The Future of DX and EF-S Lenses

[Picolo]

I think DX and EF-S lenses will grow faster.
There will be cropped size sensors that have an image quality comparable to full-frame.

[jdepould]

Originally Posted by Picolo

I think DX and EF-S lenses will grow faster.
There will be cropped size sensors that have an image quality comparable to full-frame.

There won't though, because advances in sensor tech will be applied across the board, and full frame sensors will always have more light-gathering capabilities. It's just physics.

[robbiemckay]

Originally Posted by Raoul Isidro

What is the future for these cropped APS sized FOV lenses? (DX and EF-S)
Will they be orphaned as the new cameras with Full Frame sensors become the norm?
I remember how APS Film cameras were so hot the first 2 years and went spiralling to oblivion after that...

I predict that sensors will soon be made using memory card technology. These sensors are so pixel dense compared to todays CCDs and CMOSs that APS-C sized sensors will be gigapixel in size and may be way too large. Even cheaper lenses should work well (along with crop-sensor designed lenses) since these new chips (in development) will use the sweet spot (center) of current lenses.

[sybren]

If there is a trend, it's miniaturization. I don't think APS-C sensors are a dying breed, and EF-S lenses sure have an avantage. By moving the glass further into the body as Canon do they can be smaller, lighter and faster. Because of this it's imposisbe to mount EF-S lenses on a full frame camera - the full-frame-size mirror would slam against the back of the lens. EF-S lenses have a rubberized back to ensure that your camera doesn't kill itself in the unlikely event you managed to force it onto a full-frame body.

You can mount EF-S lenses on a full-frame body using extension tubes. However, you'll still have vignetting (but that can be cropped) and you'll loose infinite focus.

[daft_biker]

Originally Posted by jdepould

There won't though, because advances in sensor tech will be applied across the board, and full frame sensors will always have more light-gathering capabilities. It's just physics.

Smaller sensors can be better for low ISO macro....it's just physics Bigger formats can mean significantly less DoF and/or significantly more diffraction softening as you need to work at higher magnifications. Higher magnifications also usually mean more light loss so the viewfinder gets even darker and/or even shorter working distances. Couple all that with the higher pixel densities you can usualy get on APS-C cameras I find a small sensor makes more sense when the subject is small than your sensor. Pixel density is the main reason I just bought a 7D instead of a 5D2.

I'd still rather have large format for landscapes and stuff. FF is hardly the last word in image quality accross the board though.....just getting better quality from larger formats looks like an expensive business so FF is about as big as I'd be prepared to shell out for.

[jdepould]

Originally Posted by daft_biker

Smaller sensors can be better for low ISO macro....it's just physics Bigger formats can mean significantly less DoF and/or significantly more diffraction softening as you need to work at higher magnifications. Higher magnifications also usually mean more light loss so the viewfinder gets even darker and/or even shorter working distances. Couple all that with the higher pixel densities you can usualy get on APS-C cameras I find a small sensor makes more sense when the subject is small than your sensor. Pixel density is the main reason I just bought a 7D instead of a 5D2.

I'd still rather have large format for landscapes and stuff. FF is hardly the last word in image quality accross the board though.....just getting better quality from larger formats looks like an expensive business so FF is about as big as I'd be prepared to shell out for.

I'm not talking about the actual characteristics of what's better for specific applications. I'm talking about image quality. Plus, full frame sensors give you one to two stops more aperture before diffraction (equal resolution of course), and they just gather light better.

[zona5101]

I think in time medium format digital backs will become affordable, all the dSLRs will be full frame - Small sensor will be used in P&S. Like a circle of what was: med format-35mm & 110/compact 35mm.

[inkista]

I think you guys are way-overestimating advances in chip manufactury. Making denser chips with more circuitry on them at the same size is all that Moore's Law helps you with. But making larger chips is a physical problem. Fewer chips per wafer simply means more expensive chips. And the possibilities of bad chips on the wafer goes up percentage wise. Larger chips are always going to be more expensive than smaller ones.

Medium format film never became affordable. Why should medium format digital? Especially since full-frame digital already delivers more resolution than medium format film did?

[vandergus]

In order to completely replace APC-S DSLR's with full frame one's, the camera companies would have to be able to make a $500 entry level model with a full frame sensor. I don't see that happening any time soon. Of course, EVIL cameras could take over the roll of the likes of the D3000 and 1000D and leave full frame for prosumer on up but Canon and Nikon aren't going to allow themselve to simply be bullyied out of the entry level market by Olympus and Panasonic. They'll definitely have something in that spot. Whether it remains an APS-C DSLR or something else is hard to say. Nikon's continued release of DX specific lenses makes me feel a little better, though.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by inkista

Medium format film never became affordable.

MF film is affordable now . Friend of mine got his Mamiya setup for less than $500.