This topic is in the 2009 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2009What happened to the affordable FF dream?
p.4 #1What happened to the affordable FF dream?
Everybody wants to save money, myself included. But, that doesn't mean I expect to get things for nothing. I would like to see prices come down but, the fact is that Canon isn't really any more expensive than Nikon or anyone else. They also invest millions of dollars developing products and people still complain that even the 5D2 doesn't have enough features. Now some people want to drop even more features from the 5D2 to make a 3D or 7D or whatever just so they can have FF. That just doesn't make sense from my point of view. If you really need or want FF and can't afford the 5D2 find a good 5D or 1Ds for around $1000-$1200.
Aug 06, 2009 at 11:00 PM
p.4 #2What happened to the affordable FF dream?
digitalbug30d wrote:
really Canon should bring out the internet legend 3D
16.7mp
digic4x2
3 inch high rez screen
interchangeble focus screens
same A/F and metering as the 1d Series
weatherized as a 1D,ISO 100-6400
form factor of a eos3 film camera
1899.00
why to jump the competition other than a high in mp count
that is better than the 1dmkiii for half the price despite a more expensive sensor
(unless are talking APS-H)
i'd prefer a 6.3 fps 21MP FF
dual digic
1dmkiin AF/metering
no weathersealing/no 100% VF, no integrated grip
video
basically the 3D as a 5D2 as is but with the 1diin AF cpu, dual-digic, the eos 3 shutter/mirror box
realistically probably more like $3100-$3400 to keep same profit margin as 5D2 has, no where near $1900
but i think this has strayed from the original topic of a low cost FF
really Canon should bring out the internet legend 3D
16.7mp
digic4x2
3 inch high rez screen
interchangeble focus screens
same A/F and metering as the 1d Series
weatherized as a 1D,ISO 100-6400
form factor of a eos3 film camera
1899.00
why to jump the competition other than a high in mp count
that is better than the 1dmkiii for half the price despite a more expensive sensor
(unless are talking APS-H)
i'd prefer a 6.3 fps 21MP FF
dual digic
1dmkiin AF/metering
no weathersealing/no 100% VF, no integrated grip
video
basically the 3D as a 5D2 as is but with the 1diin AF cpu, dual-digic, the eos 3 shutter/mirror box
realistically probably more like $3100-$3400 to keep same profit margin as 5D2 has, no where near $1900
but i think this has strayed from the original topic of a low cost FF
Aug 06, 2009 at 11:21 PM
p.4 #3What happened to the affordable FF dream?
A lot of people say that they want to go FF, but they won't buy a used 5D because it doesn't have sensor clean, live-view, or other new tech features. Sounds to me they don't really care about FF.
Aug 06, 2009 at 11:29 PM
p.4 #4What happened to the affordable FF dream?
and there are different interpretations of economic principles. stomping on others' interpretations is tedious.
anyway, i suppose that's neither here or there to me, so i'll jump off with this: someone way up there said people people won't buy a FF dslr with throttled back features. people were buying a fairly featureless FF dlsr new in 2008, and i would suspect that it had something to do with the price overshadowing its shortcomings.
as for the naysayers of FF for the everyman, people are resistant to change, (heliocentric orbit, continental drift, age of the earth) especially when they no longer have a monopoly on cool/luxury/power/etc. FF is still the ethereal thing to be strived after for photography dorks, but FF dslrs for the proletariat are coming, and will put this IQ in (relatively) everyone's reach. the sony 850 in all of its vaporware is testament to that.
anyway, i suppose that's neither here or there to me, so i'll jump off with this: someone way up there said people people won't buy a FF dslr with throttled back features. people were buying a fairly featureless FF dlsr new in 2008, and i would suspect that it had something to do with the price overshadowing its shortcomings.
as for the naysayers of FF for the everyman, people are resistant to change, (heliocentric orbit, continental drift, age of the earth) especially when they no longer have a monopoly on cool/luxury/power/etc. FF is still the ethereal thing to be strived after for photography dorks, but FF dslrs for the proletariat are coming, and will put this IQ in (relatively) everyone's reach. the sony 850 in all of its vaporware is testament to that.
Aug 07, 2009 at 02:09 AM
p.4 #5What happened to the affordable FF dream?
I hope FF cameras never come new under $2K.
Aug 07, 2009 at 02:37 AM
p.4 #6What happened to the affordable FF dream?
I Am Luna:
I hope FF cameras never come new under $2K.
They already have. You can buy new 5D mkI for less than $2000
I hope FF cameras never come new under $2K.
