$1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months?

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.
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

just bob wrote:
> <plastic_razor RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1157975666.856806.62610@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.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
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

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
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

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
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

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?
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

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".
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

Na, not a Rebel. No chance.


"Jim Townsend" <not DeleteThis @real.address> wrote in message
news:12gbfj2j5lskr54@news.supernews.com...
> plastic_razor DeleteThis @yahoo.com 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.
>
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

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.
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

just bob <kilbyfan@aoldotcom> wrote:

><plastic_razor.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1157975666.856806.62610@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.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.

People will still buy lenses. And they make more from the
regular lenses than they do from the EF-S lenses.

---- Paul J. Gans
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

David J. Littleboy wrote:

> Nah. Just underexpose a stop or two. Consumer color negative films can take
> a lot of overexposure, but their shadow detail is really bad, whereas
> digital captures a lot more in the shadows. And most quality films (ISO 50,
> 100, or 160 films) are much shorter range than consumer and ISO 400 films.
>

Except for sub-64 speed negative films, all color negative
35 mm films have essentially the same dynamic range. Some
very slow films have (or did have before they were
discontinued) a substantially smaller dynamic range. And ALL
color negative film is simply overrated on the ASA scale,
considering the "right" place to put them so get optimal
shadow detail and still have some overexposure latitude.

Color positive film, on the other hand, has no overexposure
latitude at all.

I'm too new to digital to be sure how it compares to
film in this regard, but my new Canon D30 seems to
be more like color positive film. With the preview screen,
I seem to be able to tell if something is overexposed
quite reliably. I do store everything as raw, which makes
it more forgiving.

Doug McDonald
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

"Shaun" <nospam RemoveThis @nospam.com> wrote:
> Na, not a Rebel. No chance.

The claim is that Canon has said that in the long term, the Rebel line will
be the only camera they make that's not FF. (I'm just repeating what I've
read over at dpreview.)

But here's an interesting noise comparison.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=19968444

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months? 

<dj_nme DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:
> 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.

Nah. Just underexpose a stop or two. Consumer color negative films can take
a lot of overexposure, but their shadow detail is really bad, whereas
digital captures a lot more in the shadows. And most quality films (ISO 50,
100, or 160 films) are much shorter range than consumer and ISO 400 films.

>> 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.

Even APS-C has been getting pretty bad of late.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=19968444

If you had only shot film, the D200 would knock your socks off. If.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
 >> Stay informed about: $1800 full frame dSLR within 18 months?