If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
I recently bought an Rebel XT and realized that the so called "digital"
lense does not cover 35mm format. Now the question is, how long will it be before the manufacturers migrate to full-frame format. I ask because I don't want to buy several "digital" lenses and 5 years later, no new bodies can use them. On the other hand, I suppose, at the same cost, the smaller coverage lenses can be made sharper than the 35mm lenses because of less design constraint? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
"panabiker" writes:
I recently bought an Rebel XT and realized that the so called "digital" lense does not cover 35mm format. Now the question is, how long will it be before the manufacturers migrate to full-frame format. I ask because I don't want to buy several "digital" lenses and 5 years later, no new bodies can use them. Search on past articles we recently had a long thread on that, and I don't think anyone felt that APS-C was going away any time soon, at least not in 5 years. The overriding reason is that it is and will remain rather difficult, and definitely a lot more expensive to fabricate a full frame sensor. I sunk $1100 into Canon's EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens and feeling fairly safe in having done so. Full frame sensor cameras will drop in price a bit, I think, but I think we're not likely to see one under the $1000 price point any time soon. On the other hand, I suppose, at the same cost, the smaller coverage lenses can be made sharper than the 35mm lenses because of less design constraint? Within the tradeoffs of money and size, yes, it's a lot easier to achieve a given sharpness level in a cropped view. That's why I see no shame in well constructed EF-S lenses. -- Todd H. http://www.toddh.net/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 09:29:35 -0500, panabiker wrote:
I recently bought an Rebel XT and realized that the so called "digital" lense does not cover 35mm format. Now the question is, how long will it be before the manufacturers migrate to full-frame format. I ask because I don't want to buy several "digital" lenses and 5 years later, no new bodies can use them. On the other hand, I suppose, at the same cost, the smaller coverage lenses can be made sharper than the 35mm lenses because of less design constraint? I think the short answer to this would be: If you think it's likely you will someday want to go full-frame regardless of the availability of APS-C sensor sized cameras, then stick with EF lenses. If you are happy with the APS-C size sensor you will most likely be able to buy new models for the forseeable future, I'd guess they will still be making new models in 10+ years. So if APS-C is good for what you do, don't worry about EF-S vs EF lenses. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
Image quality does not scale linearly with sensor size in digital imaging
the way it does in film. When you can wrap your head around that idea check out the new 10mp APS-c sensors dSLRs and find fault with image quality compared to even scanned medium formal film. The APS-c sensors are technically superior already to the capabilities or needs of the vast, vast majority of photographers, whatever their level of experience. Then try on a real earthshaking idea: perhaps a serious camera does not have to resemble a 1936 Exacta in order to be capable of technically excellent results even in the hands of most photographers, aesthetically challenged and specification obsessed though they may be. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
bmoag wrote: Image quality does not scale linearly with sensor size in digital imaging the way it does in film. When you can wrap your head around that idea check out the new 10mp APS-c sensors dSLRs and find fault with image quality compared to even scanned medium formal film. The APS-c sensors are technically superior already to the capabilities or needs of the vast, vast majority of photographers, whatever their level of experience. Then try on a real earthshaking idea: perhaps a serious camera does not have to resemble a 1936 Exacta in order to be capable of technically excellent results even in the hands of most photographers, aesthetically challenged and specification obsessed though they may be. I agree here the 10 or 12mp APS sensor is more compariblr to 6x4.5 than 35mm. It may even compare favorably to 6x6. The full frame sensor costs about 10x an APS sensor and give a little better results (maybe 6x7) definitly not 4x5 (Hassleblads new back comes close there). So APS may be the standard and 35mm sized sensors if you want slightly more resolution. Since the res we are dealing with now is unprecidented and APS sensor are fairly cheap to produce I think they will be here a long time. Tom |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
