Is there time for an interchangeable sensor DSLR?

Started Oct 19, 2012 | Discussions
Leif Goodwin Senior Member • Posts: 1,390
Re: It's here
1

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

Leif Goodwin wrote:

The problem is that you are making a whole shed load of assumptions, which if accepted, means that the technology exists and is cheap. However some of us question those assertions. In no case have you provided any form of proof other than "because I say so", and your response to me has been to ignore me when I ask you for some kind of proof for your assertions i.e. an FX sensor costs about £150 to £200 (effective cost to the customer), it is cheap to make a suitable mechanism to support removal sensors, there will be no significant increase in camera size, and the user will not mind if after 4 years their modular camera cannot support the latest sensors because it has locked in old technology.

What to post? ...are you so unable to think that if a D700 bares at introduction 50% increased price that a d300 (world average) and if it additionally bares 1. FF sensor, 2.Japan construction, 3.FF pentaprism and mirror assembly as well as FF shutter.... that there is no way that the sensor costs 20 times more than the APS-c one...? ...or that there is no chance that the D300 sensor costs 1/3 or anywhere near to the camera price? ...don't you have brains? If the D300's sensor would cost 15% of the camera and D700 was 20 times as this, the D700 would be at about 16000 selling price...

What to tell you? ...that the D800 sensor (probably the most expensive among DSLRs) doesn't cost them more than 150? ...there is no way that Nikon (or anybody) will waver share that info with you... nor P1 will ever share that IQ180 sensor costs less than 500..., DO YOU HAVE INFO FOR THE OPPOSITE? ...or are you just based on wikipedia info that an "FF sensor CAN cost UP to 20x as much as an APS-c sensor" ...based 7 years ago where FF sensors where no more than 2% than they are today and that their wafers where "ancient"? ...FF sensors will soon cost less than 50 to makers buddy and this is tech advancement that nor you or anybody can stop, ...while the same will never apply to mechanical construction of bodies, which can only based to "advanced productivity" to decrease cost...

So your response is to stamp your foot up and down and call me stupid. You do realise don't you that FF cameras used to be quite common, and not expensive? Therefore the extra cost due to FF shutter, mirror and pentaprism cannot be much. I have no more information than you, but you are the one making rabbit out of a hat claims, and expecting other people to simple accept them without question. It is clear from the above that you are actually making guesses.

Incidentally, you continually ignore points I have made about amortisation of costs, and the fact that an interchangeable sensor camera would sell in lower numbers than a D800, and each sensor would sell in even lower numbers. That would increase the cost, possibly substantially. Another issue, you now talk about the cost to Nikon. All we care about is the cost to us. If the sensor costs them £300, it will cost us £600. You have to add profit to Nikon, distribution and packaging costs, profit to distributer, and profit to retailer.

 Leif Goodwin's gear list:Leif Goodwin's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D +4 more
Leif Goodwin Senior Member • Posts: 1,390
Re: It's here
1

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

FF sensors will soon cost less than 50 to makers buddy and this is tech advancement that nor you or anybody can stop,

I am not 'buddy' thank you. Now on what basis do you make that claim? You do realise that Moore's law does not apply don't you? Yes they are getting cheaper, but not as fast as products such as memory or hard drives.

 Leif Goodwin's gear list:Leif Goodwin's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D +4 more
marcio_napoli Senior Member • Posts: 1,404
F6 + 35mm digital back
1

Anyone remember Leica DMR ?

I've just downloaded this morning a few raw files from this back, and oh boy... they're simply gorgeous!

At ISO 100, are among the best files I've ever seen, period, including the mighty cameras from 7 years later.

Anyway, back to the point.  The DMR was the closest thing to interchangeable 35mm sensors.

It's sad this concept died...

I'll throw some wood into the fire:  Imagine you could use amazing bodies such as Nikon F5 or F6, and swap sensor.

Ultra fast, low noise 18 mp sensor... high res 40mp when needed... dedicated BW... FF CCD sensor for those still in love with CCD... With / without AA filter, etc etc ...

Imagine the F6 with a FF 24mp Foveon sensor !

