How long before another vendor can produce full frame?

[Atlasman]

In Canon's white paper on full-frame CMOS they boldly state that they "stand alone as the only manufacturer of 35mm format digital cameras with full-frame image sensors (as of August 1st, 2006)."

How long before they will have a competitor—and who will be first to imerge and play ball in what today is Canon's exclusive turf?

I would like to say Sony, but they have been stumbling for the last few years.

How about FujiFilm? Foveon?

[DrPablo]

The Hasselblad H2D has a sensor twice as large as the Canon full frame sensors. It only costs $29,000.

I doubt that any other vendor will make full frame any time soon. It's just too small a market, and since Nikon doesn't make its own sensors I doubt they'd be able to offer full frame at a competitive price.

[Dellboy]

kodak released one in a Canon and a Nipon mount 2 or 3 years ago it's now out of production.

[Atlasman]

If the Playstation 3 doesn't fly off the shelves, there may not be a Sony in another year or two. They're in pretty bad shape financially.

Canon has a lot of advantages in this field, as they produce all the pieces for their cameras. You can get 5D's for under $3000 now, so if the past price/performance holds up, Canon may be able to come up with a 5D successor at the $2500 point. Another manufacturer would have to sell every camera at a loss to get into this market and try to catch up.

I've heard a lot of people say that full frame is dead, everybody's fine with APS-C, but 10Mpx will probably be the upper limit of resolution on a sensor this size. I remember when the P&S cameras went to 10 Mpx all the reviews talked about how noise was worse, you'd be better off with an 8 Mpx camera.

The new 400D will be a good test of whether Canon has reached the wall at this sensor size. If the 400D can match the high-ISO performance of the 350D and 30D, they might have some room to grow.

I have a feeling Canon's going to have to go full frame if they ever want to move the low-end cameras up to 12 Mpx, though. Unless we all decide that low-noise, high ISO isn't important anymore.

In the entry level DSLR, the c-size sensor is a good fit, but for those in the pro-summer and up levels, given a choice will likely opt for the full frame—I know I will eventually get the 5D or equivallent. But as long as Canon is alone in the full-frame for the prosummer, they will continue to ask, and get, premium for their products.

Of all the players today, Sony would be my first pick to crack into full frame, but they need to re-group.

Cheers!

[CyberDyneSystems]

Nikon does not seem to be in a rush to release FF..
I'd sya they are the only other system that would go in that direction.

[Atlasman]

Nikon does not seem to be in a rush to release FF..
I'd sya they are the only other system that would go in that direction.

At this point, I think it's a question of can they and not would they. Since they don't design and manufacture their own image sensor, they have to rely on Sony.

[lostdoggy]

Sony will have one in the market within 2 years now they are in the DSLR market.

[Atlasman]

Sony will have one in the market within 2 years now they are in the DSLR market.

What leads you to this conclusion?

The full frame segment of market is small and mostly professional-based, Canon has hopes of bringing this to the masses—Sony needs to get their act together; they keep shooting themselves in the foot.

My next camera will be full-frame based. It would be great if I had more than one choice.

[René Damkot]

My next camera will be full-frame based. It would be great if I had more than one choice.
You allready have: 5D and 1DsMk2 (and 1Ds) ;)

[Atlasman]

You allready have: 5D and 1DsMk2 (and 1Ds) ;)
You are right, but I meant from different manufacturers.

[Bodog]

I'd agree with CDS. If not Nikon, then nobody. And Nikon doesn't seem to be in any hurry. Could be because they have nobody to supply a FF sensor... I think Canon will be your only choice for the foreseeable future. The development cost is just to high for any expected return. Read Canon's FF white paper and check the cost difference to manufacture a FF sensor compared to the current APS size and you'll see. Unless someone finds a way to bring the cost of those silicon wafers down, that is not going to change. I really really wanted a 5D when I bought the 30D recently, but I just couldn't rationalize paying the price difference. And really, with the image quality we're getting with the 1.6x sensors, who actually needs the FF (not wants)?

[Atlasman]

I'd agree with CDS. If not Nikon, then nobody. And Nikon doesn't seem to be in any hurry. Could be because they have nobody to supply a FF sensor... I think Canon will be your only choice for the foreseeable future. The development cost is just to high for any expected return. Read Canon's FF white paper and check the cost difference to manufacture a FF sensor compared to the current APS size and you'll see. Unless someone finds a way to bring the cost of those silicon wafers down, that is not going to change. I really really wanted a 5D when I bought the 30D recently, but I just couldn't rationalize paying the price difference. And really, with the image quality we're getting with the 1.6x sensors, who actually needs the FF (not wants)?

