Why no prosumer with APS-sized CCD ?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Alfred Molon, Jan 9, 2005.

  1. Alfred Molon

    Alfred Molon Guest

    I guess there are lots of people who would like to have the low noise of
    DSLR CCDs in a much more compact package (and don't need interchangeable
    lenses, an TTL viewfinder etc.), so why has no manufacturer yet launched
    such a compact camera ? Given that DLRs now cost less than $1000, it
    can't be the cost alone.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum
    at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://myolympus.org/8080/
     
    Alfred Molon, Jan 9, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Alfred Molon <> wrote in
    news::

    > I guess there are lots of people who would like to have the low noise of
    > DSLR CCDs in a much more compact package (and don't need interchangeable
    > lenses, an TTL viewfinder etc.), so why has no manufacturer yet launched
    > such a compact camera ? Given that DLRs now cost less than $1000, it
    > can't be the cost alone.


    Me to.

    My guess is that the manufacturers, faulty or not,
    believes that there exist no market.

    The prosumer cameras have rather hefty zoom lenses with
    rather good aperture value. Most are 3x zoom, many are
    5x and some are even 10x.

    If you use a larger sensor, you have to make compromises
    there. Either less zoom or worse max aperture, if you
    don't want large cameras that are very expensive. DSLR
    normal zoom lenses are normally F/3.5 where prosumer
    are F/2.0.

    Moreover, the APS sized sensors used in SLR do not
    allow for live preview. So, either you have to make
    special sensors for those cameras or you have to
    abandon live preview.



    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jan 9, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Alfred Molon <> wrote:

    >I guess there are lots of people who would like to have the low
    >noise of DSLR CCDs in a much more compact package,


    Me too!

    >so why has no manufacturer yet launched such a compact camera ?
    >Given that DLRs now cost less than $1000, it can't be the cost alone.


    If there was such a high quality point&shoot digicam available then
    there would be a high risk that consumers would finally realize the
    *extremely* poor quality of the current digicams. This could results
    some law suits etc.

    AAlso why to use a 20 USD imager chip in the P&S cameras when a 2 USD
    imager sells very well already.

    Timo Autiokari
     
    Timo Autiokari, Jan 9, 2005
    #3
  4. Timo Autiokari <> wrote in
    news:p:

    > If there was such a high quality point&shoot digicam available then
    > there would be a high risk that consumers would finally realize the
    > *extremely* poor quality of the current digicams. This could results
    > some law suits etc.


    I think my reply was more balanced :)

    > AAlso why to use a 20 USD imager chip in the P&S cameras when a 2 USD
    > imager sells very well already.


    Hmmm ... that is a valid point .. although I would be surprised
    if the chip in a DSLR only costs $20.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jan 9, 2005
    #4
  5. Hi Al,

    << it can't be the cost alone >>

    Don't bet on that. The beancounters add pennies.

    I'd like to see actual size comparisons between CCD and CMOS sensors used in
    digital cameras.

    Best,

    Conrad




    Conrad Weiler
    Camp Sherman, Oregon
     
    Conrad Weiler, Jan 9, 2005
    #5
  6. Alfred Molon

    Mark B. Guest

    "Alfred Molon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I guess there are lots of people who would like to have the low noise of
    > DSLR CCDs in a much more compact package (and don't need interchangeable
    > lenses, an TTL viewfinder etc.), so why has no manufacturer yet launched
    > such a compact camera ? Given that DLRs now cost less than $1000, it
    > can't be the cost alone.
    > --



    I believe it is mostly cost. A larger imager will require a larger lens
    than what is going in the current crop of small-sensor compacts. Not only
    that, they require better electronics to handle the larger files.

    Mark
     
    Mark B., Jan 9, 2005
    #6
  7. "Conrad Weiler" <> wrote:
    > << it can't be the cost alone >>
    >
    > Don't bet on that. The beancounters add pennies.
    >
    > I'd like to see actual size comparisons between CCD and CMOS sensors used

    in
    > digital cameras.


    http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/Sensor_Sizes_01.htm

    The 2/3" sensors are 96.8 sq mm, whereas the 20D is 345 sq mm. So you'd
    expect the 20D to be about three to four times as sensitive for the same
    noise, and, surprise, ISO 1600 on the 20D looks about the same as ISO 400 on
    the 8MP P&S cameras.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jan 9, 2005
    #7
  8. Alfred Molon

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <Xns95D98CC121DCFklotjohan@130.133.1.4>, Roland Karlsson
    says...

    > Moreover, the APS sized sensors used in SLR do not
    > allow for live preview. So, either you have to make
    > special sensors for those cameras or you have to
    > abandon live preview.


    Should be no problem making an APS-sized CCD with live preview. If the
    tiny ones have this feature, there is no reason why the bigger CCDs
    can't have it.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://myolympus.org/8080/
     
    Alfred Molon, Jan 9, 2005
    #8
  9. Alfred Molon

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <>, Mark B. says...

    > I believe it is mostly cost. A larger imager will require a larger lens
    > than what is going in the current crop of small-sensor compacts. Not only
    > that, they require better electronics to handle the larger files.