I know, I know, got live in the real world ...

Cheers!

-- hide signature --

Marcio Napoli

www.marcionapoli.com

OP Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: It's here
1

1. That is why I didn't reply when you was expecting me too...

2. If a sensor would cost them 300... it would come 5000 to you... now you can refer to the ones that ..."know"! You are not going to have another reply (you wasn't either if you didn't post "you refuse to reply"...), not because you are trolling or "funboying" (you are obviously not)... just because I think you are very "stubborn" to understand reality and you can "die a donkey with your logic"..., you obviously believe all the crap you are reading in web no? ...I mean you are the kind of "i heart in TV" ...so it must be true, ....believer no? ...To your surprise, I like you... I like your "defense line" principal... its what you are used to and you are "protecting" it because "it serves you" but its got a principal behind it and that I like...

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

OP Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: F6 + 35mm digital back

marcio_napoli wrote:

Anyone remember Leica DMR ?

I've just downloaded this morning a few raw files from this back, and oh boy... they're simply gorgeous!

At ISO 100, are among the best files I've ever seen, period, including the mighty cameras from 7 years later.

Anyway, back to the point.  The DMR was the closest thing to interchangeable 35mm sensors.

It's sad this concept died...

I'll throw some wood into the fire:  Imagine you could use amazing bodies such as Nikon F5 or F6, and swap sensor.

Ultra fast, low noise 18 mp sensor... high res 40mp when needed... dedicated BW... FF CCD sensor for those still in love with CCD... With / without AA filter, etc etc ...

Imagine the F6 with a FF 24mp Foveon sensor !

I know, I know, got live in the real world ...

Cheers!

Marcio.... the subject is different! ....we are talking about interchangeable sensors here, not of interchangeable ..backs! ...Yet you are right on the results though, ...just irrelevant!

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

Grevture Veteran Member • Posts: 4,188
Re: You are, if nothing, predictable :)
3

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

What was that? ...another 1000 words for repeating what was already said? ...again with no answers? ...Guess what, that was what it is... yet there are not many people to read it, ...I am sorry I did!

Since you do not seem to pay much attention to anwers, I tried a bit of repetitionĀ 

Seriously, do you have any real arguments backing up your assertion it is technically trivial to build a camera with a replaceable sensor - or is it just that you keep repeating it over and over again and somehow wish it will become true?

-- 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
OP Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: You are, if nothing, predictable :)

Grevture wrote:

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

What was that? ...another 1000 words for repeating what was already said? ...again with no answers? ...Guess what, that was what it is... yet there are not many people to read it, ...I am sorry I did!

Since you do not seem to pay much attention to anwers, I tried a bit of repetitionĀ 

Seriously, do you have any real arguments backing up your assertion it is technically trivial to build a camera with a replaceable sensor - or is it just that you keep repeating it over and over again and somehow wish it will become true?

You really don't read the previous posts do you? ...I 've already stated that they will never do it unless a newcomer to FX comes with such a solution (threading them to take the market off them... whiteout risking the "current way of doing things" that could possibly put him out of market having to demand it)..., they won't do it because it serves them to have us "camera victims" than "film victims"... unless we act in a demanding way that is...

For example (of what "demanding way" is, ....If we know that a D400 FF will come out (because Nikon will name all FF with 3digit even numbers and thus D400 can only be ...FF!) and they make an overpriced D600 that in the near future will be replaced by D400 and the D610 (or D601) will be a REAL in-between camera that would have better construction and better specs than the "now D600" (which in reality is a D400), ....we can turn our back to it unless it comes down to a ...D400 price! ...I repeat ..."if a D400 will ever exist it will be FF! .....Theodoros!" and I repeat, "all DX Nikons will be 4digit and oddly numbered (1xxx, 3xxx, 5xxx, 7xxx, 9xxx) and all FX Nikons will be 3-digit and evenly numbered (2xx, 4xx, 6xx, 8xx)...

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

marcio_napoli Senior Member • Posts: 1,404
Re: F6 + 35mm digital back
1

hehe I know !!

