The Price of Full Frame

[jrista]

- Current 7D AF - paid off tech

Keep in mind, AF systems have to be designed for the sensor size they compliment, to achieve the right amount of frame spread. The 7D AF was designed for an APS-C size sensor, so technically speaking, creating a 7D-style 19 cross-type point AF system for FF would not really be paid-off tech. Who knows what kind of nuances might present when "scaling" the technology to FF size, but its highly doubtful it would be particularly cheap. It would need to go through the same kind of design and QA process that any new AF design goes through.

What is the 'right amount of frame spread'? By most accounts (mine included!), the point spread on the 5DII sucks. Relative to the image sensor size, every other current Canon camera in the lineup has better AF point coverage, from the 1D X down to the T4/1100D, than the 5DII.

FWIW, below is a superimposed image of the 7D's AF points (black) projected onto the 5DII's AF points (blue). The coverage still sucks, but to be honest, it doesn't suck all that much more than the 5DII, and the greter density of points would mean better AI Servo performance. Just sayin'...

Alright, I'll grant the use of "right amount" was probably the wrong term. How about "adequate point spread"? And since you mentioned it, you would also want adequate point density as well. That would be one of the bonuses of a 61 point AF system...much higher density over a greater, more adequate spread for FF, which, even if there aren't 41 cross-type points on a 5D III 61 point AF system, would still be far more useful. ;-)

The 7D's AF point spread is pretty nice for the size of sensor...but it would be fairly limiting for FF area. If I had to choose between the 7D 19-pt AF as-is, and say a 61-point AF based on the 1D X's with only 21 cross-type points in the center, I'd go for the second one. I would rather pay a bit more for a useful AF system designed for a FF sensor than a somewhat useful one that covered only a very small area of the center of the frame.

 

[jrista]

- Current 7D AF - paid off tech

Keep in mind, AF systems have to be designed for the sensor size they compliment, to achieve the right amount of frame spread. The 7D AF was designed for an APS-C size sensor, so technically speaking, creating a 7D-style 19 cross-type point AF system for FF would not really be paid-off tech. Who knows what kind of nuances might present when "scaling" the technology to FF size, but its highly doubtful it would be particularly cheap. It would need to go through the same kind of design and QA process that any new AF design goes through.

There is no scaling, they would use the same size in the FF. The 7D AF is already near the limits a 35mm AF sensor can be and perform properly.

I beg to differ. The 7D AF may be nearing the limits of APS-C (its the light cone that matters...perhaps with EF-S lenses the 7D AF may be nearing limits). However its the 1D X that is at the limits for a 35mm FF AF sensor. It has a much broader point spread of 53% the width of the FF frame, where as the 5D II and 1Ds III covered about 41%, and the 7D probably covers less then 40% of the FF frame (I'd guess about 38%, but more than 50% for APS-C). AF units absolutely scale to the sensor frame, and point spread and point density are key performance factors (the point density of the 1D X AF unit is one of its intriguing features...very point dense despite its greater spread).

Reference: http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/1dx_af_pts_article.shtml

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

- Current 7D AF - paid off tech

Keep in mind, AF systems have to be designed for the sensor size they compliment, to achieve the right amount of frame spread. The 7D AF was designed for an APS-C size sensor, so technically speaking, creating a 7D-style 19 cross-type point AF system for FF would not really be paid-off tech. Who knows what kind of nuances might present when "scaling" the technology to FF size, but its highly doubtful it would be particularly cheap. It would need to go through the same kind of design and QA process that any new AF design goes through.

There is no scaling, they would use the same size in the FF. The 7D AF is already near the limits a 35mm AF sensor can be and perform properly.

I beg to differ. The 7D AF may be nearing the limits of APS-C (its the light cone that matters...perhaps with EF-S lenses the 7D AF may be nearing limits). However its the 1D X that is at the limits for a 35mm FF AF sensor. It has a much broader point spread of 53% the width of the FF frame, where as the 5D II and 1Ds III covered about 41%, and the 7D probably covers less then 40% of the FF frame (I'd guess about 38%, but more than 50% for APS-C). AF units absolutely scale to the sensor frame, and point spread and point density are key performance factors (the point density of the 1D X AF unit is one of its intriguing features...very point dense despite its greater spread).

