When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
- Thread starter sylvestrerato
- Start date
- Status
nicku said:
You forget about competition. Why do you think we now have $2000 FF bodies? It will take a while, but slowly and surely prices will be forced down as Canon/Nikon/Sony and maybe others fight for market share. People said the sub $1000 DSLR wouldn't happen, then Canon released the Rebel and won over tons of new customers. So someone will make it happen eventually.
Upvote
0
+1 all the way. The first iteration of the 5D is still a very viable camera for many people and can be had well south of $1K. It is what I have now. While it does not have some of the new whiz bang features of new cameras, those features do not necessarily make better pictures. Plus, the price on the 5Dc has fully depreciated so even if you want to sell it down the road, you will not have lost much in the transaction. Oh and I love the large pixel size of the ONLY 12MP sensor; allows for a tighter f stop giving more DOF without diffraction issues. Really wish Canon would make this camera again with this sensor but with ultrasonic cleaning tech included. They could do that for $1K cameras new.RLPhoto said:
Upvote
0
weekendshooter said:
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.
I am not mis-informed, I have a ton of experience in electronics manufacturing and the costs to do so.
Canon has improved processes and switched to 12 in wafers which, along with improved high resistivity wafer manufacturing process technology has vastly improved the yield. Its why the cost of FF bodies has dropped.
However, you only need to work backward from the selling price to become aware that the direct cost to manufacture a Camera is far less than the selling cost.
The direct cost is the actual cost of the parts, and the labor to assemble them.
Selling Price:
less Rebates
less Dealer markup
Less Canon North America Profit
Less Canon Japan Profit
Less Canon Warehousing / Inventory Costs including wages, taxes, facility cost, etc
Less a allowance for Service (Canon Repair facilty & warranty Costs)
Less Losses for broken, damaged, stolen items
Less insurance, both liability and catastrophic damage insurance
less shipping costs
Less Advertising Costs
Less Amortized Tooling Costs
Less R&D
Less amortized Development costs
I'm only roughly touching some of the costs of doing business beyone what it actually takes to assemble a product, which is why the final selling price tends to be a multiple of the actual direct manufacturing cost.
Upvote
0
iso79 said:
Wow....this is logic...but alas, this topic is not logical so it will fall on def ears!!!
Upvote
0
Area256 said:
Maybe it will, I could see a full plasitc body, totally hobbled FF rebel -
but do you want something with like
14MP
6point AF (no cross points)
SD card only
3fps
ISO range 100-1600
I could see that for about a grand, but, it would be sooooo hobbled that I'd say going with a used FF is a better option.
Upvote
0
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..... :
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..... :
Upvote
0
Do you folks have any sources for this talk about $1000 sensors?
Please explain to me how the 6D is $2100 and the D600 is at $2000 when the sensor alone is half of that price? I believe the 6D will be selling at $1700 in a matter of months. I've read that FF sensors cost $500 to manufacture a couple years ago, but I have never heard of them being $1000 to make.
Please explain to me how the 6D is $2100 and the D600 is at $2000 when the sensor alone is half of that price? I believe the 6D will be selling at $1700 in a matter of months. I've read that FF sensors cost $500 to manufacture a couple years ago, but I have never heard of them being $1000 to make.
Upvote
0
If you want full frame, don't care about video, you get a 5D classic. If you are afraid of the lack of warranty, you can literally almost buy two copies for $1,000 these days, and ebay has lots of low mileage copies. I got mine that way and love it.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_sacat=0&_from=R40&_nkw=canon+5D+-ii+-iii&rt=nc&LH_BIN=1
Upvote
0
I remember my dad buying our first VCR, it cost $799. I remember when a 1TB drive cost more than $1000. I believe that 24*36mm cameras will drop below $1000, but it's a matter of when the manufactures have to drop the price, and not when they can. Because they'll be able to sell 24*36 for less than $1000 before they have to sell them at that price.
Upvote
0
Never say never on such things.
It will happen, and it's forseable.
Why? Simply because every products no matter what the domain or when follow the same life curb.
I've not search FF body history and launch price for each item, but if someone can help remember those i would be glad to help and create a predictory chart so we can answer this question.
It will happen, and it's forseable.
Why? Simply because every products no matter what the domain or when follow the same life curb.
I've not search FF body history and launch price for each item, but if someone can help remember those i would be glad to help and create a predictory chart so we can answer this question.
Upvote
0
Regarding the actual manufacture of CMOS sensors ... Canon had put out a white paper on this topic a few years back that still has relevancy now. I found a download location for it here.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_Full-Frame_CMOS_White_Paper.pdf
It is a decent read. Shows how they could only get 20 FF sensors on a 8 inch wafer but could get 200 crop sensors on the same wafer. Also discusses the various processes involved in creating these sensors and what can go wrong. Unlike many other camera makers, Canon makes their own sensors in house.
http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_Full-Frame_CMOS_White_Paper.pdf
It is a decent read. Shows how they could only get 20 FF sensors on a 8 inch wafer but could get 200 crop sensors on the same wafer. Also discusses the various processes involved in creating these sensors and what can go wrong. Unlike many other camera makers, Canon makes their own sensors in house.
Upvote
0
awinphoto said:
I picked one up of craigs;ist for 800m with BG and four real batteries! Not bad at all... but a wee old in the UI.. will be selling it for a 5d MK II... and awaiting the 7D MK II...
Upvote
0
jcollett said:
This white paper has been quoted many times in this forum. Unfortunately, this is dated back to 2006 and there are a few mistakes in the paper. Let us use with the most obvious. Canon claims that they can have 200 APS-C sensors from the 8" wafer. My estimate is only 75 APS-C on an 8" wafer. You can draw it out by yourself and see the mistake that Canon has made. I think Canon was using these number to justify the high cost of the FF sensor and hence the high cost of the FF DSLR. 6 year in silicon fabrication is almost 2 lifetime. Most stuff that was in the white paper has been changed a few times. Also Canon should have moved to 12" fabrication already.
Upvote
0
Hard to say. 2 maybe 3 years perhaps at the rate we're going? Looking at the price of the still current 5DII and comparing that to the 6D I would think we're probably heading in that direction. A $1000 6D would probably sell to a lot of folks who would currently not considering upgrading their Rebels and 60Ds and stuff - and without added production cost really.
It's still too early but I see sensor size becoming the next marketing slogan for the market segment that is still looking at megapixels and ISO numbers.
The question is if there will be any actually usable mirrorless camera first or if it's a small(ish) SLR.
For around a 1000 bucks the 6D would make a really nice entry level camera or a decent backup camera for more invested folks. For 2K I don't see it making any sense in any market segment.
It's still too early but I see sensor size becoming the next marketing slogan for the market segment that is still looking at megapixels and ISO numbers.
The question is if there will be any actually usable mirrorless camera first or if it's a small(ish) SLR.
For around a 1000 bucks the 6D would make a really nice entry level camera or a decent backup camera for more invested folks. For 2K I don't see it making any sense in any market segment.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
