Who thinks this is an ANTI-CLIMATIC product? As in, the 5DIII

[PhilDrinkwater]

One man's trash is another man's treasure. I think someone would be insane NOT to be blown away by this piece of equipment. It improves on the Mark II in every single way (save for the one thing I don't need or want: more MP).

Exactly the same for me. I neither need or want more resolution for the work I do. All I'd be doing was recording more detail which I had to store that I'd be getting rid of again when the files were reduced in size.

However, I understand that some people either need or want more resolution. My personal view is that more want it than genuinely need it.

 

[scottsdaleriots]

I was so hyped up for the 5dmkiii but now it's just too expensive. Not to mention nikon have won the high MP war at least for the next 3-5 years I reckon.

 

[XanuFoto]

I was so hyped up for the 5dmkiii but now it's just too expensive. Not to mention nikon have won the high MP war at least for the next 3-5 years I reckon.

I thought NOKIA Phone won the high MP war.

 

[jrista]

I was so hyped up for the 5dmkiii but now it's just too expensive. Not to mention nikon have won the high MP war at least for the next 3-5 years I reckon.

I thought NOKIA Phone won the high MP war.

Depends. The Nokia Phone is a pixel-binned camera...you don't normally get the full 41mp, and when you do use it for "high resolution" shots, its somewhare in the vicinity of the D800 in terms of actual image resolution. When using it in binned mode, the images are about 3, 5, or 8mp (depending on binning mode), from what I've read. Pixel binning can indeed produce better quality photos, however you don't get a normal RAW image out of them (either JPEG or something akin to Canon m/sRAW), so you lose much of the flexibility RAW has when processing in post.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

For those of you whom don't beleive the camera manufacturers are ripping us off. Here is a price list for a 16 bit 80MSPS ADC. Talk about milking the technology.

http://www.analog.com/en/analog-to-digital-converters/ad-converters/ist/191/pst.html

Well, if we use $50 as a base, and assume Canon has one ADC per read channel from the sensor (which I think would be essential to achieve 12fps@18mp)...that would be 16 ADC's at $50 each for a total of $800 (for 1D X), or 8 @ $50 for a total of $400 (for the 5D III). Thats assuming the ADC's are independent components. In the past, I believe they have been an integrated part of their DIGIC processors, and its entirely possible Canon has partly taken the approach Sony did, and are now embedding the ADC right on the sensor itself. Integrating the ADC component with any other component, and doing so while keeping electronic noise low, while still supporting the very high readout rates for 10-12 fps...is expensive.

I don't think camera manufacturers are ripping us off with their ADC's.

You missed the part where the price is $50.... for each PACK of 1000 ;D
(i.e. 5 cents each)

Oy, I did miss that. Oops. ;D Well, the other points still remain true, its not cheap to produce complex IC's like cmos sensors and DIGIC processors. The real cost isn't the ADC anyway, its far more complex devices like the metering or AF system and large IC's like the sensor.

I bet the real cost, talking direct material cost only, is mostly in the shutter/mirror box and the sensor (if it is FF size). Perhaps a little in the VF if it is exactly 100%. Many of the chips inside DSLRs have also been used in the $40 P&S cameras.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

You missed the part where the price is $50.... for each PACK of 1000 ;D
(i.e. 5 cents each)

Oy, I did miss that. Oops. ;D Well, the other points still remain true, its not cheap to produce complex IC's like cmos sensors and DIGIC processors. The real cost isn't the ADC anyway, its far more complex devices like the metering or AF system and large IC's like the sensor.

Actually you didn't miss it, I've purchased parts from Analog and that's an indicative price per unit if you buy 1000 pieces, from the * at the bottom of the page:

* The pricing listed here is provided only for budgetary purposes as recommended list price in U.S. Dollars in the United States ex factor (sic) per unit for the stated volume.

High resolution / speed ADC converters are quite expensive. They're gradually coming down in price, going back 20 years or so there were many parts north of $1000 per unit.

Oops I guess I missed it. :-[ Pesky *.
Still, they don't use ones as fancy as that in the DSLRs.

 

[jrista]

For those of you whom don't beleive the camera manufacturers are ripping us off. Here is a price list for a 16 bit 80MSPS ADC. Talk about milking the technology.

http://www.analog.com/en/analog-to-digital-converters/ad-converters/ist/191/pst.html

Well, if we use $50 as a base, and assume Canon has one ADC per read channel from the sensor (which I think would be essential to achieve 12fps@18mp)...that would be 16 ADC's at $50 each for a total of $800 (for 1D X), or 8 @ $50 for a total of $400 (for the 5D III). Thats assuming the ADC's are independent components. In the past, I believe they have been an integrated part of their DIGIC processors, and its entirely possible Canon has partly taken the approach Sony did, and are now embedding the ADC right on the sensor itself. Integrating the ADC component with any other component, and doing so while keeping electronic noise low, while still supporting the very high readout rates for 10-12 fps...is expensive.