I have read Canon's white paper on FF and understand the challenges.

For me, I'm getting outstanding images from the 20D, but still would like to move up to FF.

[lostdoggy]

What leads you to this conclusion?

The full frame segment of market is small and mostly professional-based, Canon has hopes of bringing this to the masses—Sony needs to get their act together; they keep shooting themselves in the foot.

My next camera will be full-frame based. It would be great if I had more than one choice.

Sony is mega company that have many other establish companies out of business. You don't need to look further then the Television industries like Zenith a mega gaint in its heydays and now they are just a relic of a name pasted on a cheap TV set.

Sony is the gaint when it comes to digital P&S camera and have secure a large percentage of the market share. Not suprisingly they supply a large part of the sensors Nikon is not exception. So if anybody going to design and manufacture a FF sensor it won't be Nikon because they need Sony to do it for them and now that Sony has control of KM and have Zeiss in their back pocket why wouldn't I think Sony will the next company to introduce a FF sensor camera. Everyone needs to realize that Nikon is a small company w/ a very big ego and have nothing to show for it except a bunch of diehard believers that are constantly being disappointed.

[CoolToolGuy]

Everyone needs to realize that Nikon is a small company w/ a very big ego and have nothing to show for it except a bunch of diehard believers that are constantly being disappointed.

Gee, don't hold back - tell us how you really feel. . . :lol:

Have Fun,

[lostdoggy]

Ooops was I SLEEP-TYPING???

[DrPablo]

I'd bet that Leica will produce a full frame rangefinder at some point. I don't know why they went for APS-C with the M8, but there are a lot of people with tens of thousands of dollars of Leica lenses who would gobble up a full frame rangefiner.

[Atlasman]

I'd bet that Leica will produce a full frame rangefinder at some point. I don't know why they went for APS-C with the M8, but there are a lot of people with tens of thousands of dollars of Leica lenses who would gobble up a full frame rangefiner.
Definitely anyone with high end glass would be open to FF—I am included in this group.

The different FOV would give my lenses new meaning (or is that old meaning!).:lol:

[Atlasman]

What about Sigma? Foveon FF on the to-be-announced SD14?

[DrPablo]

I think Sigma has really committed itself in recent years to lenses for APS-C cameras. I'd also think that if the SD-14 were full frame that they would have announced that in their teaser. Still, it's a matter of cost, and if the Foveon chip is less costly than the Bayer chips then they might make full frame in a future model.

[Atlasman]

I think Sigma has really committed itself in recent years to lenses for APS-C cameras. I'd also think that if the SD-14 were full frame that they would have announced that in their teaser. Still, it's a matter of cost, and if the Foveon chip is less costly than the Bayer chips then they might make full frame in a future model.

You are right at Sigma has been releasing lenses based on cropped sensors.
I guess market size for FF is one factor—the other is the ability to produce the FF sensor at a competitive price point.

[ptomsu]

In the entry level DSLR, the c-size sensor is a good fit, but for those in the pro-summer and up levels, given a choice will likely opt for the full frame—I know I will eventually get the 5D or equivallent. But as long as Canon is alone in the full-frame for the prosummer, they will continue to ask, and get, premium for their products.

Of all the players today, Sony would be my first pick to crack into full frame, but they need to re-group.

Cheers!

Same for me! I own a D2X and I am not happy with that camera - main reasons are I do not like the RAW files coming out of the box AND - I really want FF. I finally want to forget about all these small crop versions and go FF.

So this may be the reason I go for a 5D or successor, since time to see this from another vendor is simly too long for me!

Peter

[ptomsu]

I'd bet that Leica will produce a full frame rangefinder at some point. I don't know why they went for APS-C with the M8, but there are a lot of people with tens of thousands of dollars of Leica lenses who would gobble up a full frame rangefiner.

I would like to see that too, but simply speaking I do NOT believe this will happen in the next 5 years. They have so much work to do for the R ystem, so I rather believe in a FF R10.

[DrPablo]

I have to correct myself, the Leica is not APS-C, it's something like APS-H (1.33x factor).

