When will we have a full frame body below $1,000?
- Thread starter sylvestrerato
- Start date
- Status
i'll be that guy that chimes in with---
It's already here! It's called the original 5d, or as many call it the 5dc. I see them used now for $500-900 all the time.
It's already here! It's called the original 5d, or as many call it the 5dc. I see them used now for $500-900 all the time.
Upvote
0
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.
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.
Upvote
0
Halfrack said:
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.
Upvote
0
Costs to make a FF sensor have certainly dropped dramatically over the years, but the basic concept driving the price to 20X the cost of APS-C has not changed. DSLR sensors are not made from run of the mill silicone wafers as some seem to think.ScottyP said:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/public_files/Canon_Full-Frame_CMOS_White_Paper.pdf
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 42026
Guest
2nd hand full frame camera's. As people have said the 5D classic. I wouldn't buy it personally, but its there and cheap. Even 1Ds mark ii's are nearly there, much more tempting I'd suggest.
The question is that are they better than the current crop sensors? No, not necessarily at all... possibly far behind.
You know what Im sick of? People seeing crop sensors as second rate. THEY'RE NOT necessarily *points to the 7D*. Most people don't need to spend a massive bucket load of cash on a Full Frame vs a crop sensor, they won't get the real benefit anyway.
Get off your high horses. Skill will matter a million times more than any fancy piece of overpriced tech. 'Oh, full frame is better at high iso' ... really? Thats it? Oh, that's right ... reach? NO... don't care, doesn't matter.
The question is that are they better than the current crop sensors? No, not necessarily at all... possibly far behind.
You know what Im sick of? People seeing crop sensors as second rate. THEY'RE NOT necessarily *points to the 7D*. Most people don't need to spend a massive bucket load of cash on a Full Frame vs a crop sensor, they won't get the real benefit anyway.
Get off your high horses. Skill will matter a million times more than any fancy piece of overpriced tech. 'Oh, full frame is better at high iso' ... really? Thats it? Oh, that's right ... reach? NO... don't care, doesn't matter.
Upvote
0
I do believe that. Exponential error rates truly are a bitch. But although an aps-c sensor can be manufactured for a couple of dozens of dollars tops, an FF sensor doesn't need to cost more than a few hundred dollars. You'd think that a $700 Rebel with a FF sensor slapped on would fit the bill.ScottyP said:
However, stuff like the shutter, the mirror mechanism and the pentaprism needs to be a lot bigger too, and that isn't exactly cheap either. Now you can save money on most of those (say: pentamirror instead of prism) but that would chip away at the quality of both camera and images. And quality is exactly the reason to choose FF over crop. It would make no sense to produce an extremely cheap FF camera, unless of course the market for gear whores becomes substantially bigger than that for actual photographers. I may be naive, but I don't think that's the case yet.
By the way: every few decades prices double because of inflation, so a sub-$1000-camera will be less likely every year. If it is to happen, it'll need to happen in the very near future - say less than five years. Unless Sony starts making 450mm sensor wafers with excellent yields real soon, and I don't see that happening. And I don't see Canon invest in that sort of tech anytime soon at all.
All in all, my guess is never, but you may get lucky between 2015 and 2020
Upvote
0
That day will come...
And the day mobile phones become FF will also come..just a matter of time i believe...
And the day mobile phones become FF will also come..just a matter of time i believe...
Upvote
0
Available right now...pre-owned on eBay.
Nothing wrong with a well looked after, low-mileage 5D or 5DII.
But new? It will happen. Probably not 2013, 2014 or even 2015. If you have a budget limit of $1k and have a definite need for FF, it's a pre-owned body for you.
-PW
Nothing wrong with a well looked after, low-mileage 5D or 5DII.
But new? It will happen. Probably not 2013, 2014 or even 2015. If you have a budget limit of $1k and have a definite need for FF, it's a pre-owned body for you.
-PW
Upvote
0
ScottyP said:
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.
Upvote
0
Buy a film body. Full frame with an interchangeable sensor. It's pretty awesome and has been around for a little while, so they have had time to work out all the bugs!
