December 18, 2014, 01:32:57 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - ScottyP

Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 39
301
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Information [CR1]
« on: November 30, 2012, 11:42:25 AM »
--The camera will also get some technologies from the EOS-1D X, like the AF system and noise performance. [/quote][/i][/b]

Is that even remotely possible?  Are they saying the same ISO performance, or does this just suggest there will be some improvement in ISO performance?  That would not just be a new sports body, that would be a revolution in Canon's (or anyone else's) crop sensors that would ripple out through the whole line.

I hope it does mean at least 1 full stop improvement.  Two would be utterly amazing.

302
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 29, 2012, 08:28:57 AM »
Never

Chip costs for the sensor won't allow for pricing to be that low and everyone making a markup.  Compromises made to the 6D at the $2k price point seem to piss everyone off, so to think of a $1k price, it wouldn't even be a p&s type.  Refurb on sale gets a 5d2 down to 1,400-1,500 range, but that's about as low at it will go.

I don't believe that the FF sensors cost dramatically more to make than 1.6 crop sensors.  They use the difference to allow them to sell cameras at a lower price point to 95% of the people buying cameras without undercutting the prices on their own FF models. 

It may cost a lot to develop new sensor models, but I really don't think FF sensors cost a whole lot more money to crank out than a crop sensor, and I don't think either one really cost as much per unit to fab as people imagine.  Chip fab facilities in Taiwan, etc., just crank these things out like saltine crackers.  There should be no reason camera sensor production economics should be dramatically different from all the other chips and things we are surrounded with.  The difference is in the huge markup they are allowed due to very little competition.  High-end camera sensors have not become commoditized like most other microelectronics.     

The manufacturing  cost of a 24x36mm sensor is many times higher than the APS
Replacing 5dmk2 sensor= cost of purchasing 8000 SEK = around 1200 USD three years ago

And the point is missed again. 
1.  The fact Canon charged you 1200 dollars to replace a sensor does not mean it costs common that much to make it. Actually it proves the opposite. Canon made a profit on that part plus labor cost too.
2.  Maybe a FF sensor does cost Canon several times more to manufacture than a crop sensor costs canon to make. But so if the crop sensor only costs canon 25 bucks to make, then you are talking only a couple hundred or few hundred bucks.

@ScottyP Using your very flawed logic it only costs 10-15 bucks to manufacture an APS-C sensor. Mikael highlights the fact that it costs several times more to make a FF sensor (remember that the surface area of a FF sensor is nearly 2.5x bigger than an APS-C sensor).

In truth, you DO NOT KNOW how much it costs to make, only Canon Inc. does. Speculating about something you know absolutely nothing about is the folly of futility ::)

What is the most expensive component in a modern DSLR camera? I think most people would say; probably the sensor.

Again, using your fundamentally flawed logic, if a FF sensor costs just $25 more than an APS-C one, and Canon can manage to sell me a 7D for 1000 euros, but want 3600 euros for a new 5D, then Canon are making an EXTRA TWO-AND-A-HALF GRAND PROFIT on the 5D3 ???


Sometimes it is a good idea to go back and read what you've written. Then contextualize it. Look at the real world and put it into practice.

Maybe I didn't express that, or maybe you only skimmed what I wrote. 
First, I said a crop sensor probably costs $25 bucks, not $15 bucks, for Canon to churn out.  This could be $35 bucks, but no way more than $50 bucks BASED ON WHAT THEY SELL CROP CAMERAS FOR.  The sensor does have an entire camera attached to it.   ;)  Also, Canon makes a profit, and the retailer makes a profit.  How much room do you see for all those other expenses plus all those other profits if they are selling the crop body for $500.00 or $600.00??
Secondly, I allowed for sake of argument that it really does cost 'several times more to make a FF sensor".  Several means "four" in colloquial English.  So, $25 x 4 = $100.  $35 x 4 = $140.  $50 x 4 = $200.
Thirdly, look at the 6D.  Sells pre-order for $2100.  You know it will be going for $1700 or $1800 in 6 months.  You lose any and all credibility if you claim the FF sensor in that thing costs Canon more than few hundred to make, given the cost of all the other parts in the camera, plus labor, plus profit to Canon plus profit to the retailer, etc...