[Atlasman]

I have to correct myself, the Leica is not APS-C, it's something like APS-H (1.33x factor).

It was a surprise to me that Leica went the 1.33 crop factor, but the bigger surprise was that the sensor is Kodak!

[René Damkot]

I don't know why they went for APS-C with the M8
Because they could not reach the quality they wanted in the corners of a FF chip.
Because of the lens design, the rear element of a wide angle lenses is, unlike in a SLR lens, very close to the sensor. So light falls on the sensor under an extreme angle in the corners. Thats also a reason why the camera has extra thin glass in front of the sensor (0,5 mm), and a microlens array offset at the corners.

[Atlasman]

Because they could not reach the quality they wanted in the corners of a FF chip.
Because of the lens design, the rear element of a wide angle lenses is, unlike in a SLR lens, very close to the sensor. So light falls on the sensor under an extreme angle in the corners. Thats also a reason why the camera has extra thin glass in front of the sensor (0,5 mm), and a microlens array offset at the corners.

But wouldn't quality issues apply with their film version?

[DrPablo]

I should correct myself -- the Leica isn't APS-C. Its sensor is 18x27mm (as opposed to 15x24 on APS-C) and it's a 1.33x FOV crop.

[NBEast]

We have to ask why a FF is so danged expensive to make?

It's got about double the pixels but seems to bump the camera price by about $2K. Surely has to do with an exponentially greater manufacturing loss and some inherent difficulties. When they lick that problem it'll be "double the pixels, then double the mfg. cost. Then a FF should cost them about $200 more to manufacture than an 1.6x.

When that happens, then why would they stick to it - except that AP-C lenses are cheaper too. Hey, maybe that was the whole point of the thead - they get away with too much without competing forces.

So; if a 30D costs $1250 and a 5D costs $1600, which would you buy? Then put a FF sensor in a Rebel body so you can get it for $1100 (with say, 13K pixels to achieve a nice pixel size even if cropped), then which of these 3 would you buy? (here I display my marketing stupidity - I suppose the Pros will always demand a $5K ultra camera but doesn't that cost so much simply because it's such a small market - sort of a self fullfilling prophecy)

I'd get the FF Rebel every time, particularly if it had a step-down feature to convert it to a 1.3x, 1.6x, and 2.0x on demand, and use EF-S lenses.

RE: Nikon ... Is there an issue with going Digital FF considering their smaller lens coupling size? I realize FF film works just fine with it, but does it cause some restrictions, like maybe additional vignetting on Ultra wide?

[DrPablo]

I think FF is important for many reasons.

That said, it's not compelling enough to pull many people away from Nikon. Nikon's flagship camera is an APS-C body. It has the same number of pixels as the 5D, but on an APS-C chip instead of a full frame chip.

The D2X costs more, but of course it's also weather sealed and has a lot of the bells and whistles of 1-series Canons.

Nikon doesn't make its own sensors, which makes FF more prohibitive.

But I think the reason they don't make full frame is that they don't need to.

The FF market hasn't been strong enough for it to hit anyone but Canon.

But Nikon will be compelled to some day, because they've basically maxed out the pixel density with APS-C. You would need something lke 24 megapixels on FF to match the pixel density of the D2X. So as long as people race for megapixels, the FF vendors will always win.

Of course this neglects the possibility of a different sensor design. I think the Foveon holds promise for much better and more accurate resolution per unit sensor area, and this might de-emphasize the total number of megapixels.

[René Damkot]

But wouldn't quality issues apply with their film version?

No.. Film doesn't have a microlens array in front of it ;)

[mxwphoto]

If any consumer camera company will make a FF next, it will likely be Sony. Sony's already supplying Nikon with CMOS, and it probably won't be long till they make it large enough to be FF and put it on their own DSLR. FF CCD is way too expensive right now to even consider. :D

[cosworth]

Some people here are not getting it. Double the size double the cost?

What about burst modes? Think a buffer made for a 6meg images can handle a 15 meg image? What about what else comes with a FF camera? More rubust shutter, power to drive it, bigger viewfinder etc.

also the law of supply and demand comes into play. If 1Ds Mk II sales were non-existent then Canon would have asked too much. But they didn't. People will pay for the technology, R&D, marketing and value that comes with a FF camera. Basic economics.

[lostdoggy]

Sony will have one in the market within 2 years now they are in the DSLR market.

!!!