But that DMR was so freaking cool !!...  an updated F6 with the same concept would be... oh well, never mind...

just dreams ...

-- hide signature --

Marcio Napoli

www.marcionapoli.com

OP Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: F6 + 35mm digital back

marcio_napoli wrote:

hehe I know !!

But that DMR was so freaking cool !!...  an updated F6 with the same concept would be... oh well, never mind...

just dreams ...

Marcioooooo! ...behave yourself will you (LOL!)? ....We all "felt" a future with Leica R glass and ...name! ...It's not the subject here you "naughty" boy!

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

Leif Goodwin Senior Member • Posts: 1,390
Re: It's here
1

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

1. That is why I didn't reply when you was expecting me too...

2. If a sensor would cost them 300... it would come 5000 to you... now you can refer to the ones that ..."know"! You are not going to have another reply (you wasn't either if you didn't post "you refuse to reply"...), not because you are trolling or "funboying" (you are obviously not)... just because I think you are very "stubborn" to understand reality and you can "die a donkey with your logic"...,

So, if someone does not simple accept statements you make without any justification, they are stubborn and a donkey.

you obviously believe all the crap you are reading in web no?

Have you not worked out that I do not believe your claims?

...I mean you are the kind of "i heart in TV"

Not sure what you mean. I do not watch TV, so if the reference lies there I am lost.

...so it must be true, ....believer no? ...To your surprise, I like you...

This could be the start of something beautiful ...

I like your "defense line" principal... its what you are used to and you are "protecting" it because "it serves you" but its got a principal behind it and that I like...

Is this psychobabble?

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

Theodoros, look I do not claim to know for sure, but I find your claims hard to credit, since you do not support them with evidence. I did a quick Google:

http://www.bythom.com/2012%20Nikon%20News.htm

Now I am sure that you will agree that Thom Hogan is a sane, intelligent person, a bit of a moaner at times ( I added that cheeky comment in case he is reading this ) but he is more in touch with the industry and its costs than most commentators out there. And in the above he says:

"Manufacturing rule of thumb is you multiply parts cost by 3.5 to get retail price impact, so a US$400 sensor means that there is US$1400 worth of cost in the final product implied by the sensor alone."

So it looks like I was wrong about the markup, his figure is x3.5 not x2, and I greatly underestimated the total cost of the sensor in the camera too, so from your point of view this looks even worse. I promise I am trying not to look too smug, or to smirk too much. Well, sort of.

 Leif Goodwin's gear list:Leif Goodwin's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D +4 more
OP Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: It's here

Leif Goodwin wrote:

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

1. That is why I didn't reply when you was expecting me too...

2. If a sensor would cost them 300... it would come 5000 to you... now you can refer to the ones that ..."know"! You are not going to have another reply (you wasn't either if you didn't post "you refuse to reply"...), not because you are trolling or "funboying" (you are obviously not)... just because I think you are very "stubborn" to understand reality and you can "die a donkey with your logic"...,

So, if someone does not simple accept statements you make without any justification, they are stubborn and a donkey.

"Die a donkey" refers to the recipient ...for anyone that follows the conversation... and yes man you can ..."die a donkey"! ...i.e. donkey is supposed to be an animal that can take it all...

you obviously believe all the crap you are reading in web no?

Have you not worked out that I do not believe your claims?

........

...I mean you are the kind of "i heart in TV"

Not sure what you mean. I do not watch TV, so if the reference lies there I am lost.

I simply mean "wide spread truth"....

...so it must be true, ....believer no? ...To your surprise, I like you...

This could be the start of something beautiful ...

...why not?

I like your "defense line" principal... its what you are used to and you are "protecting" it because "it serves you" but its got a principal behind it and that I like...

Is this psychobabble?

NO! ...it's what I like about you!

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

Theodoros, look I do not claim to know for sure, but I find your claims hard to credit, since you do not support them with evidence. I did a quick Google:

http://www.bythom.com/2012%20Nikon%20News.htm

Now I am sure that you will agree that Thom Hogan is a sane, intelligent person, a bit of a moaner at times ( I added that cheeky comment in case he is reading this ) but he is more in touch with the industry and its costs than most commentators out there. And in the above he says:

"Manufacturing rule of thumb is you multiply parts cost by 3.5 to get retail price impact, so a US$400 sensor means that there is US$1400 worth of cost in the final product implied by the sensor alone."