I don't think camera manufacturers are ripping us off with their ADC's.

You missed the part where the price is $50.... for each PACK of 1000 ;D
(i.e. 5 cents each)

Oy, I did miss that. Oops. ;D Well, the other points still remain true, its not cheap to produce complex IC's like cmos sensors and DIGIC processors. The real cost isn't the ADC anyway, its far more complex devices like the metering or AF system and large IC's like the sensor.

I bet the real cost, talking direct material cost only, is mostly in the shutter/mirror box and the sensor (if it is FF size). Perhaps a little in the VF if it is exactly 100%. Many of the chips inside DSLRs have also been used in the $40 P&S cameras.

Your forgetting the AF unit, which is fairly large, must be extremely precise in its design, is generally bound to the sensor size (from a point spread standpoint), and must be coupled with advanced control logic in the camera's processor. When you factor in the metering sensor into the AF system (as they usually are these days), that makes the whole system even more complex. There is all the software to manage the AF and metering system, make it customizable, hook all that customizability into the various body buttons....

I think expensive cameras are expensive simply because they are expensive. I don't think you can really reduce the cost down to a single component or two as easily as we would all wish. They are complex automated systems of interconnected, synchronous parts that work at incredibly high speed. Its not just metering, or just AF, or just the sensor, or even just any couple of those parts...its the system as a whole, multiple discrete components operating in harmony to accurately track subjects and produce highly detailed, highly accurate, high resolution photos...N times a second.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

For those of you whom don't beleive the camera manufacturers are ripping us off. Here is a price list for a 16 bit 80MSPS ADC. Talk about milking the technology.

http://www.analog.com/en/analog-to-digital-converters/ad-converters/ist/191/pst.html

Well, if we use $50 as a base, and assume Canon has one ADC per read channel from the sensor (which I think would be essential to achieve 12fps@18mp)...that would be 16 ADC's at $50 each for a total of $800 (for 1D X), or 8 @ $50 for a total of $400 (for the 5D III). Thats assuming the ADC's are independent components. In the past, I believe they have been an integrated part of their DIGIC processors, and its entirely possible Canon has partly taken the approach Sony did, and are now embedding the ADC right on the sensor itself. Integrating the ADC component with any other component, and doing so while keeping electronic noise low, while still supporting the very high readout rates for 10-12 fps...is expensive.

I don't think camera manufacturers are ripping us off with their ADC's.

You missed the part where the price is $50.... for each PACK of 1000 ;D
(i.e. 5 cents each)

Oy, I did miss that. Oops. ;D Well, the other points still remain true, its not cheap to produce complex IC's like cmos sensors and DIGIC processors. The real cost isn't the ADC anyway, its far more complex devices like the metering or AF system and large IC's like the sensor.

I bet the real cost, talking direct material cost only, is mostly in the shutter/mirror box and the sensor (if it is FF size). Perhaps a little in the VF if it is exactly 100%. Many of the chips inside DSLRs have also been used in the $40 P&S cameras.

Your forgetting the AF unit, which is fairly large, must be extremely precise in its design, is generally bound to the sensor size (from a point spread standpoint), and must be coupled with advanced control logic in the camera's processor. When you factor in the metering sensor into the AF system (as they usually are these days), that makes the whole system even more complex. There is all the software to manage the AF and metering system, make it customizable, hook all that customizability into the various body buttons....

I think expensive cameras are expensive simply because they are expensive. I don't think you can really reduce the cost down to a single component or two as easily as we would all wish. They are complex automated systems of interconnected, synchronous parts that work at incredibly high speed. Its not just metering, or just AF, or just the sensor, or even just any couple of those parts...its the system as a whole, multiple discrete components operating in harmony to accurately track subjects and produce highly detailed, highly accurate, high resolution photos...N times a second.

AF sensors are basically the same size whether the cam is APS-C,APS-H,DX,or FF.
Sure developing the logic behind AF must take lots of manpower, but we were talking strictly cost to manufacture part here not actual full down the line cost of a part. Most logic in these cams is actually pretty simple and trivial, but AF and especially AI Servo has got to be pretty tricky going indeed. I bet the first guy they said "OK so your next task is to come up with our first AF tracking system." got a lump in his throat.