$1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months?

Prices of dSLR cameras have been going down precipitously. Just to put
things in perspective, consider how fast things changed in a few short
years:

(APS-C cropped dSLR):

1998 $15,000 (Kodak DCS520)
1999 $5,500 (Nikon D1)
2000 $3,000 (Canon D30)
2002 $2,000 (Canon D60)
2003 $900 (Canon 300D)


Now look at how the prices for a full frame dSLRs:

2002 $8,000 (Canon 1Ds)
2005 $3,300 (Canon 5D)
2006 $2,650 (Canon 5D today)
2007 ???
2008 ??

If this was a math question on the SATs, most students would notice the
pattern, and probably write "$1800" in that blank space beside 2008!

wrote in message
ups.com...


If this was a math question on the SATs, most students would notice the
pattern, and probably write "$1800" in that blank space beside 2008!

Probably 100% correct, but and I can't see them allowing a FF to fall below
$1800 for a further five years because any lower and people would not buy
those EF-S lenses.

The full frame vs APS-c size sensor debate is the equivalent of the 16 vs 8
bit color debate: a matter of faith not all that relevant to the real world.
What I would like to see is camera designers abandon the nearly 80 year old
35mm SLR form factor and take advantage of the APS-c sensor size and
micro-electronics to make a smaller, lighter camera with controls that can
be totally customized by the user.
Canon and Nikon dSLRs need to go on a diet. They are seriously overweight.
More than a full frame sensor I would like to see a sensor with even 1 stop
of latitude.
For the near future I do not see high quality cameras going to a smaller
sensor size than APS-c. This is not because of problems with the sensors,
which apart from latitude already exceed the needs of the majority of users,
but because of refraction problems in the short focal length lenses required
for these sensors.
Only Olympus, clunky as their efforts may be, has made a stab at this

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 15:16:04 GMT, bmoag wrote:

More than a full frame sensor I would like to see a sensor with even 1 stop
of latitude.

Hasn't Fuji taken some steps in that direction with some of their
sensors that use a mix of sensor elements of different sizes?

bmoag wrote:
The full frame vs APS-c size sensor debate is the equivalent of the 16 vs 8
bit color debate: a matter of faith not all that relevant to the real world.
What I would like to see is camera designers abandon the nearly 80 year old
35mm SLR form factor and take advantage of the APS-c sensor size and
micro-electronics to make a smaller, lighter camera with controls that can
be totally customized by the user.

Clearly you are describing point and shoot cameras. When you mention
taking advantage of micro-electronics and abandonment of traditional
design, you are describing the paper thin cameras, pen-shaped cameras,
disposable cameras, and whatnots of the category known as digital point
and shoots.

What you are asking for is already here.

However, people with investments in lenses and who prefer the heft and
build of traditional SLRs would still buy into DSLRs. Horses for
courses, as they say. I, for one, am still lusting for an affordable
full frame digital camera.

just bob wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

If this was a math question on the SATs, most students would notice the
pattern, and probably write "$1800" in that blank space beside 2008!

Probably 100% correct, but and I can't see them allowing a FF to fall below
$1800 for a further five years because any lower and people would not buy
those EF-S lenses.

"Them"? You mean Canon, or the wider camera cartel? s.

Some of us decided long ago to not acquire EF-S lenses; others to do so,
both in mind that we'd someday acquire a FF dSLR.

And I'd dare say the margins on the FF lenses are probably greater than
on the S lenses, and on a higher base, to boot.

--
John McWilliams

bmoag wrote:
The full frame vs APS-c size sensor debate is the equivalent of the 16 vs 8
bit color debate: a matter of faith not all that relevant to the real world.
What I would like to see is camera designers abandon the nearly 80 year old
35mm SLR form factor and take advantage of the APS-c sensor size and
micro-electronics to make a smaller, lighter camera with controls that can
be totally customized by the user.
Canon and Nikon dSLRs need to go on a diet. They are seriously overweight.
More than a full frame sensor I would like to see a sensor with even 1 stop
of latitude.
If is ironic that you are claiming FF camera have no use and then in
ask for more latitude. You should be aware that the larger the sensor
the more latitude you are going to get.

BTW I get at least 3 stops of latitude from my 20D, I believe the 5D
gives even more.

If you are not getting even one stop you must be doing something very
wrong, like not shooting raw or using a P&S camera.

Scott

On 11 Sep 2006 10:00:55 -0700, Scott W wrote:

More than a full frame sensor I would like to see a sensor with even 1 stop
of latitude.
If is ironic that you are claiming FF camera have no use and then in
ask for more latitude. You should be aware that the larger the sensor
the more latitude you are going to get.

BTW I get at least 3 stops of latitude from my 20D, I believe the 5D
gives even more.

If you are not getting even one stop you must be doing something very
wrong, like not shooting raw or using a P&S camera.

bmoag didn't ask for more latitude. He asked for just one stop.
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought he was referring to digital's
blowing out of highlights that just barely reach or exceed the
sensor's photon limit, unlike film which has a slightly more
forgiving "knee".

Na, not a Rebel. No chance.


"Jim Townsend" wrote in message
...
wrote:

I'm not quite as optimistic as you, but I'd be willing to
bet the farm that within 3 years they have a full frame
Digital Rebel for under $2000.

bmoag wrote:

The full frame vs APS-c size sensor debate is the equivalent of the 16 vs 8
bit color debate: a matter of faith not all that relevant to the real world.
What I would like to see is camera designers abandon the nearly 80 year old
35mm SLR form factor and take advantage of the APS-c sensor size and
micro-electronics to make a smaller, lighter camera with controls that can
be totally customized by the user.
Canon and Nikon dSLRs need to go on a diet. They are seriously overweight.
More than a full frame sensor I would like to see a sensor with even 1 stop
of latitude.

I can only guess that you mean a more gentle treatment of over-exposed
highlights, similar to that of film.
The only way I could see this happening is if digital camera
manufacturers went to a 16bit ADC, use a file format that could have
12bits per colour (unlike the 8bits we get today with jpeg), and change
the exposure calculation slightly to under-expose and preserve the
highlights.

For the near future I do not see high quality cameras going to a smaller
sensor size than APS-c. This is not because of problems with the sensors,
which apart from latitude already exceed the needs of the majority of users,
but because of refraction problems in the short focal length lenses required
for these sensors.

Unfortunately (for the moment, at least) smaller sensors than APS-C
have a lower signal to noise ratio, which become evident when doing any
low-light photography.

Only Olympus, clunky as their efforts may be, has made a stab at this.

Olympus (and now Panasonic) have made a huge camera surounding a tiny
sensor.
The FourThirds sensor is the same size as a a frame of 110 cartridge
film.
Pentax made the ultimate in compact SLR cameras (the Auto110 and Super
Auto110), that should have been the model to emulate, (at least
size-wise) for a smaller sensor camera.
Even the Olympus Pen-F (half-frame 35mm SLR) is much smaller than an
Evolt.
Here is a side-by-side picture showing their relative sizes:
http://members.iinet.com.au/~therealm/dj_nme/compared_2.jpg
Don't forget that the two outer cameras have a sensor (film or CCD)
that is pretty much the same size.