ANYONE ELSE THINKING

http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Full-frame_digital_SLR

"Production costs for a full-frame sensor can exceed twenty times the costs for an APS-C sensor.[citation needed] Only 20 full-frame sensors will fit on an 8-inch (200 mm) silicon wafer, and yield is comparatively low because the sensor's large area makes it very vulnerable to contaminants—20 evenly distributed defects could theoretically ruin an entire wafer. Additionally, the full-frame sensor requires three separate exposures during the photolithography stage, tripling the number of masks and exposure processes.[7]"

Last real info I saw was about a 1DsII vs 30d or something and it was $100 vs $1000 production cost ratio.

Canon white paper:
http://www.robgalbrait​h.com …rame_CMOS_White​_Paper.pdf

RobDickinson wrote in post #15021285
http://en.wikipedia.or​g/wiki/Full-frame_digital_SLR

"Production costs for a full-frame sensor can exceed twenty times the costs for an APS-C sensor.[citation needed] Only 20 full-frame sensors will fit on an 8-inch (200 mm) silicon wafer, and yield is comparatively low because the sensor's large area makes it very vulnerable to contaminants—20 evenly distributed defects could theoretically ruin an entire wafer. Additionally, the full-frame sensor requires three separate exposures during the photolithography stage, tripling the number of masks and exposure processes.[7]"

Last real info I saw was about a 1DsII vs 30d or something and it was $100 vs $1000 production cost ratio.

Which was 8 years ago.

FF sensors havnt got smaller in the last 8 years.


edit :-

You asked for information. I provided information. If you want more accurate or more current information to dispute this claim , go find it.