Richard H. wrote:
MarkČ wrote:
The latest from Canon is the full-frame 5D, which will have a large,
bright viewfinder, more in keeping with what you're used to. It
also accepts different screens, and has diopter adjustment.
$3K gets you 12.8 megapixels, and the above.
A friend and I were debating the longevity of "digital"-specific
lenses. He made an interesting observation about the prospect of
full-frame CCD sensors becoming the new trend...
* With the smaller sensors, we're "beyond" the resolution of the mass
market needs, even at 6 or 8MP. (i.e., it's good enough for most 35mm
purposes, and while consumers may ask for higher resolution, there
aren't enough willing to pay for it.)
* The pros need higher-res imaging, but they can just as easily switch
to a medium-format body with a digital back and bear the cost of a
really expensive sensor. (i.e., there's already a solution for this
market segment)
* At a manufacturing level, full-frame sensors will always be more
expensive to make because they have a higher probability of defects
and fewer of them fit on a manufacturing wafer (more scrap material,
lower # units per batch, & higher defect rate).
* "Digital" format lenses are cheaper to produce (and sell), and can
be smaller and lighter because they require less glass for the same
result.
Looking at the above if I were a camera manufacturer, I'd be focusing
on increasing resolution by improving density of the smaller sensors
at the same / less cost, not on physically increasing the size of the
sensor.
It'll be very interesting to see if Canon's 5D is setting a new trend,
or a short-lived idea.
Cheers,
Richard
At this point, the 5D isn't for the masses. A quickie indicator of this is
its lack of built-in flash. This is for people who wouldn't likely neither
want/need nor be satisfied with the pop-gun sized built-in flash. It is for
serious photographers who want their wide angle lenses to work...and who
want the high res of 12.8MP without sacrificing quality to noise. They have
also indicated a plan to keep both the 1.6 crop-factor sensor range, and the
full frame sizes in the future.
The other side of the business coin you describe above is this:
Canon makes most of their money from the sale of lenses. As sensors grow
both in size and pixel density, we are quickly reaching a point where lens
quality is paramount. Sensors are now capable of revealing lens' optical
flaws. From a marketing standpoint, this could be good for Canon, since it
would then "justify" the purchase of their highest quality (and, by far,
their highest priced) lenses. It is already happening. More and more
advanced amateurs seem to be gravitating toward larger, faster, more
expesnive glass. This is where Canon will make a mint. If they were to
limit themselves to small sensors (which also lead to lower threshholds for
noise), they'd only be inviting lesser lens manufacturers to nab their cash
cow (lenses), since everyone could churn out small-sensor-optimized lenses.
I think Canon is not only on the right track business-wise, but they are
also in a position of command in terms of utilizing the larger sensor's
capacity for high-res/low-noise imaging.
-Mark
|