On 28 Sep 2006 07:29:35 -0700, "panabiker" wrote:
I recently bought an Rebel XT and realized that the so called "digital" lense does not cover 35mm format. Now the question is, how long will it be before the manufacturers migrate to full-frame format. Most are already their but I suspect you meant *exclusively*. Even if Full Frame sensor prices drop to the same cost of present day crop factored sensors, don't you think the cost of crop factored sensor will still be less expensive to produce? I ask because I don't want to buy several "digital" lenses and 5 years later, no new bodies can use them. On the other hand, I suppose, at the same cost, the smaller coverage lenses can be made sharper than the 35mm lenses because of less design constraint? Think cost to benefit ratio. Some of us (like myself) like the crop factored cameras in part because we favor the telephoto end for most of our photographic needs. Here a crop factored DSKR can be a plus in providing a boost in the equivalent effective focal length(s). I for 1 like my very inexpensive ($75 USD) Canon EF 50mm f1.8 lens which acts much like an 80mm lens on my 300D & or 30D. The bottom line for me & I suspect others, is that a crop factored DSLR will very likely always be less costly to produce than a FF DSLR. So if that's all I need & or it actually meets my needs better than a FF DSLR, why would I want a FF DSLR? Also I do like the fact that a crop factored DSLR does to some extent use the sweat spot (central) portion of most EF lenses to achieve better corner sharpness. If I include the 18-55mm kit lens that came with my 300D, I own 3 EF-S lenses & they each have a purpose & each still get used for certain things. The original 300D (1.6x crop factored sensor) brought the DSLR within affordable range for many. I suspect they will continue to do so for a great many years to come, bringing more P&S owners over to a DSLR sooner than they might have come were there only FF DSLR cameras to choose from. Also I still own P&S cameras & always will because they each have their place. Respectfully, DHB "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
panabiker wrote:
I recently bought an Rebel XT and realized that the so called "digital" lense does not cover 35mm format. Now the question is, how long will it be before the manufacturers migrate to full-frame format. I ask because I don't want to buy several "digital" lenses and 5 years later, no new bodies can use them. When full frame gets down to $1000, 1.6x will be about $300. They will stop making expensive EF-S lenses for the cheap 1.6x cameras by then. If you have an 1.6x camera, do you want to be without the lenses you want for 5 years by not buying EF-S? You can buy a 5D now, and EF lenses only. But full frame cameras will drop in price, too. And even EF lenses will drop in price when new lenses come out. So you might lose more money by going full frame and EF lenses instead of 1.6x and EF-S. On the other hand, I suppose, at the same cost, the smaller coverage lenses can be made sharper than the 35mm lenses because of less design constraint? And EF-S lenses should be cheaper than comparable EF lenses at the same quality level. http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
"DHB" wrote in message ... On 28 Sep 2006 07:29:35 -0700, "panabiker" wrote: I recently bought an Rebel XT and realized that the so called "digital" lense does not cover 35mm format. Now the question is, how long will it be before the manufacturers migrate to full-frame format. Most are already their but I suspect you meant *exclusively*. Even if Full Frame sensor prices drop to the same cost of present day crop factored sensors, don't you think the cost of crop factored sensor will still be less expensive to produce? I ask because I don't want to buy several "digital" lenses and 5 years later, no new bodies can use them. On the other hand, I suppose, at the same cost, the smaller coverage lenses can be made sharper than the 35mm lenses because of less design constraint? Think cost to benefit ratio. Some of us (like myself) like the crop factored cameras in part because we favor the telephoto end for most of our photographic needs. Here a crop factored DSKR can be a plus in providing a boost in the equivalent effective focal length(s). I for 1 like my very inexpensive ($75 USD) Canon EF 50mm f1.8 lens which acts much like an 80mm lens on my 300D & or 30D. The bottom line for me & I suspect others, is that a crop factored DSLR will very likely always be less costly to