They already have. You can buy new 5D mkI for less than $2000
Aug 07, 2009 at 05:17 AM
p.4 #7What happened to the affordable FF dream?
I paid $2000 for my 5D, and still consider it to be a huge bargain. What a camera, if you don't need machine gun frame rate and lightning AF, which I don't. It easily pays for itself with saved film developing costs and the ability to PP.
Aug 07, 2009 at 05:46 AM
p.4 #8What happened to the affordable FF dream?
nads wrote:
yet used prices still have barely fallen!
Are you kidding? I don't have time to point out all the B&S area deals going on.
I will provide just one case. When the 1Ds 2 was released, it was around $6,000. I just purchased one in mint condition for $2,500.
I am not sure what your definition of "barely" is, but it isn't a 140% drop in price!
Perhaps your perspective is that unless they drop below $1,000, then they haven't moved. I bet if you drop the pizza and beer (as a metaphor, not actual food you eat), for a month, you can afford the additional few hundred to get something over $1,000, since that is your threshold.
One certain way to get them to drop prices is to not buy until they come down; however, you need to persuade more of their market to do this.
yet used prices still have barely fallen!
Are you kidding? I don't have time to point out all the B&S area deals going on.
I will provide just one case. When the 1Ds 2 was released, it was around $6,000. I just purchased one in mint condition for $2,500.
I am not sure what your definition of "barely" is, but it isn't a 140% drop in price!
Perhaps your perspective is that unless they drop below $1,000, then they haven't moved. I bet if you drop the pizza and beer (as a metaphor, not actual food you eat), for a month, you can afford the additional few hundred to get something over $1,000, since that is your threshold.
One certain way to get them to drop prices is to not buy until they come down; however, you need to persuade more of their market to do this.
Aug 07, 2009 at 05:56 AM
p.4 #9What happened to the affordable FF dream?
"A lot of people say that they want to go FF, but they won't buy a used 5D because it doesn't have sensor clean, live-view, or other new tech features. Sounds to me they don't really care about FF. "
Well, I disagree because I did refuse to buy a 5D because it didn't have sensor cleaning and fabulous Live View manual focussing, and I repeatedly said this on FM. Instead I grumbled and groaned about the cost, but eventually had to buy a 5D2, which I love. The original 5D was a great camera, but it doesn't offer everything that anyone might possibly want from a FF body.
Changing the subject, I would welcome a cheap FF body, of course I would. Perhaps the rumours that Sony will oblige and market such a camera soon will start up a whole new marketing niche, the entry level affordable FF body with all the modern bits that the 5D didn't include. I'd snap up such a camera.
Well, I disagree because I did refuse to buy a 5D because it didn't have sensor cleaning and fabulous Live View manual focussing, and I repeatedly said this on FM. Instead I grumbled and groaned about the cost, but eventually had to buy a 5D2, which I love. The original 5D was a great camera, but it doesn't offer everything that anyone might possibly want from a FF body.
Changing the subject, I would welcome a cheap FF body, of course I would. Perhaps the rumours that Sony will oblige and market such a camera soon will start up a whole new marketing niche, the entry level affordable FF body with all the modern bits that the 5D didn't include. I'd snap up such a camera.
Aug 07, 2009 at 06:27 AM
p.4 #10What happened to the affordable FF dream?
Pat Flanakin wrote:
I am not sure what your definition of "barely" is, but it isn't a 140% drop in price!
are you being sarcastic or do you really think something can drop over 100 percent in price?
nads wrote
yet used prices still have barely fallen!are you being sarcastic or do you really think something can drop over 100 percent in price?
Aug 07, 2009 at 06:35 AM
p.4 #11What happened to the affordable FF dream?
mfurman wrote:
I hope FF cameras never come new under $2K.They already have. You can buy new 5D mkI for less than $2000
Damn it.
Earlier quote
I Am Luna:I hope FF cameras never come new under $2K.
Damn it.
Aug 07, 2009 at 06:37 AM
p.4 #12What happened to the affordable FF dream?
big country wrote:
I am not sure what your definition of "barely" is, but it isn't a 140% drop in price!are you being sarcastic or do you really think something can drop over 100 percent in price?
Seriously, sorry, my math was bad. Good catch. The drop in price is around 56% (I was dividing the difference by the current amount instead of the former amount). I agree, something cannot drop in price more than 100%.
Pat Flanakin wrote
nads wrote
yet used prices still have barely fallen!Seriously, sorry, my math was bad. Good catch. The drop in price is around 56% (I was dividing the difference by the current amount instead of the former amount). I agree, something cannot drop in price more than 100%.
Aug 07, 2009 at 06:43 AM
p.4 #13What happened to the affordable FF dream?
