When will these people get it? Telephotos CAN shrink

On 2012-03-15 20:56 , Andrew Reilly wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 16:58:56 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

On 2012-03-15 11:45 , James Silverton wrote:
On 3/15/2012 10:50 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

That is still only half the area of a full frame CCD sensor at
864mm^2.

True enough and I think it is worth adding that the Sandy Bridge CPU is
just about 21mm on a side as opposed to full frame at 36x24mm.

A photo sensor chip doesn't needs the fine layout of a CPU.

CPU's like the i7 are about 730M transistors per chip (quad core) on
263mm^2. That's nearly 3M per square mm. (!).

A FF photography sensor has up to 36M photo sites with up to 4
transistors per site (2 or 3 is typical). Edge logic will bump that up
a little but 2 orders of magnitude less. All in all, less than 150M
transistors on a chip that is over 3x the size of an i7.

A mere 200,000 transistors (at most) per mm^2.

Potentially lower costs per chip even considering defect rejection.

OTOH, the volume of CPU production is an order or 2 higher than FF
sensors leading to lower costs overall.

The density of circuits doesn't matter, other than the extent to which
they require newer fab lines. All that matters (regarding manufacturing
cost) is number of process steps and yield per wafer.

FF sensors can be made on relatively older lines where the capital plant
cost has been recovered and passed on in the pricing.

Defect rates on lower "pitch" production is lower. Defects on a photo
sensor are more tolerable (defect mapping) than on a CPU.

--
"I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did.
I said I didn't know."
-Samuel Clemens.

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , Trevor
wrote:

OTOH, the volume of CPU production is an order or 2 higher than FF
sensors
leading to lower costs overall.

I would have thought far more than 2 times, but the number of FF sensors
made would increase rapidly if a cheaper FF camera becomes available.

right, because factories just magically appear as needed.

I guess you haven't seen what has happened to the prices of large panel
TV's, computers, and cheap digital cameras then. Do you really believe the
factories manufacturing those just magically appeared? Are you really that
thick that you don't understand lower prices increases demand, increases
economy of scale, and allows further price reductions?
(when the raw materials are a minor part of total cost anyway)
Altenatively the manufacturer keeps prices high and chooses a bigger profit
margin on smaller volume sales, as is the case atm.

Trevor.

In article , Trevor
wrote:

Altenatively the manufacturer keeps prices high and chooses a bigger profit
margin on smaller volume sales, as is the case atm.

think about that for a bit.

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , Trevor
Altenatively the manufacturer keeps prices high and chooses a bigger
profit
margin on smaller volume sales, as is the case atm.

think about that for a bit.

Yes do so, then tell us why the 5D outsells the 1DS, how they made more
sensors to build them, and why they build the 5D if some people are happy to
buy the 1DS?
A FF priced under the 5D3 is only a matter of time IMO, whether you agree or
not.

Now if you have nothing else to add, time to move on!

Trevor.

Trevor wrote:

"nospam" wrote in message
...
In article , Trevor
Altenatively the manufacturer keeps prices high and chooses a bigger
profit
margin on smaller volume sales, as is the case atm.

think about that for a bit.

Yes do so,

Do it yourself.

then tell us why the 5D outsells the 1DS,

The 5D is no longer sold.

how they made more
sensors to build them,

In factories that took years to build.

and why they build the 5D if some people are happy to
buy the 1DS?

- almost everyone who'd have bought a 1Ds at their price poing
had already done so,
- the 5D was not eating into the target market of the 1Ds (pros
who need robustness and stuff that really works),
- Nikon users who wanted FF switched to Canon at the
affordable 5D (and bought lenses and flashes, too)
- the higher price of the 5D didn't hurt APS sales
- overall, the 5D brought way more money than the loss of 1Ds
sales

A FF priced under the 5D3 is only a matter of time IMO, whether you agree or
not.

It's called a 5D2.

Now if you have nothing else to add, time to move on!

Yep, time to move Trevor on.

-Wolfgang

In article , Trevor
wrote:

Altenatively the manufacturer keeps prices high and chooses a bigger
profit margin on smaller volume sales, as is the case atm.

think about that for a bit.

Yes do so, then tell us why the 5D outsells the 1DS, how they made more
sensors to build them, and why they build the 5D if some people are happy to
buy the 1DS?

they had to have the sensors before they could release the 5d, which
was a few years after the 1ds. the 5d didn't sell that well initially
either. canon had to offer multiple rebates to move them.

A FF priced under the 5D3 is only a matter of time IMO, whether you agree or
not.

i never said it wasn't going to happen. what i said was it isn't going
to happen as soon as you want.

canon and nikon are not in any rush given the sales of what they have
now. sony is probably going to be first with a cheap full frame since
they don't have much else to compete on.