But to answer the OP's original question. It's hard to say since they are marketed as top end consumer cameras and "professional" cameras. There is no REAL reason "Full Frame" has to be considered a high-end / pro format. My EOS Rebel G is all plastic (even the mount) with 3 AF points... and IT'S FULL FRAME! Does that mean I could have considered myself a pro when I got it from Santa as a kid?
Basically FF will have to be the standard sensor in entry-level cameras first to be marketed <1K.
Also, ask the average tourist walking around with a Rebel what size sensor is in their camera, or what the "crop factor" is, and you'll most likely get a blank look. They don't care.
But to answer the OP's original question. It's hard to say since they are marketed as top end consumer cameras and "professional" cameras. There is no REAL reason "Full Frame" has to be considered a high-end / pro format. My EOS Rebel G is all plastic (even the mount) with 3 AF points... and IT'S FULL FRAME! Does that mean I could have considered myself a pro when I got it from Santa as a kid?
Basically FF will have to be the standard sensor in entry-level cameras first to be marketed <1K.
Also, ask the average tourist walking around with a Rebel what size sensor is in their camera, or what the "crop factor" is, and you'll most likely get a blank look. They don't care.
Upvote
0
W
weekendshooter
Guest
bvukich said:
Absolutely right. I've done work in nanofabrication and the plain fact is that big chips are extraordinarily difficult and expensive to make. Many of the advancements made in fabrication technology in recent years have aimed to reduce the minimum feature size, enabling smaller, more power-efficient chips. This sort of move is irrelevant to sensor fab, as sensors have a fixed overall size and thus are very expensive to make regardless of how advanced the fab process is.
Imagine building something where your initial investment (building the fab) is in the billions of dollars, then for every time your process messes up a single step (out of dozens) you have to toss out a wafer of 10 or more full frame sensors. These things are extremely hard to get right, and prices won't go way down by a significant margin anytime soon unless someone decides it's worth it to sell full frame cameras at a loss.
That could be a nice venture, considering how much full frame lenses cost! Nikon already sells its lowest crop body (think canon T3) as a kit only, so I can see Canon doing this and selling a barebones full frame body with a mandatory 24-70/4 IS kit. I'm sure $1500 for that lens is leaving plenty of profit margin ;D
Upvote
0
pwp said:
Consider the following initial list prices (source dpreview.com):
- EOS D30: US $2990
- EOS D60: US $2199
- EOS 10D: US $1999
- EOS 20D: US $1599
- EOS 30D: US $1399
- EOS 40D: US $1299
- EOS 50D: US $1299
- EOS 60D: US $1099 (possibly not a real comparison)
Canon has kept release prices of enthusiast level APS-C bodies above the $1000 barrier. Although, if one were to adjust for inflation, we would be below the 2000 value of $1000.
I suspect, subject to market forces, Canon will probably try to keep full frame bodies above $1500 (at launch). Given the trajectory shown above, that may take another 2 generations to reach, however.
You also need to consider where Canon is pitching the xx0D range - which have now settled at listing just below $900 at launch. That makes a sub $1000 full frame body seem unlikely to me, unless APS-C starts to fall away, which seems unlikely to me.
Upvote
0
W
weekendshooter
Guest
gmrza said:
APS-C will always have a place in Canon's lineup, as they have proven that a 1.6x crop sensor is useful for many types of photography. APS-C sensors are the sweet spot for the manufacturer price-wise; they can charge $1000 for a 60D-type camera where the sensor costs a couple hundred dollars, compared to a 6D that's going for $2000 with a $1500 sensor. As things are now, Canikon can't charge significantly less than $2k for a full-frame body without either making it out of silly putty or taking a significant loss on every camera sold.
Upvote
0
weekendshooter said:
Although I am in agreement that a FF sensor is more expensive, it certainly does not cost Canon $1500. Their cost to manufacture the 6D is going to be less than that. The selling price of a body is probably at least 3 - 4X the cost to manufacturer it. Adversising, freight, maintaining warehouses, returns and the cost of servicing cameras are huge expenses. And, then, there is the dealer profit and the rebate program. It likely costs $300 to give a buyer a $200 rebate, for example.
My guess as to the price for a FF sensor for the 6D is about $350-$450 max. The APS-C sensors likely now cost $20 to make.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
