Forecast the Future

[Farkled]

When do you think that a full frame 20+mp, consumer priced (<=$1000) camera will be available?

The reason I ask is that my perspective says that one buys lenses that will last pretty much a lifetime and that camera bodies come and go. That being the case, if one believes that full frame stuff will be ready in 5 years then today's small sensor lenses only have a 5 year life.

Thanks for your thoughts?

[Saralonde]

Who knows what they have on their drawing boards, but I wouldn't count on it. DSLRs are under $1000 to appeal to the general consumer market, most of which don't want or need a full frame camera. I think they figure if you'reinto photography enough that you want a full frame, you'll be willing to pay for it along with the lenses you'll need to go with it.

[Farkled]

Who knows what they have on their drawing boards, but I wouldn't count on it. DSLRs are under $1000 to appeal to the general consumer market, most of which don't want or need a full frame camera. I think they figure if you'reinto photography enough that you want a full frame, you'll be willing to pay for it along with the lenses you'll need to go with it.

For the sake of discussion....

35mm film is, by definition, full frame. I think most people still expect that level of capability from their cameras. There is a long list of lenses already out there that don't have to be re-designed and reinvented if only the chip were a little larger. Then there is competition. Note how the mp race in PnS goes on with little concern for the noise factor. I suspect that someone other than Canon & Nikon will just up and do it because they will have to one-up everyone to survive. Look what happened to the DSLR market with Canon. I believe the demand is there and that the 1st model will open a floodgate.

So, if I'm at all close to right, then the question remains: when?

[inkista]

I dunno. I mean, sure, there are bits of digital cameras that inevitably follow Moore's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law), but there are bits that don't. Cramming photosites onto sensors is obviously the prior, but given that we're slamming into the noise issue, the megapixel race may be ending. (Which also begs the question--why would you want 20MP on a full-frame? 22-40 megapixel is medium format time (http://www.hasselblad.com/products/h-system/h3d)!)

But I think all that may happen is that larger sensors will start going into P&Ses. I mean, that's where the volume is. And to successfully differentiate the dSLRs, I'd be willing to bet they find a sensor size that's smaller than APS-C, while larger than the 1/2.5" crowd. There's still a lot of room there (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm).

The physics of bending light are more or less immutable. I mean, if there was one body I would have thought when it went digital would be full-frame, it was the Leica M8. And in the end, they had to jump with a 1.3x crop, and some incredibly complex and cool engineering to make even that work with the shorter back focus in a rangefinder body.

The truth of the matter is that the reason pros have made the leap to digital is that the resolution of the full-frames rivals medium format film (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/shootout.shtml). People are still going to want full-frame, but for folks who just want something equivalent to 35mm? Crop bodies are already there. And in fact, full-frame lenses work better on crop bodies because they only use the sweet spot of the image circle: the center. I see way more people wanting to make the leap to larger P&S sensors than from APS-C to full-frame. I'd be willing to bet that five years is optimistic in seeing an under $1000 FF SLR body arrive on the scene.

Hasselblads never became high-volume, low-cost consumer items... Just my 2¢.

[matthewchj]

Well, Canon already has the 16.7MP full-frame 1Ds MkII, but it cost about US$8000 if I'm not wrong. Well, give it maybe 10, 15 years and the price might just drop to a thousand.