End of the APS-H sized CMOS?

[Steve Todd]

It's hard for me to imagine Canon will abandon the highly successful, 1.3 sensor format?  I can only see this happening if a 1.3 crop is offered as a CF function on a future FF sensor.  Too many Pros rely on the benefits of this less than full frame  format, to make any sense of abbandoning it altogether!  I just spoke to a Canon rep this weekend at a convention we both attended (not a photo related event).  When I asked him about the possible merge of the 1D line and the possible end of the APS-H sensor, his only comment was "many pros live and die by the 1.3 crop sensor and its tremendous image quality."  So, if they are planning to abandon it, they must have something pretty impressive in the works!  I know I have said this before in the past (as have many others); "How can they make much of an improvement over the current technology?" and yet they did and did it well indeed!

[7enderbender]

Pros that "live and die" by APC-H? I'm not a pro but that sounds weird. I would think that most pros work with anything that they are given or that works for a specific need. Correct me if I'm wrong but I would think that APS-H was a compromise back then because "full frame" didn't yet deliver the speed that journalists and sports people were used from their film cameras.
And it appears that this is now obsolete and things could slowly return to a "normal" sensor size across the board. So where would be the benefit other than the current price difference?

[Gtgroove]

I think is not possible to see Canon leave APS-H sensor, I think instead there will be a repalcement for the APS-C sensor with APS-H in the future, for speed shooting and more quality pictures.

[CR Backup Admin]

I don't believe APS-H is going away, simply due to cost.  They make and sell a ton of the 1D camera bodies for $5,000 and charge $8,000 for full frame.

Certainly, APS-C is not going away either, in fact, I expect a smaller format for mirrorless cameras.

[YoukY63]

I don't believe APS-H is going away, simply due to cost.  They make and sell a ton of the 1D camera bodies for $5,000 and charge $8,000 for full frame.

Certainly, APS-C is not going away either, in fact, I expect a smaller format for mirrorless cameras.

I totally agree with scaleusa!

Maybe I am wrong, but I am pretty sure that Canon sells more 1D bodies than 1Ds bodies. The number of journalists (especially sport one, and they are really many) that use and need an APS-H sensor is just too big.
1D and 1Ds bodies are tools, and each tools fit to one specific need. That's the way to be efficient.

Replacing it by a FF sensor would not make the match: the bigger sensor means to have a very high pixel density to "compete" with APS-H sensors. But, if you increase that pixel density, you will reduce the speed of your camera (too many data to manage --> lower frame rate).

Furthermore, 1D bodies are the exact opposite of 1Ds bodies: one is made to work in high isos (for very short shutter speed), the second one with very low isos (remember, the limit of 1DsIII is 1600 isos! No need more in fashion world, but less than 50 isos would be very welcome!) One more time, professional users will not find what they are looking for in a merged version.

[drummstikk]

Maybe I am wrong, but I am pretty sure that Canon sells more 1D bodies than 1Ds bodies.

No, you are not wrong. In my various jobs I see dozens of 1D's in use, and only know of one photographer using a 1Ds. He commands megabucks for commercial, full bleed magazine cover photos, so more power to him.

I'm ambivalent on APS-H. I've been close to pulling the trigger on a new or used 1D several times, but have always ultimately decided it's not enough better than my 7D's to justify the extra cost, and also not close enough to the angle of view of the 5D to be a good companion to that camera. If I got way busier and used my camera's much harder, then the heavier-built 1D would be a no-brainer. But in my rather modest business as it is now (and will continue to be until the economy stops sucking), the 7D's will be my workhorses, and the 5D will be an artistic choice or a 3rd body/backup.

So, APS-H could disappear tomorrow, and I really wouldn't notice. I have a hard time believing many pros "live and die" by this format. If you give pros a higher-megapixel full-frame sensor so they can do the "crop-factor" in Lightroom rather than in the camera, I think most of them would go for that and not mourn the death of APS-H.

I do think APS-H could have a future in pro-sumer cameras in the 7D-type market space, but I have to feel that the pro lines (1D and its future successors) will consolidate around the full-frame format in coming years.

[Bob Howland]

So, APS-H could disappear tomorrow, and I really wouldn't notice. I have a hard time believing many pros "live and die" by this format. If you give pros a higher-megapixel full-frame sensor so they can do the "crop-factor" in Lightroom rather than in the camera, I think most of them would go for that and not mourn the death of APS-H.

If Canon had simply enlarged the 1D2 8.2MP sensor to FF for the 1D3, the result would have been about  12MP. The 1D3 sensor enlarged to FF would have been about 16MP. Do these pixel counts sound familiar? Arguably, Canon is about 2 generations late in going FF in their 1D series.

As for Canon's long term commitment to APS-H, I'll ask once again: Where is the Canon APS-H equivalent to the 16-35 FF lens and the 10-22 APS-C lens?

[unfocused]

Just a thought, but why do we all assume that an APS-H sensor would be replaced by a body with a full-frame sensor? It occurs to me that Canon might ultimately replace the APS-H sensor with a APS-C sensor once they are comfortable that they can get the same or better image results out of the smaller sensor. If a 1.3 crop is good for sports and wildlife shooters, a 1.6 crop should be even better.

No, they wouldn't want to call the camera a 1D. Maybe a 4D or 9D? Same sensor as the next generation of 7D, but in a 1D-type body?

[J. McCabe]

I think is not possible to see Canon leave APS-H sensor, I think instead there will be a repalcement for the APS-C sensor with APS-H in the future, for speed shooting and more quality pictures.

That would imply forcing all owners of EF-S lenses to buy new body & lenses, at which point many of them might switch brands. Additionally, it would require closing the EF-S lenses production lines, and opening new ones, e.g. ultra-wide lenses for APS-H.

I think the more likely Canon will stop making APS-H cameras than APS-C cameras.

[Stone]

I don't believe APS-H is going anywhere.  The only way Canon could shelve the tech is if APS-C IQ and dynamic range can somehow exceed that of APS-H.  I don't see it now, but perhaps Canon has that trick up it's sleeve.  There's still the matter of the DOF advantage that APS-H and FF have over the APS-C sensors.  I still say if the next 1D is FF and I'm not sure it will be, the next 7D will be APS-H and the 70D will become the fast crop body.  That's my story and i'm sticking to it 

[AdamJ]

I don't believe APS-H is going anywhere.  The only way Canon could shelve the tech is if APS-C IQ and dynamic range can somehow exceed that of APS-H.

As others have said, Canon's lenses aren't range-specific to APS-H so there are no system-related exit barriers for APS-H. Surely it's only a matter of time (possibly very soon) before we see a very high resolution full-frame camera capable of 10FPS. Then what would be the point of APS-H?

[Ivar]

I think at this point the only way to improve remarkably the IQ is to increase the light gathering area.

[Haydn1971]

I'm a tad baffled as to why people see the APS-H format as dead - others have said elsewhere that the 1.3x crop offers better picture quality than APS-C, but much faster framerates and much higher ISO performance than full frame sister products.  It's essentially a product that offers a specific range of benefits against certain restrictions.

Using the car analogy, the family car is the APS-C, the luxury performance saloon is the full frame, but hang on, I want the performance, but don't need the four seats of the big car - I'll buy the sports car instead ! Want a hatchback car, buy a micro 4/3rds, want a cheap Korean runaround ? Buy a compact zoom camera.

[Ivar]

Using the same technology, ALWAYS the bigger sensor wins in high ISO due to be able to collect more light.
As for actual products, it seems to me that the 1.3x is not the best option out there concerning high ISO, where did you get this idea? Also, frame rate has only to do with the amount of data to move, not to the sensor size. Imaginable 16MP FF 1D MK4 could have easily done the same 10fps as it does currently with the crop.

The real or relative benefits for crop are:
* more spread AF points, for some reason they cannot be expanded in FF
* cheaper to make (take a note however, the 1D-series is no way cheaper  to buy though, it is just more margin for Canon. Reality check - look at the 5D MK2 FF price or check Nikon FF equivalents)
* due to data throughput constraint a smaller sensor allows more density, ie. magnification. This has, however, limited potential as technology improves.

I'm a tad baffled as to why people see the APS-H format as dead - others have said elsewhere that the 1.3x crop offers better picture quality than APS-C, but much faster framerates and much higher ISO performance than full frame sister products.

Using the car analogy, the family car is the APS-C, the luxury performance saloon is the full frame, but hang on, I want the performance, but don't need the four seats of the big car - I'll buy the sports car instead ! Want a hatchback car, buy a micro 4/3rds, want a cheap Korean runaround ? Buy a compact zoom camera.

[Haydn1971]

Using the same technology, ALWAYS the bigger sensor wins in high ISO due to be able to collect more light.
As for actual products, it seems to me that the 1.3x is not the best option out there concerning high ISO, where did you get this idea? Also, frame rate has only to do with the amount of data to move, not to the sensor size. Imaginable 16MP FF 1D MK4 could have easily done the same 10fps as it does currently with the crop.

Simple really...   Take a look at the current camera body specs.

To answer your second part, a 16mp frame will be saved to a memory device quicker than a 21mp frame - it's about 75 % of the size, the 16mp frame will also be processed quicker than the 21mp frame for a given picture process engine.  Mixing in the Digic 4 process engine over the Digic 3 of the FF camera, is why the current 1.3x 1D has a frame rate roughly twice the speed of the current 1Ds.

With regard to the first point about ISO, again, read the specs, the newer 1D has a much greater performance in terms of ISO than the full frame sensor in the 1Ds or the later 5D.  I'm not a image sensor expert, I design roads for a living, but it seems plausible that the 1.3 crop sensor in the 1D has been optimised to provide better ISO performance than the then current full frame technology.  Should full frame technology be released in the next 12 months that match the 1.3 crop, I'm pretty sure the techniques will be deployed in the next 1.3 crop sensor to great affect.

Canon wouldn't be selling a £4k1.3 crop product if there wasn't demand for it's benefits, similarly they wouldn't by selling the £6k full frame product if everyone wanted the 5D instead.  Each camera has it's own advantages, it seems more implausible to imagine a gap between a 5D Mk3 at say £2.5k and a replacement 1Ds at a launch price of say £7-8k, the 1D sites slap bang in the middle.  Sticking my neck out, I'd suggest that there is as much chance of the 1.3 crop disappearing as a 1.6 crop 1Dx in the future or a 3D appearing.