So it looks like I was wrong about the markup, his figure is x3.5 not x2, and I greatly underestimated the total cost of the sensor in the camera too, so from your point of view this looks even worse. I promise I am trying not to look too smug, or to smirk too much. Well, sort of.

I do think that TH is a mindless troll... but that's my opinion...!

Theodoros

www.fotometria.gr

www.fotometriawedding.gr

Wojciech Sawicki
Wojciech Sawicki Contributing Member • Posts: 661
It's already been done
1

It was how digital SLRs first came to be. Pro and semi-pro Nikon bodies with digital backs. F3, F801, F90. you could easily take the back off and load film - which I used to do often. But what Theodoros means is a digital body that already contains all the essential electronics (card slots, processing and writing provisions, etc), with the sensor being the only interchangeable part.

A digital back has to contain all the electronics for handling data, processing, writing, it needs card slots, data ports and buttons for all digital functions (delete, format etc).

A modern application could no doubt be much smaller and neater, this mid-nineties monstrosity was huge, heavy, ugly as hell and very impractical. Until the DCS-315 they had no screens so you had no clue how your photo turned out. It had PCMCIA cards for memory (they were huge, especially the harddrive variation, and vulnerable to drops), and had SCSI ports for communication.

There was a different concept about, as far as I can remember... A digital film casette you could put in most cameras. I would sooo love that for use with vintage Zenits and Leicas! Sadly, I think the project died in its concept stage, there wasn't even a prototype.

 Wojciech Sawicki's gear list:Wojciech Sawicki's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR +19 more
Leif Goodwin Senior Member • Posts: 1,390
Re: It's here
1

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

I do think that TH is a mindless troll... but that's my opinion...!

Wow. There is not much more to say, I'm afraid. Have a nice day.

 Leif Goodwin's gear list:Leif Goodwin's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D +4 more
Leif Goodwin Senior Member • Posts: 1,390
Re: It's already been done

Wojciech Sawicki wrote:

There was a different concept about, as far as I can remember... A digital film casette you could put in most cameras. I would sooo love that for use with vintage Zenits and Leicas! Sadly, I think the project died in its concept stage, there wasn't even a prototype.

Yes, it got huge amounts of publicity, and I think there was a prototype, but it never made it to a product, as far as I know anyway. And by modern standards it was rather pathetic anyway.

 Leif Goodwin's gear list:Leif Goodwin's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D +4 more
OP Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: It's already been done
1

Wojciech Sawicki wrote:

It was how digital SLRs first came to be. Pro and semi-pro Nikon bodies with digital backs. F3, F801, F90. you could easily take the back off and load film - which I used to do often. But what Theodoros means is a digital body that already contains all the essential electronics (card slots, processing and writing provisions, etc), with the sensor being the only interchangeable part.

A digital back has to contain all the electronics for handling data, processing, writing, it needs card slots, data ports and buttons for all digital functions (delete, format etc).

A modern application could no doubt be much smaller and neater, this mid-nineties monstrosity was huge, heavy, ugly as hell and very impractical. Until the DCS-315 they had no screens so you had no clue how your photo turned out. It had PCMCIA cards for memory (they were huge, especially the harddrive variation, and vulnerable to drops), and had SCSI ports for communication.

There was a different concept about, as far as I can remember... A digital film casette you could put in most cameras. I would sooo love that for use with vintage Zenits and Leicas! Sadly, I think the project died in its concept stage, there wasn't even a prototype.

If you ask me Wojciech, it's that we forgot to care or we forgot to bother., I mean the photographers to "demand"!


-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

OP Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: It's here

Leif Goodwin wrote:

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

I do think that TH is a mindless troll... but that's my opinion...!

Wow. There is not much more to say, I'm afraid. Have a nice day.

