Stéphane205018
Leading Member
so that you can achieve same shallow dof as with a dslr?
Reading mode:
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why no digicam with large sensor...
- Thread starter Stéphane205018
- Start date
KenEis
Senior Member
APS sensors cost $100s each. FF sensors like in the Kodak and Canon cost $100)s each and the senor backs for the large format cameras cost probably in the neighborhood of $10K each. APS size sensors are coming down in cost due to lots of R&D and higher production rates but the cost of manufacturing truely large CCD/CMOS/LBCAST chips is still very high. Large format chips still have power and tethered processing needs that make them impractical for normal outdoor use.....yet.
Ken Eis
--so that you can achieve same shallow dof as with a dslr?
Ken Eis
To pay additional 100$ would be no problem for me,
thats not much compared to the cost of a camera and lenses.
AND: APS size is not necessary, with 60% APS surface size
you could also get a visible shallow DOF and the sensor
would still be three times bigger than the 2/3' sensor.
And this should be available for 50$.
thats not much compared to the cost of a camera and lenses.
AND: APS size is not necessary, with 60% APS surface size
you could also get a visible shallow DOF and the sensor
would still be three times bigger than the 2/3' sensor.
And this should be available for 50$.
--so that you can achieve same shallow dof as with a dslr?
Ken Eis
Daniel Card
Senior Member
I'd be happy with a semi compact 2/3' sensor 5mp camera. None exist for a reasonable price. I think the Leica cost more than $1500.
AND: APS size is not necessary, with 60% APS surface size
you could also get a visible shallow DOF and the sensor
would still be three times bigger than the 2/3' sensor.
And this should be available for 50$.
--so that you can achieve same shallow dof as with a dslr?
Ken Eis
It's not just an additional $100. It's an additional hundreds of dollars more. A digicam using an APS-sized sensor would actually cost more than a DSLR body alone because you would have to integrate the lens. And it would probably be the same size because you would have to scale everything up in size to be proportional with the sensor. So in the end, there isn't much sense in having a digicam with an APS-sized sensor. Just get a D70 or 300D and keep a Sigma 18-125 DC lens: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0405/04052101sigma18-125.aspTo pay additional 100$ would be no problem for me,
thats not much compared to the cost of a camera and lenses.
on it all the time. That'll probably the same size and cost of a digicam with an APS sensor. And you would be able to change lenses if you wanted to.
Ok, plus a lens with limited zoom range, and the cost of a D70,It's not just an additional $100. It's an additional hundreds ofTo pay additional 100$ would be no problem for me,
thats not much compared to the cost of a camera and lenses.
dollars more. A digicam using an APS-sized sensor would actually
cost more than a DSLR body alone because you would have to
integrate the lens.
I would pay it. The cam would probably look like, cost and have the spec
of a Leica D2.
If Leica would include a larger sensor, this would be the perfect cam for me.
Tony Sx
Senior Member
And the 'identical' Panasonic LC1 costs about $1100I'd be happy with a semi compact 2/3' sensor 5mp camera. None
exist for a reasonable price. I think the Leica cost more than
$1500.
http://www.pbase.com/tonysx
If the Leica had a larger sensor, it would also probably require a larger lens, and probably a larger body to support it, too. In the end, you have a big, boxy camera with a body about the size of a 300D or D70, except without a removable lens. It probably wouldn't have the ergonomic handgrip of an SLR. And looking through the viewfinder would mean you would see the lens protruding into view worse than it already does. So why not just get a 300D or D70, then?If Leica would include a larger sensor, this would be the perfect
cam for me.
Not so big, because the lens may be a lens only for APS sensor size.If the Leica had a larger sensor, it would also probably require aIf Leica would include a larger sensor, this would be the perfect
cam for me.
larger lens, and probably a larger body to support it, too. In the
end, you have a big, boxy camera with a body about the size of a
300D or D70, except without a removable lens.
And the most important thing: I would have a live histogram.
The Leica Digilux 2's lens is already as large as it is, and that's for a 2/3" sensor (8.8mm x 6.6mm), which is significantly smaller than an APS sensor (23.7mm x 15.6 mm). So expect its lens to be as large as any of the current APS-specific lenses on the market (like the Sigma DC lenses). As for the live histogram, I suppose that would be nice. But I'm not sure switching to an EVF viewfinder, or having to deal with lower battery life, or the higher image noise caused by having the sensor constantly active, would be worth it. Having better metering (by the camera), better metering skill (by the photographer), and more dynamic range (by the sensor) seem like better approaches to the dilemma.Not so big, because the lens may be a lens only for APS sensor size.If the Leica had a larger sensor, it would also probably require aIf Leica would include a larger sensor, this would be the perfect
cam for me.
larger lens, and probably a larger body to support it, too. In the
end, you have a big, boxy camera with a body about the size of a
300D or D70, except without a removable lens.
And the most important thing: I would have a live histogram.
curtisls
Leading Member
Others have spolken about the sensor from the cost perspective, but I would also offer that a digicam with a larger sensor would be a hard sell to most digicam buyers because everything about the camera would have to be larger. If you use a larger sensor, you need a larger lens, more processing power, etc. This drives overall size up, and since most people who buy digicams want smaller sizes, there's no market for this.so that you can achieve same shallow dof as with a dslr?
Just my .02
Regards,
Curt
KenEis
Senior Member
I doubt anyone would make a sensor to a set DOF. DOF is the outcome of many other considerations. APS, 35mm, medium and large format cameras were designed without DOF as a consideration. I doubt it will become one for digital. I just use my f stop to control it.
Ken Eis
--AND: APS size is not necessary, with 60% APS surface size
you could also get a visible shallow DOF and the sensor
would still be three times bigger than the 2/3' sensor.
And this should be available for 50$.
--so that you can achieve same shallow dof as with a dslr?
Ken Eis
Ken Eis
For me, a combination of a little bit more shallow DOF,The Leica Digilux 2's lens is already as large as it is, and that'sNot so big, because the lens may be a lens only for APS sensor size.If the Leica had a larger sensor, it would also probably require aIf Leica would include a larger sensor, this would be the perfect
cam for me.
larger lens, and probably a larger body to support it, too. In the
end, you have a big, boxy camera with a body about the size of a
300D or D70, except without a removable lens.
And the most important thing: I would have a live histogram.
for a 2/3" sensor (8.8mm x 6.6mm), which is significantly smaller
than an APS sensor (23.7mm x 15.6 mm). So expect its lens to be
as large as any of the current APS-specific lenses on the market
(like the Sigma DC lenses). As for the live histogram, I suppose
that would be nice. But I'm not sure switching to an EVF
viewfinder, or having to deal with lower battery life, or the
higher image noise caused by having the sensor constantly active,
would be worth it. Having better metering (by the camera), better
metering skill (by the photographer), and more dynamic range (by
the sensor) seem like better approaches to the dilemma.
larger sensor and live histogram would be perfect.
I just looked what is offered, there will be for example
a Olympus E 1 inclusive Zuiko D 2,8-3,5/14-54 for 2000 EUR
The size is not so important, here you see the oly E1 is
not so big as the rest of the DSLRs, but ok, a little bit bigger than the leica:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse1/page3.asp
And compared with Leica = 135 x 82 x 103 mm
Oly = 141 x 104 x perhaps 150 incl lens
And now remove the mirror of the oly, make it a little bit smaller
( no space for the mirror ), and include a live histogram.
I guess at APS size sensor noise is not a problem even with some heat.
There are rumours Panasonic would plan such a thing, but this may be not true:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=9321197
The lenses still require a specific lens-to-sensor distance to properly focus throughout their range. So removing the mirror would not reduce the space. It just leaves the same empty space. The only way to get around this is to go back to the drawing board and redesign the lenses so that they all require a shorter lens-to-sensor distance. But digital sensors of a specific size will still require a certain minimum lens-to-sensor distance. Maybe someday, someone might design a system from scratch that can do that, but I don't see Oly doing that because they just put all their effort into the E-1 system. And I don't see any other camera manufacturers starting new systems when they already have lens/camera systems. Your best bet is to stick with a digicam if you want a live histogram.And now remove the mirror of the oly, make it a little bit smaller
( no space for the mirror ), and include a live histogram.
Jay Turberville
Forum Pro
No, but removing the pentaprism would. Yeah, what I want is a 3/4 sensor size on a camera with interchangeable lenses - you could use the E1 lens system - but with an EVF. Ideally, the EVF would be modular so that different types of EVFs could be plugged in.The lenses still require a specific lens-to-sensor distance to
properly focus throughout their range. So removing the mirror
would not reduce the space.
--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com
You're still going to want some kind of eyepiece to look through. Holding a camera a foot or two in front of you while looking at the LCD to frame the picture might be fine for a little point-n-shoot digicam, but that's not going to fly for a larger camera with larger lenses. Serious photographers want to be able to look through a viewfinder to frame the picture. It also helps stabilize the camera, too, for better handholdability. Removing the pentaprism, but replacing it with an EVF, doesn't do anything to the size of the camera.No, but removing the pentaprism would. Yeah, what I want is a 3/4The lenses still require a specific lens-to-sensor distance to
properly focus throughout their range. So removing the mirror
would not reduce the space.
sensor size on a camera with interchangeable lenses - you could use
the E1 lens system - but with an EVF. Ideally, the EVF would be
modular so that different types of EVFs could be plugged in.
win39
Veteran Member
I don't see how cost can be pointed to. A mechanically complex 300D SLR with lens and APS sized sensor sells for the same price as the new 8MP digicams. Size may be a factor, but I think a digicam with APS sensor could be made not much larger than one of the larger 8MP digicams. Certainly there is a big range in size with those cameras with 2/3" sensors. If Nikon can build a camera the size of the 8700 I have no doubt they could build an APS sized sensor digicam not much bigger than an Olympus c-8080. I would love something like that for travel.
A 2/3" sensor measures 8.8mm x 6.6mm. An APS sensor measures 23.7mm x 15.6mm. Stick an APS sensor into an 8700 or C8080, and you would have to scale everything up (especially the lens) to accomodate the larger sensor. The reason Nikon and Olympus can make their 8700 and C8080 so small is because they're using a sensor that's smaller than your pinky finger.I don't see how cost can be pointed to. A mechanically complex 300D
SLR with lens and APS sized sensor sells for the same price as the
new 8MP digicams. Size may be a factor, but I think a digicam with
APS sensor could be made not much larger than one of the larger 8MP
digicams. Certainly there is a big range in size with those cameras
with 2/3" sensors. If Nikon can build a camera the size of the 8700
I have no doubt they could build an APS sized sensor digicam not
much bigger than an Olympus c-8080. I would love something like
that for travel.
Michael Long
Senior Member
The Olympus is supposedly custom designed for its sensor size (which is very close to APS size) and it's nearly the size and weight of a Rebel.If Nikon can build a camera the size of the 8700
I have no doubt they could build an APS sized sensor digicam not
much bigger than an Olympus c-8080. I would love something like
that for travel.
curtisls
Leading Member
I was only making reference that others had spoken about cost. I still maintain that it is not physically possible. For example, the registration distance for the lens is much larger for an APS sized sensor than a 2/3 sensor. Also, a lens that would cover the sensor would have to be much bigger in diameter.I don't see how cost can be pointed to. A mechanically complex 300D
SLR with lens and APS sized sensor sells for the same price as the
new 8MP digicams. Size may be a factor, but I think a digicam with
APS sensor could be made not much larger than one of the larger 8MP
digicams. Certainly there is a big range in size with those cameras
with 2/3" sensors. If Nikon can build a camera the size of the 8700
I have no doubt they could build an APS sized sensor digicam not
much bigger than an Olympus c-8080. I would love something like
that for travel.
Regards,
Curt
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
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.
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.