The forthcoming Sony a850 looks to be a stripped down a900 (3 fps continuous shooting vs 5 fps; Smaller viewfinder - 98% coverage instead of 100%; Single processor instead of dual processor). Looks like it will be a full-frame DSLR for $1800-2000. The announcement is expected around the beginning of September.
Aug 07, 2009 at 06:52 AM
p.4 #14What happened to the affordable FF dream?
Not sure Canon has any new bodies due out for the cycle. They all seems to be rather fresh (i.e. 5D II, 1D 3s, 50D, etc....).
Aug 07, 2009 at 07:09 AM
p.4 #15What happened to the affordable FF dream?
tsangc wrote:
How far the 5D dropped was a question of inventory and how fast the 5D2 came on stream in the product line, plus the relation to the competition.
It's a bad idea to gauge the cost of producing a product towards the end of a lifecycle--traditionally a manufacturer will dump the last few months as customers are expecting a new model and the other products above and below in the line have become better or cheaper. Who knows why it fell that far? Maybe there was an excess of units and they didn't want to ruin the 5D2 launch?
You do realize that it was sold at the sub $2000 price two years before the 5DII was announced.
How far the 5D dropped was a question of inventory and how fast the 5D2 came on stream in the product line, plus the relation to the competition.
It's a bad idea to gauge the cost of producing a product towards the end of a lifecycle--traditionally a manufacturer will dump the last few months as customers are expecting a new model and the other products above and below in the line have become better or cheaper. Who knows why it fell that far? Maybe there was an excess of units and they didn't want to ruin the 5D2 launch?
You do realize that it was sold at the sub $2000 price two years before the 5DII was announced.
Aug 07, 2009 at 07:12 AM
p.4 #16What happened to the affordable FF dream?
The original 5D was a great camera, but it doesn't offer everything that anyone might possibly want from a FF body.
What could ever meet the criterion of "everything that anyone might possibly want?"
You do realize that it was sold at the sub $2000 price two years before the 5DII was announced.
I never saw a 5D advertised with a true price under $2000 anywhere. I'm not talking about 3-card-monte marketing gimmicks. I'm talking about a genuine price.
What could ever meet the criterion of "everything that anyone might possibly want?"
You do realize that it was sold at the sub $2000 price two years before the 5DII was announced.
I never saw a 5D advertised with a true price under $2000 anywhere. I'm not talking about 3-card-monte marketing gimmicks. I'm talking about a genuine price.
Aug 07, 2009 at 08:16 AM
p.4 #17What happened to the affordable FF dream?
Any full-frame 3D camera is likely to be *more* expensive than a 5D2, not less, based on the assumption that it is a higher-end model and built more like a 1-series body (sans grip). You would not be paying for additional resolution, but rather for higher speed, more responsiveness, improved AF, etc.
But, after the wild success of the 5D2, I have come to doubt that Canon will ever make this camera.
But, after the wild success of the 5D2, I have come to doubt that Canon will ever make this camera.
Aug 07, 2009 at 08:56 AM
p.4 #18What happened to the affordable FF dream?
George.ML wrote:
Well, prepare to be shocked - according to this CNet article, Canon has been using 300mm wafers since maybe 2006. Here's the relevant part:
Current pricing of FF cameras is mostly marketing driven.
As I said in my previous post, these are premium products (at least for now).
Until they lose this status, they won't get cheap.
Fair enough-- they're on a 300mm process, which does give them a higher percentage of usable wafer area (I'm not going to run the calcs). I didn't realize that they were selling enough camera sensors to move to 300mm processing, even if they're using the same fab line for FF and crop-frame sensors (foolish not to). It is a very large investment cost to move from a 200mm to a 300mm fab, even if you make the steppers in house.
However, wafer size doesn't remove the defect density problem of a larger chip. See:
Defect Density for Non-Ph.D's
for a better perspective. The point you may have missed is that the largest Intel processor chips, albeit more complicated than sensor chips, are significantly smaller (250mm^2 versus >864mm^2) and still very expensive. And Intel makes enough of them, on a 300mm process, to drive down costs, especially considering the competitive nature of the processor world. I know of no process engineer who doesn't enjoy hearing about a die shrink, if the fab process is designed to handle it.
The present 1ds3's process became mature enough (i.e. high enough yield) to handle moving the 5Dii to it as well, simplifying the manufacturing lines and reducing costs universally. The process will likely repeat itself on a new 1Ds4, which will be a low-yield FF sensor (i.e. VERY expensive at onset), whose process will mature over some lifetime (2 years?) to make it inexpensive enough to move the 5D platform over to it.