Reference: http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2011/1dx_af_pts_article.shtml

Yes they did some things to the 1DX sensor to get a wider spread than before but as you see the 7D doesn't need any re-scaling since it covers close to the same amount, certainly not a 1.6x scaling which was my point. And for it to go to 1DX size it would need to begin utterly from scratch not just be re-scaled.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

But all of the production cost, profit margin talk is just for fun. None of us here really know, we are not Canon insiders (I guess there could be a few canon insiders trolling this forum).

very good points... I think it easy for us to guess the price bc we know what the 5DII debuted at ($2699), what the D700 debuted at ($2950),

The D800 will sells for $2999, so I would expect the 5DIII/X to retail for $2799 at release, and be down to $2599 a year later... This its easier to understand than all the production cost talk...

supply and demand... if canon sells the 5DIII for $2999, people will buy it, if they want more sales they will simply drop the price until they feel comfortable with the sales numbers.

I'd say its more likely we'll see a match in price at least for the 5d mkIII, if not maybe more ($3100). They won't drop the native price for a while, more likely they will give their distributors a price break for initial stock, which they can then market to customers with rebates. (release price of $3099, but, offer rebates). Then see how the market reacts. Part of it of course will be is the mkiii/x going to live up to the hype and have the stones to make people say yeah it has this cost, but, its worth it! If it comes out shooters hate it, bad reviews will pour in - then we'll see the price come down for sure. But, if it is the upgrade we all want it to be, it will sell. They will check their spreadsheets and I'm sure there's red lines of how many units need to be sold at the release price point to warrent a native price drop. Just saying. If we see any mkiii's selling new for under $2700, it will be due to rebates, not a native price drop. Consumer psychology - $2800 on a body full price seems like wow, paying a ton, who cares that the release price was $3100 - but, pay that same $2800 after a $300 rebate, then wow, I made out! Score!!!!!

http://chuckalaimo.com/

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Am I really alone in thinking, as a Hobbyist, that a $2k FF body will be awesome and the current Price trend seems ridiculous? Can Canon make money with such a lower priced FF body with parts from the wheely bin, bearing in mind future L lens sales? Will this cannibalize sales of other bodies? Or does every single FF user out there crave for the 36MP 61 AF pt monster at $3,5k body only as rumoured?

Sony tried a 2k full frame body and it wasn't very successful. The good news is that your sub $2k full frame is already here -- it's the used 5D mark II (or a new one if you can get it on sale).

You're not going to see what's very close to a flagship product at a discount price. There's nothing entry level about a full frame body with a flagship sensor and a top of the line AF system.

While it might not seem like Canon make money from used 5D Mark II sales, the buyers of the latest and fanciest technology need to sell their used gear to someone to fund their purchase. So a thriving secondary market where there is reasonably strong demand does help maintain demand for their flagship. If the market is flooded with cheap full frame bodies that are loaded with the same tech as the expensive full frame bodies, it could potentially undercut their high end products. Basically, the guys who would have bought used 5D mark IIs would buy the 6D instead, so those who are selling the 5D Mk II have to offload it for peanuts, and therefore have less to spend on the upgrade.

That last paragraph is a very good point. Price points of these things and their longevity help not only the creators of the product, but, the consumers too. checking now, when it's time to make my upgrade, my 7D will account for about 1/3rd of the cost of the 5dmkiii (What I may actually do is get the 5dmkiii, sell my 7d, and grab a 7d mkii, assuming they come out with one. I like the extra range a 1.6 crop gives you, and I don't want to have spend a ton on a 200-400 mm lens when my 70-200mm covers a lot of ranges on both a FF and 1.6 crop crop bodies!

http://chuckalaimo.com/