Yes, the sensor probably is the most expensive single part, but there are many many other parts in there too, and they all cost money also.  The processor, the shutter, the motherboard, the LCD screen(s), the body, and hundreds more.  Plus the cost to assemble all these parts into a camera.  There is just so much you can reasonably claim the sensor alone costs Canon to manufacture.

303
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 29, 2012, 08:17:20 AM »
Canon could do sub-$1000 FF SLRs any time it wants to, and do it profitably.  Because it can, does not mean it will, nor mean it should.

That's why I think that any lower priced FF camera will be a surprise entry from a low market share camera company.  The big three (Canon, Sony and Nikon) already have FF entries.  They're don't want to disturb their margins by introducing a low cost FF camera.  They also won't want to cannibalise their higher end models.  With the peer pressure on photographers to go full frame, they know that people will happily pay a high price if they feel it will lead to photograhy perfection. 

But for Mamiya, Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung, Pentax, Ricoh, Casio etc who are all looking at increasing market shares (and in some cases just want to stay in business), getting into the FF market must look very tempting.  And it will be hard for them to compete with the big three.  The answer I keep coming back to is to introduce the camera at a low price and make your money on the lenses and on future higher specc'd camera model releases.

Without wanting to be too repetitive, the company I keep coming back to is Pentax.  Their K-01 is retailing for $350.  What the??  Surely they can just put a FF sensor in their and sell it in the low $1k range?  It will have a K mount and would interest a lot of people.  My alternative is Samsung, who are very ambitious right now and want to be seen as the world's leading tech company.  Surely their camera division are under pressure to gain more profits and market share.

That makes a lot of sense.  Good point.

304
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 29, 2012, 06:32:10 AM »
Never

Chip costs for the sensor won't allow for pricing to be that low and everyone making a markup.  Compromises made to the 6D at the $2k price point seem to piss everyone off, so to think of a $1k price, it wouldn't even be a p&s type.  Refurb on sale gets a 5d2 down to 1,400-1,500 range, but that's about as low at it will go.

I don't believe that the FF sensors cost dramatically more to make than 1.6 crop sensors.  They use the difference to allow them to sell cameras at a lower price point to 95% of the people buying cameras without undercutting the prices on their own FF models. 

It may cost a lot to develop new sensor models, but I really don't think FF sensors cost a whole lot more money to crank out than a crop sensor, and I don't think either one really cost as much per unit to fab as people imagine.  Chip fab facilities in Taiwan, etc., just crank these things out like saltine crackers.  There should be no reason camera sensor production economics should be dramatically different from all the other chips and things we are surrounded with.  The difference is in the huge markup they are allowed due to very little competition.  High-end camera sensors have not become commoditized like most other microelectronics.     

The manufacturing  cost of a 24x36mm sensor is many times higher than the APS
Replacing 5dmk2 sensor= cost of purchasing 8000 SEK = around 1200 USD three years ago

And the point is missed again. 
1.  The fact Canon charged you 1200 dollars to replace a sensor does not mean it costs common that much to make it. Actually it proves the opposite. Canon made a profit on that part plus labor cost too.
2.  Maybe a FF sensor does cost Canon several times more to manufacture than a crop sensor costs canon to make. But so if the crop sensor only costs canon 25 bucks to make, then you are talking only a couple hundred or few hundred bucks.

305
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 28, 2012, 09:13:32 AM »
Ok, $sub-$1,000 might be a bit of an exaggeration, but those who knowledgeably proclaim that the FF sensors cost $1,500 or $1,000 are nuts. 
Watch and see when the 6D hits a flash sale for $1,700 or $1,800 and then try to tell me that the sensor in that thing costs $1,000 to make.  No way that with that $800 dollar difference that they can build a whole camera body to put the sensor into, with all the other expensive processors and parts and LCD screens, and still have room left over for Canon and also the retailer make money.