Oh! It was a "to the guru I believe" post from the start... why don't you say so... (from the start)...?

Well... let the "Guru" post all the "predictions" and "reasoning" himself ...no? ....What are you guys? ...mindless servants to the "Guru"? ...or is the Guru so mindless to let the "servants" do "the job for him"? ...LOL (for the ...guru!)

P.S. ....(and I wondered all this time "where is TOF Guy"... ?) ....LOL!

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

Wojciech Sawicki
Wojciech Sawicki Contributing Member • Posts: 661
Re: It's already been done
1

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:


If you ask me Wojciech, it's that we forgot to care or we forgot to bother., I mean the photographers to "demand"!

Yes, that's a given. But I think there's far more at play than that. This concept in it's purest form (interchangeable part being the sensor only, and nothing else) introduces a bunch of problems.

First of all, you'd likely be limited a a few sensor options available for this hypothetical system at the time of its release. Newer and more advanced sensors would require new processing units to handle them. This is perhaps the killer problem that kills the whole idea. Sure we can bundle sensors and processing units together, but then, where do we stop? If we do that the buffer memory would have to be included in there, as well. So why even bother keeping the card slot in the camera body, then? Especially since memory cards also evolve with time. This inevitably leads us all the way back to the digital back concept - unless we make our system non-upgradable, with only a bunch of contemporary sensors from the time of its introduction available for use.

Second, quality of connection between the sensor and the processing unit is paramount. Any faults long this path introduce more noise. A plug/unplug connection along the path might potentially spell disaster for the final image quality.

 Wojciech Sawicki's gear list:Wojciech Sawicki's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR +19 more
OP Theodoros Fotometria Senior Member • Posts: 2,090
Re: It's already been done

Do you mean that a creator of such a solution would "sabotage" the existence of it... ? Because none of your reasoning could apply unless he does....

-- hide signature --

Theodoros
www.fotometria.gr
www.fotometriawedding.gr

Leif Goodwin Senior Member • Posts: 1,390
Re: It's here
1

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

Leif Goodwin wrote:

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

I do think that TH is a mindless troll... but that's my opinion...!

Wow. There is not much more to say, I'm afraid. Have a nice day.

Oh! It was a "to the guru I believe" post from the start... why don't you say so... (from the start)...?

Well... let the "Guru" post all the "predictions" and "reasoning" himself ...no? ....What are you guys? ...mindless servants to the "Guru"? ...or is the Guru so mindless to let the "servants" do "the job for him"? ...LOL (for the ...guru!)

P.S. ....(and I wondered all this time "where is TOF Guy"... ?) ....LOL!

You dismiss comments by someone who is widely respected for his reviews, and Nikon camera guides, and who has inside contacts in the industry, including in Nikon, as a 'mindless troll'. I think you need to look in the mirror. You are a complete unknown, making claim after claim, without any justification or proof whatsoever. And when someone questions you, you insult them, on the grounds that they do not accept something simply because you say so. And as for my not having any brains, I have a PhD, unlike you.

 Leif Goodwin's gear list:Leif Goodwin's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm F2.8G ED Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D +4 more
Wojciech Sawicki
Wojciech Sawicki Contributing Member • Posts: 661
Not sure what you mean?
1

Theodoros Fotometria wrote:

Do you mean that a creator of such a solution would "sabotage" the existence of it... ? Because none of your reasoning could apply unless he does....

Why would it be sabotage?

Newer, more capable sensors require newer, more capable electronics to handle their output. You wouldn't be able to upgrade sensors in this hypothetical system unless you upgrade large portions of other electronics, too.

Unless you keep designing new sensors only for this system, which would make them very expensive (low production numbers relative to unit production cost), but then eventually, a few years down the road, the system would bottleneck - new, higher resolution sensors, but taking ages to process and write the files, because the electronics can't keep up...

That's no sabotage, that's an inherent trait of this whole concept. You'd have to replace more than just the sensor. It would be expensive, and it would get very similar to a digital back.

 Wojciech Sawicki's gear list:Wojciech Sawicki's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XC 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OIS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR +19 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads