge zoom range, AND a huge sensor then you need bigger elements ... but a reasonable fixed zoom lens could EASILY be mounted to a prosumer body AND be more compact than the R1.
 
There have been small "full framed" FILM cameras for years. In those cameras the lens had no problem imaging the large 35mm film. Why should it be difficult putting an APS sensor (which is smaller than 35mm film) in a comparable small camera body?
Pradipta Dutta said:
Pradipta Dutta said:
HaplessClick wrote:
There really is no technical reason why
APS sized (or even full frame) sensors can't be in small bodies.
Click to expand...
That's totally wrong. The main technical limitation is that when
you put a bigger sensor, you need more glass - lenses with larger
diameter compared to what you would need when you are using the
regular tiny sensors that typically in use in the P&S cameras.

--
Speed is significant and interesting but accuracy is downright
fascinating
http://www.pbase.com/pradipta
Click to expand...
--
Aron Digumarthi
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/gern
 
Almost similar topic came up at Nikonians a few months ago wherein people were wrongly interpreting Moore's Law to reduce cost as well while Moore's law talks about doubling number of transistors thereby improving performance.

--
Speed is significant and interesting but accuracy is downright fascinating
http://www.pbase.com/pradipta
 
Walter Blackledge said:
Moore's Law is in effect with all consumer electronics.

There is nothing wrong with the 5D except the price. However
Moore's law dictates that in 18 months it or a similar item will
cost half as much, and there's no getting away from it no matter
how I spell CaNon.. :-)
Click to expand...
so you ment scoops for pma 2007 products?? i think it's wee bit early for those :) considering the product cycles a ff model for 10d-20d-??d series might be somewhat realistically expected to be introduced in fall of 2007... if your intepretation of moores law was correct, which it isn't.
 
Moore's law is the empirical observation that at our rate of technological development, the complexity of an integrated circuit, with respect to minimum component cost will double in about 24 months.

It is attributed to Gordon E. Moore[1], a co-founder of Intel. However, Moore had heard Douglas Engelbart's similar observation possibly in 1965. Engelbart, a co-inventor of today's mechanical computer mouse, believed that the ongoing improvement of integrated circuits would eventually make interactive computing feasible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore 's_law
 
While Moore's Law states that the number of transistors per square inch on integrated circuits would doubled every 18 months(?) does not involve cost directly, cost is a major result of this increased density. That's because the yield of functional circuits from a semiconductor wafer increases dramatically. That's where the reduced costs come in. So the cost reduction interpretation is not wrong.

--mamallama
Pradipta Dutta said:
Almost similar topic came up at Nikonians a few months ago wherein
people were wrongly interpreting Moore's Law to reduce cost as well
while Moore's law talks about doubling number of transistors
thereby improving performance.

--
Speed is significant and interesting but accuracy is downright
fascinating
http://www.pbase.com/pradipta
Click to expand...
 
thank you.

I would like to hear from anybody who would pay the same price for half as much of anything.

One only has to look back over the pas twenty years to see what happens to the price on the latest and greatest computers. They are worth half as much in 18 months because newer machines that are twice as powerful are coming to market.

I'm begining to think I've made some New 5D owners mad because I told them their depreciation cost is going to be $1500 this year.

Sorry guys, Lets wait until February and see what happens..
 
mamallama said:
mamallama wrote:
While Moore's Law states that the number of transistors per square
inch on integrated circuits would doubled every 18 months(?) does
not involve cost directly, cost is a major result of this increased
density. That's because the yield of functional circuits from a
semiconductor wafer increases dramatically. That's where the
reduced costs come in. So the cost reduction interpretation is not
wrong.
Click to expand...
We will have to continue to interprete our own way. I have many times read the quote from Gordon Moore's paper that eventually became Moore's law. It only talks about doubling number of transistors every two years. The whole reduction of cost is today's interpretation but is clearly not part of the original Moore's law.

You can read it directly from the Intel site @ ftp://download.intel.com/museum/Moores_Law/Printed_Materials/Moores_Law_2pg.pdf

--
Speed is significant and interesting but accuracy is downright fascinating
http://www.pbase.com/pradipta
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top