Is there time for an interchangeable sensor DSLR?

Started Oct 19, 2012 | Discussions thread
Grevture Veteran Member • Posts: 4,188
Trying to answer
3

marcio_napoli wrote:

I'm going to sound really ignorant , dumb and naive now, I know it.

Usually if one admits that, one is willing to listen, which is a good thing

I hope my answers below does not come of as abrasive or negative, I just try to be short and clear.

And no, I haven't read all the thread. It's just too long

But where are the proofs that it's not doable? I'm with Theodoros on this one.

DMF is actually based on film cameras, and interchangeable backs. This concept worked pretty fine from day one, and still does.

Technically, yes. Commercially (as in anyone actually making any significant money from it) it was bad when it got started and has deteriorated to a unmitigated disaster since then ...

Leica did the DMR.

Which was an abysmal failure, technically and commercially and had a horrible handling to boot

Its only redeeming factor was a image quality which was almost as good as other cameras sold for a fraction of its price.

Ricoh did its little GRX.

Which has flopped.

Even Silicon Film, which sported "whopping" 2002 technology, almost lift off the ground with a 10mp module.

They never got beyond showing clunky and huge almost-but-not-quite-working prototypes (read some of Joesphs posts for info on that one)

Emphasize that: 2002 technology, at the hands of a small company, and they almost did it.

Really, they did not.

Probably they were too early at the party... 2002 tech simply wasn't enough to make a really small package, that could fit inside a film camera.

And they also tried at the most unfortunate time, when digital cameras already started to shred the film SLR market into pieces.

The thing is, all these makers proved it's doable. Give it enough R&D funds, and it will be doable.

No, they more or less established that the idea was not viable.

Maybe it's not the case of a sensor alone, but mini-digital backs (with sensor + processors + firmware) could work.

True. You need (at least) those three components working together. That is the part of the Ricoh GXR concept which actually works.

I'm going to sound a little arrogant right now, but I believe this concept did not became mainstream just because of ONE single reason.

Canon and Nikon never tried it.

True. But don't forget the reason they never tried it is because a) it had been proven by several others to not work and b) because they sat down and figured out which solution does really work before they started. Like almost everybody else did.

Quite often when an idea is not implemented, there are some compelling reasons for that.

They never need too. They are leaders from day one, and never had to look too closely on such exotic ideas, they're doing just fine selling the whole package since 1999.

But give it Canikon R&D, and 2012 tech, and I trully think it's possible.

Maybe I'm wrong and I'm saying pure nonsense. But for now, I believe it's a possibility.

It is not impossible, so far I agree. And it is in some ways an intriguing idea, the poster Tony Beach had some interesting thoughts about it further up in the thread.

The problem is that it is technically difficult to do, thus expensive, and its advantages will only be noticeable or in any way interesting to a fairly small target audience. And these factors when combined is a bullet proof recipe for a commercial failure.

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

 Grevture's gear list:Grevture's gear list
Nikon D70s Nikon D3 Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow