Sony to release square ff sensor body?

[Marsu42]

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-hot-new-sony-a1s-with-full-frame-square-sensor/

The new A1S SLT camera with square sensor: According to two different sources Sony has a working prototype which one of my sources told me is called “A1S“. The real incredible news is that it has a Full Frame square sensor. Don’t know if it is 36mm x 36mm or a bit smaller. The source said that “will change the world of Full Frame photography“. The very good news is that all current Alpha and Minolta Full Frames lenses will work on it without any issue!

While it might only have an optical viewfinder like other sony bodies I have to agree with the comment on the site: "Take that Nikon D800 and new Canon 5D!". And it makes me wonder if it's still a clever idea to invest in high quality canon lenses that will last a decade or more if the big money r&d competition seems to do better than the not that revolutionary advancement of the 5d2->5d3 after a couple of years.

Disclaimer: I love Canon, I have a Canon, I won't sell my Canon. But still...

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Cost goes up exponentially with the area of the sensor, so, unless there is some other breakthru, we are talking spending a lot more $$$.

 

[marekjoz]

What is the advantage of a square sensor? Is the circular sensor the next step?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

What is the advantage of a square sensor? Is the circular sensor the next step?

Some like square framing, so you get more mp and thus higher resolution if you crop now to a square format. If you like the 3:2 format, it merely saves you from having to rotate the camera for portraits, since you will crop anyway, you might not like to spend the extra money on a large sensor.

Of course, some will see that it has 60mp and buy it because of the mp, even though they will crop half of it way. I do not see much advantage to circular, you will almost always throw away a lot of the image that you paid 10X for.

 

[marekjoz]

What is the advantage of a square sensor? Is the circular sensor the next step?

Some like square framing, so you get more mp and thus higher resolution if you crop now to a square format. If you like the 3:2 format, it merely saves you from having to rotate the camera for portraits, since you will crop anyway, you might not like to spend the extra money on a large sensor.

Of course, some will see that it has 60mp and buy it because of the mp, even though they will crop half of it way. I do not see much advantage to circular, you will almost always throw away a lot of the image that you paid 10X for.

I don't see any sense in circular sensor either. Your notes on square sensor make sense but I don't see how this might "change the world of FF photography". Anyway it's true, that Sony makes a big progress.

 

[stabmasterasron]

Cost goes up exponentially with the area of the sensor, so, unless there is some other breakthru, we are talking spending a lot more $$$.

Digital sensors are becoming a mature product, and Sony makes sensors for other camera manufacturers (Nikon D800). I don't think the sensor cost is a very large chunk of the overall final price you pay for it at a retail outlet. It may be the single highest cost component to manufacture, but I find it hard to believe the cost, by itself, is very high relative to the final sales price. Price is driven more by market factors than individual component price.

 

[Marsu42]

Price is driven more by market factors than individual component price.

While I don't know the exact cost relation in a body, I tend to agree.

The companies that produce ff dslr bodies are working like a trust and only release high quality, high cost ff products. Once someone releases a medium quality ff body at a budget price because it's possible nowadays with large sensors getting easier to produce, the deal's off and we might see aps-c pushed down to entry level and ff becoming the standard amateur format. At least that's what I hope.

 

[stabmasterasron]

Price is driven more by market factors than individual component price.

While I don't know the exact cost relation in a body, I tend to agree.

The companies that produce ff dslr bodies are working like a trust and only release high quality, high cost ff products. Once someone releases a medium quality ff body at a budget price because it's possible nowadays with large sensors getting easier to produce, the deal's off and we might see aps-c pushed down to entry level and ff becoming the standard amateur format. At least that's what I hope.

Yes, exactly. I have said this same thing on other forum posts relating to the future of FF sensors. Mirrorless is eroding out the bottom end of the dslr market. The only place left to go is upscale. Not necessarily in price, but in features (yes, there is a weak linkage there). But for canon to continue to compel people to buy entry level dslr's, they have to offer a reason to do so over a competing mirrorless system. Now for the savvy, this is easy, they can see a clear upgrade path from an entry level dslr, where the path is maybe not so clear for mirrorless. But most entry level buyers are not that savvy. So they need other reasons to buy a dslr. FF could be the answer to that question. I know FF isn't that answer to all image problems, but it could be a compelling reason for many buyers to go dslr instead of mirrorless.