produce than a FF DSLR. So if that's all I need & or it actually meets my needs better than a FF DSLR, why would I want a FF DSLR? Also I do like the fact that a crop factored DSLR does to some extent use the sweat spot (central) portion of most EF lenses to achieve better corner sharpness. If I include the 18-55mm kit lens that came with my 300D, I own 3 EF-S lenses & they each have a purpose & each still get used for certain things. The original 300D (1.6x crop factored sensor) brought the DSLR within affordable range for many. I suspect they will continue to do so for a great many years to come, bringing more P&S owners over to a DSLR sooner than they might have come were there only FF DSLR cameras to choose from. Also I still own P&S cameras & always will because they each have their place. Respectfully, DHB Of course this all goes out the door at some time in the future when you realise that all these nice new cheap FF D-SLR's take a much better pic, yes better lenses will be more expensive but if you want better pics then that is the price you will have to pay. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
AaronW wrote: When full frame gets down to $1000, 1.6x will be about $300. They will stop making expensive EF-S lenses for the cheap 1.6x cameras by then. I doubt 1.6x cameras will ever be $300. The overriding factor will be the price of *good* lenses, which hardly change over the years. It makes little sense to market a $299 camera body for use with $600 lenses. People who can only afford a $299 dSLR will not be splurging on $600 lenses. Sure, Canon can make cheapie EF-S lenses for $200. But the best $500 point-and-shoot cameras will be cheaper and better than budget $299 dSLRs with cheapie $199 lenses, don't you think? I do think that cropped sensor cameras are here to stay though. For most people, the low noise images of dSLRs in the 10-12 megapixel range is enough. Not many amateurs make prints larger than 19"x13" for personal use. Speaking from experience, I can tell you that most casual photographers are shocked at how big these digicam pictures appear on their monitor! At some point, people will stop caring about the megapixels. Not when their baby pictures start appearing on the monitor as humongous portraits with the baby's iris taking up the entire screen. It's getting ridiculous. As Canon has *explicitly* said in the past, they do intend to go full frame in the future for ALL their dSLR models except the entry level. In other words, the digital rebel will remain 1.6x crop practically forever. The 10/20/30D series will be full frame. Eventually, I suspect the crop camera bodies will have its prices settle in the $600 range, and the most expensive EF-S lenses drop to roughly the same price ($600). Full frame bodies will be $1200, and the best EF "L" lenses priced similarly at $1200. A clear and defined line between "consumer" and "prosumer" dSLR equipment. For most amateurs, they really don't need to use (or spend) anything more than the 1.6x bodies and compact EF-S lenses. That's why those 1.6x cameras will be here to stay. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Longevity of APS-C Format
panabiker wrote: I recently bought an Rebel XT and realized that the so called "digital" lense does not cover 35mm format. Now the question is, how long will it be before the manufacturers migrate to full-frame format. I ask because I don't want to buy several "digital" lenses and 5 years later, no new bodies can use them. On the other hand, I suppose, at the same cost, the smaller coverage lenses can be made sharper than the 35mm lenses because of less design constraint? A lot of people *LIKE* APS-C. The camera is smaller and lighter and so are the lenses and you get sharper pictures. If you are shooting dollar bills from 20 feet away and then blowing them up to 10x life size so you can see the red and blue threads, you will get slightly sharper results with a 35mm sensor. Otherwise, no one can tell the difference. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What will the Nikon D300 be like? | Alexander Arnakis | 35mm Photo Equipment | 69 | December 13th 05 05:13 AM |
Large Format Clubs/Groups? | Sherman | Large Format Photography Equipment | 4 | November 21st 04 11:14 PM |
did anyone try this: cheap point-n-shoot on the back of a large format beast? | chibitul | Digital Photography | 241 | August 16th 04 12:02 PM |
did anyone try this: cheap point-n-shoot on the back of a large format beast? | chibitul | Large Format Photography Equipment | 243 | August 16th 04 12:02 PM |
Anti-digital backlash continues ... | Bill Hilton | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 284 | July 5th 04 05:40 PM |