But then if someone would start a thread arguing that there is no good reason for Canon to charge so much for (insert some other random single camera part here) the 150,000 - 200,000 actuation-rated shutter, lets say, on the more expensive bodies.  We would have had a lot of excited FF owners typing furiously defending how a good shutter like that CERTAINLY costs $1500 dollars alone.  Or the magnesium body must cost $1000 alone to make.  Or the processors must probably cost $1,500 dollars each for Canon to make.  And those heavy-duty neck straps.....     ::)

306
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 25, 2012, 02:12:01 PM »
Quote
You're quite misinformed if you think sensors are that cheap. Think $1k for full frame and $100-200 for APS-C. Again, it's REALLY HARD to make huge chips with no imperfections. A single dust speck or mistimed/mismeasured fabrication step is much more expensive for a full frame process where only a few chips fit on a wafer than on APS-C, which fit many more. Every possible cost is squared and then some when building big chips.
FF sensors definitely are not 1000 dollars each....
If they were, the 6D would be 3000 dollars minimum, not overpriced at 2100.
I have read VERY conflicting articles on it, but at this point, I don't even think they are evn $500 each as seems to be the most quoted price online...
The last article I read made it seem like they more about $100 each to produce....
I haven't read an article yet that I fully trust in terms of the actual price of the sensor, but somehow, I know that they are not $1000.
If anyone has a link to an article that more clearly and absolutely gives the cost of manufacturing sensors i'd be quite interested to read it.

EXACTLY.  If they sell a 6D for $2100 (and then lower it to retail for $1,700 6 months after release) then how in the world could the sensors cost $1,000.00??  Canon has to make a profit, plus the retailer has to make a profit, plus the REST of the camera has to cost something to make and to assemble too, right??  Also all the marketing and advertizing Canon does in all the magazines, TV, etc., is not free either. 
It might be gratifying (if you own a FF body) to think that a crop sensor could be made for $20 bucks but a FF must cost 50 TIMES that much, but that is nonsense.  And you know the crop sensor can't cost more than $25 to $50 bucks tops, or else how could the T3i I bought 1 year ago at its peak have cost $630.00 body-only, and still the retailer made money, Canon made money, and on top of that, they managed to wrap a whole camera around that sensor, all with change left over?

307
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 25, 2012, 12:23:51 AM »
I don't believe that the FF sensors cost dramatically more to make than 1.6 crop sensors.  They use the difference to allow them to sell cameras at a lower price point to 95% of the people buying cameras without undercutting the prices on their own FF models. 

You would believe wrong then.

A FF sensor has approximately 2.6x the surface area, so they only get about 1/3 as many on a wafer.
Because of the increased surface area there is an increased risk of flaws, but not a 2.6x increase, a 6.9x increase. (actually 6.9x (square of the difference) sounds a little high, so don't quote me on that.  I do know it's not linear though.)
There is also the reduced volumes vs. APS-C, especially taking into account for the 18MP sensor that has made it into seemingly half the APS-C bearing line.

Add those all together, and you get massive cost increases.

As to your second point (unquoted for brevity)...

Even an APS-C sensor is larger (up to 2x) than the latest 6 & 8 core Intel processors.  Have you priced out an 8 core Xeon lately?  They start north of $1k in bulk.  And even the newest 10 core E7 processors are almost half the size of a FF sensor, and they start at about $2500.

Sensor vs. CPU isn't an entirely fair comparison though.  Processors are several orders of magnitude more complicated, and expensive to fab.  They're also more sensitive to flaws.

So I guess my takeaway point is...  Things are more complicated than you think.

You quote the retail price of Intel CPU's, which misses my point.  Whatever the retail, you know it doesn't cost Intel anything like that much to produce.  Even if you can really translate surface area directly into fab cost (cost per square centimeter), and the surface area is 2.6 times greater, and even if the 0.05% dud rate is really multiplied by 6.9x or whatever number you toss at it, I still am not convinced that the actual cost to make it is that great.  2.6 times what?? 


308
EOS Bodies / Re: When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
« on: November 24, 2012, 09:05:35 PM »
Never

Chip costs for the sensor won't allow for pricing to be that low and everyone making a markup.  Compromises made to the 6D at the $2k price point seem to piss everyone off, so to think of a $1k price, it wouldn't even be a p&s type.  Refurb on sale gets a 5d2 down to 1,400-1,500 range, but that's about as low at it will go.

I don't believe that the FF sensors cost dramatically more to make than 1.6 crop sensors.  They use the difference to allow them to sell cameras at a lower price point to 95% of the people buying cameras without undercutting the prices on their own FF models. 

It may cost a lot to develop new sensor models, but I really don't think FF sensors cost a whole lot more money to crank out than a crop sensor, and I don't think either one really cost as much per unit to fab as people imagine.  Chip fab facilities in Taiwan, etc., just crank these things out like saltine crackers.  There should be no reason camera sensor production economics should be dramatically different from all the other chips and things we are surrounded with.  The difference is in the huge markup they are allowed due to very little competition.  High-end camera sensors have not become commoditized like most other microelectronics.     

309
EOS Bodies / Possible positive 6D surprise? Should I wait?
« on: November 24, 2012, 02:26:27 AM »
Various websites are saying the 6D sensor will actually have an advantage in low noise at high ISO vs. the sensor on 5D3. 
I have an itchy trigger finger with all the $2500 give-aways on the 5D3.  If the 6D were really going to stay at or around $2100.00, it would seem like a slam dunk for buying 5D3, UNLESS the new sensor really is better in low light...  I realize the AF seems to have been deliberatively crippled (and overly-so!), but for shooting portraits and candids and casual soccer of my kids, I really don't need the pro athlete or bird-in-flight AF.

Plus, heck, the replacement for the 7D (7D2?) could have a wildly better sensor?

What do CR folks think of this?

I should say you can see my equipment below my name.  I shoot portraits and candids of my 7-year old and 6-y-o and my infant.  They do/will play some peewee soccer, but nothing challenging for another 6-8 years max!  I've never met a bird who would pay fair value for an excelent portrait at 1000 yards, so I don't need too incredible an AF capability.   :)

310
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Ended: Canon EOS 5D Mark III Body $2499
« on: November 24, 2012, 01:48:12 AM »
<div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><g:plusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/11/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-body-2499/\"></g:plusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/11/canon-eos-5d-mark-iii-body-2499/\">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>*UPDATE*<br />


</strong>The deal has sold out, but <strong><a href=\"http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5574981434&toolid=10001&campid=5337186548&customid=&icep_item=221116170557&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg\" target=\"_blank\">still available for $2886</a></strong> shipped from the same seller.</p>
<p><strong>From BigValueInc

</strong>Big Value Inc has the Canon EOS 5D Mark III for $2499 via eBay.</p>
<p><strong><a href=\"http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5574981434&toolid=10001&campid=5337186548&customid=&icep_item=360512357497&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg\" target=\"_blank\">Canon EOS 5D Mark III $2499 via eBay</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>


Wow.  That was posted here at 7:39 in the morning on Black Friday, and it was reported "SOLD OUT" within just about an hour?

I may need to watch the computer constantly whilst working on "Cyber Monday".  I am certain my boss would not mind?

311
EOS Bodies / Re: Next year's APS-C vs. this year's FF
« on: November 23, 2012, 07:30:00 PM »
Source: Serious lurking on this forum.

Observation: Two of next year's camera bodies will allegedly get entirely new naming systems: the high MP, and the 7D successor.

Speculation: That's because they'll introduce Canon's new sensor technology. Probably 180nm instead of 500nm (on a side note, I'd love to know more specifics about what that means).

Question: If Canon does implement this tech in a 7D.2, could that APS-C camera produce lower noise at low ISO than current FF cameras?

I ask because I'm pretty invested in EF-S lenses but also very interested in a 6D. Low ISO IQ is the #1 consideration for me. Thanks for any thoughts or info!
I doubt if we will see a APS-C camera with lower noise than a 5D MK III.  There is such a large difference, and improving noise by even 1/2 stop is a big deal.
If Canon actually is able to use a rear illuminated sensor as in their recent patent, then we might see a 1 stop gain, which would be huge.  I'm hoping to see that happen, it would likely appear in a 7D MK II first.
The 180 nm technology allows more pixels, but I doubt if it improves 18mp sensors by more than a tiny amount.
Canon is claiminng that they will have a 100% robotic assembly line.  Thats likely where development money is going.  Canon's strong point is low cost production of very good products, but not necessarily the best.  They can price lower than the competition and still make a larger profit.

We don't know if they "can" price lower than the competition.  We do know that they "don't." :P

312
Lenses / Re: 1Dx or lenses
« on: November 22, 2012, 11:22:16 PM »
Hard not to go with the glass.  Or THREE pieces of it, to be exact.   :D

Don't know if you are hitting walls with the 5D3 that you could walk right through with the 1Dx, but only you know, and it is your money and your life. 

Not a terribly bad dilemma to have, b/t/w.

313
EOS Bodies / Re: What will be the issue with the 6D
« on: November 22, 2012, 11:13:12 PM »
A related topic, is there any moderation of the canonrumors forum? There is so much anti-canon stuff that is allowed to proliferate and seems mainly aimed at making canon owners think they make poor decisions and should be filled with regret. Instead, this forum could be a pleasant haven for Canon users where people share, solve and support one another. All it would take is some decent moderation of the anti-Canon crap from either bitter people or blatant trolls.

As long as they don't resort to personal attacks, name calling, or profanity; they shouldn't be moderated.  My job isn't to judge peoples personal opinions, they're entitled to them, and I would refuse the job if given it.  As long as things are kept civil, most things will work themselves out, and most dedicated trolls will leave out of boredom or banned because of bad behavior.  There are some forum members that started off with very trollish behavior and ended up becoming good helpful forum members.

Amen.  Very well said, and it speaks very well of the integrity of this entire site!

314
EOS Bodies / Re: What will be the issue with the 6D
« on: November 22, 2012, 11:11:50 PM »


A related topic, is there any moderation of the canonrumors forum? There is so much anti-canon stuff that is allowed to proliferate and seems mainly aimed at making canon owners think they make poor decisions and should be filled with regret. Instead, this forum could be a pleasant haven for Canon users where people share, solve and support one another. All it would take is some decent moderation of the anti-Canon crap from either bitter people or blatant trolls.

Perhaps that sort of un-newspeak you describe should be supressed.  Not to speak too strongly, but I feel it is double-plus ungood.  (Saying this loudly so I can be heard clearly by Big Brother)

315
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: What would you do? Crop or FF
« on: November 22, 2012, 02:22:50 PM »
Only you can say if that trade is a good one, especially as you will be $1050 cash in on the deal.

I am not sure losing a good zoom in exchange for a 40mm pancake is really all that great, and yes, you are going to be a little hard up on the wide end.  Even adjusting for the wide-end help you'd get from the FF sensor, you'd still be missing out on whatever you used to do between 17mm and 25mm on your old lens/camera combo. 

Perhaps you should also add in the cost of the wider glass you may find you will want to buy?

I am in kind of the same situation.  I might like to go FF, and I probably would if it was "only" the considerable cost of the camera body.  The kicker, though, is additional cost of the new walk-around zoom I'd need to shell out for (24-70 or 24-105 or something), or maybe 2 or 3 primes instead.

I agree with the others that say if you do it, do it right.  You should be sure you have bought enough good glass to make the FF camera work well for you.

Good luck.  Unfortunately no real camera deals on B&H "Black Friday."   :P


Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 39