That's how this business works. There is a market driven nature, but be sure that a 24x36 chip is not going to be easy in comparison to a crop frame sensor, ever.
Daniel
Daniel Heineck wrote
People won't get this. A 24x36mm chip is ENORMOUS in semicon speak, especially on a 200mm platform (I'd be shocked if they use 300mm).Earlier quote
Indeed, when I asked him about it, Canon Technical Adviser Chuck Westfall told me, "The machine that Canon uses to manufacture its CMOS image sensors for EOS digital SLRs does in fact use a 300mm wafer...Canon has had the capability to use 300mm wafers since at least 2006."As I said in my previous post, these are premium products (at least for now).
Until they lose this status, they won't get cheap.
Fair enough-- they're on a 300mm process, which does give them a higher percentage of usable wafer area (I'm not going to run the calcs). I didn't realize that they were selling enough camera sensors to move to 300mm processing, even if they're using the same fab line for FF and crop-frame sensors (foolish not to). It is a very large investment cost to move from a 200mm to a 300mm fab, even if you make the steppers in house.
However, wafer size doesn't remove the defect density problem of a larger chip. See:
Defect Density for Non-Ph.D's
for a better perspective. The point you may have missed is that the largest Intel processor chips, albeit more complicated than sensor chips, are significantly smaller (250mm^2 versus >864mm^2) and still very expensive. And Intel makes enough of them, on a 300mm process, to drive down costs, especially considering the competitive nature of the processor world. I know of no process engineer who doesn't enjoy hearing about a die shrink, if the fab process is designed to handle it.
The present 1ds3's process became mature enough (i.e. high enough yield) to handle moving the 5Dii to it as well, simplifying the manufacturing lines and reducing costs universally. The process will likely repeat itself on a new 1Ds4, which will be a low-yield FF sensor (i.e. VERY expensive at onset), whose process will mature over some lifetime (2 years?) to make it inexpensive enough to move the 5D platform over to it.
That's how this business works. There is a market driven nature, but be sure that a 24x36 chip is not going to be easy in comparison to a crop frame sensor, ever.
Daniel
Aug 07, 2009 at 09:14 AM
p.4 #19What happened to the affordable FF dream?
dancam wrote:
Everybody talking about stripping out features on the 5D2 to make a cheaper FF makes no sense! The only thing I can personally see the 5D2 standing to loose would be the video, and that certainly wouldn't make it $600-$800 cheaper. What else would anybody give up just to get FF?
For real. In terms of functionality the 5DII doesn't have much to strip out or downgrade to make it a cheaper camera. Downgrade the AF? Weather sealing? Viewfinder? Framerate? None of those are particularly stellar as it is, so would such a camera sell very well? Depends on the price I guess, but I agree that there's not much room for the 5DII to move downward in features.
If another "affordable" FF were to hit the market the more reasonable direction would be up. Upgrade the features I listed above, sell it for $3000 and move the 5DII downward in price.
Everybody talking about stripping out features on the 5D2 to make a cheaper FF makes no sense! The only thing I can personally see the 5D2 standing to loose would be the video, and that certainly wouldn't make it $600-$800 cheaper. What else would anybody give up just to get FF?
For real. In terms of functionality the 5DII doesn't have much to strip out or downgrade to make it a cheaper camera. Downgrade the AF? Weather sealing? Viewfinder? Framerate? None of those are particularly stellar as it is, so would such a camera sell very well? Depends on the price I guess, but I agree that there's not much room for the 5DII to move downward in features.
If another "affordable" FF were to hit the market the more reasonable direction would be up. Upgrade the features I listed above, sell it for $3000 and move the 5DII downward in price.
Aug 07, 2009 at 11:14 AM
p.4 #20What happened to the affordable FF dream?
garyvot wrote:
Any full-frame 3D camera is likely to be *more* expensive than a 5D2, not less, based on the assumption that it is a higher-end model and built more like a 1-series body (sans grip). You would not be paying for additional resolution, but rather for higher speed, more responsiveness, improved AF, etc.
But, after the wild success of the 5D2, I have come to doubt that Canon will ever make this camera.
Agreed. Sad, but probably true.
Any full-frame 3D camera is likely to be *more* expensive than a 5D2, not less, based on the assumption that it is a higher-end model and built more like a 1-series body (sans grip). You would not be paying for additional resolution, but rather for higher speed, more responsiveness, improved AF, etc.
But, after the wild success of the 5D2, I have come to doubt that Canon will ever make this camera.
Agreed. Sad, but probably true.
Aug 07, 2009 at 11:15 AM