    The filesize should be the same - it only depends on the resolution, not
    on the CCD size (unless of course the larger CCD camera generates RAW
    files with more bit depth, but even then the increase would be moderate
    - 16 bits vs 12 bits for instance).
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://myolympus.org/8080/
     
    Alfred Molon, Jan 9, 2005
    #9
  10. Alfred Molon wrote:
    > I guess there are lots of people who would like to have the low noise
    > of DSLR CCDs in a much more compact package (and don't need
    > interchangeable lenses, an TTL viewfinder etc.), so why has no
    > manufacturer yet launched such a compact camera ? Given that DLRs now
    > cost less than $1000, it can't be the cost alone.


    Maybe not a direct answer to your question, but keep in mind that the
    way CCD's are manufactured and the limits placed on them by the
    manufacturing process makes for certain "sweet" sizes. Changing the shape
    or size can greatly change the cost of each unit. I suspect they are made a
    number at a time on a circular blank. Making them say just a 1/16" larger
    may reduce the yield per blank by 20% or more, thereby increasing the price
    by 25%.


    --
    Joseph Meehan

    26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math
     
    Joseph Meehan, Jan 9, 2005
    #10
  11. Roland Karlsson <> wrote:

    >I think my reply was more balanced :)


    Well ... yes, considering that I forgot to mention that most of the
    manufacturers do not want to provide such a high quality P&S digicam
    simply because doing so would inevitably eat the market share of their
    dSLRs.Those manufacturers want to sell the high price tag dSLR
    glassware and other add-on too.

    You did mention two very important issues, the lens (aperture and zoom
    range) and the live preview feature.

    I'm not sure what is the typical speed of the 3x lenses of the P&S
    film cameras but I'd guess that f/2.8 can be quite easily made for APS
    size, e.g. digicams do not require a lot of resolving power. I'd
    gladly take a high quality digital P&S with "only" 3x zoom but I'd not
    want a slow lens.

    The live preview has effect on image quality versus imager size, a
    sensor that does not provide the live preview is using all of its
    active photon sensing area for capturing the image. Sensors with live
    preview only use half of the active area for image capture and the
    other half for the video stream. The larger the active area is the
    higher is image quality so the live preview is very costly in terms of
    image quality.

    For the high quality P&S digicam I would gladly take the similar range
    finder that the film P&S cameras have.

    Timo Autiokari
     
    Timo Autiokari, Jan 9, 2005
    #11
  12. "Alfred Molon" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    >I guess there are lots of people who would like to have the low noise of
    > DSLR CCDs in a much more compact package (and don't need interchangeable
    > lenses, an TTL viewfinder etc.), so why has no manufacturer yet launched
    > such a compact camera ?


    Because it wouldn't be particularly compact.
     
    Andrew Koenig, Jan 9, 2005
    #12
  13. Alfred Molon <> wrote in
    news::

    > Should be no problem making an APS-sized CCD with live preview. If the
    > tiny ones have this feature, there is no reason why the bigger CCDs
    > can't have it.


    Nope - but the point was that there are no such CCD.
    You cannot just build such a camera.



    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jan 9, 2005
    #13
  14. Timo Autiokari <> wrote in
    news::

    > For the high quality P&S digicam I would gladly take the similar range
    > finder that the film P&S cameras have.


    The main problem is that "the market" does not understand that.
    It is only a matter of comparing features. All cameras give
    fantastic and outstanding pictures in the ads, so its all
    about features. So - "live preview" wins over "higher quality".
    You cannot tick off "higher qualiy" in the fact sheet,
    only "high quality" - and that is always ticked off.




    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jan 9, 2005
    #14
  15. "Andrew Koenig" <> wrote in news:gYbEd.89155$uM5.58855@bgtnsc05-
    news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

    > Because it wouldn't be particularly compact.


    Compact 35 mm film cameras are compact.
    Compact APS film cameras are even compacter.
    Digital prosumer cameras can be even compacter,
    but usually are not. On the contrary.

    But you are right - if the APS camera shall have a 5x F/2.0
    zoom, it will not be in particular compact. But, an APS
    size sensor and a 30 mm F/1.4 lens would be super compact.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jan 9, 2005
    #15
  16. Alfred Molon <> wrote in
    news::

    > I guess there are lots of people who would like to have the low noise of
    > DSLR CCDs in a much more compact package (and don't need interchangeable
    > lenses, an TTL viewfinder etc.), so why has no manufacturer yet launched
    > such a compact camera ? Given that DLRs now cost less than $1000, it
    > can't be the cost alone.


    I have a question for you Alfred.

    Why do you ask this question again and again?
    This is at least the fourth time you ask it.

    And you get the same answer every time.

    Do you hope to get better answers?



    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jan 9, 2005
    #16
  17. Alfred Molon

    Guest

    Every company has a line of products and as you go up in that line you
    get more features and a better product. Why should Nikon or Canon,
    etc. put all the goodies in a P&S when they can allure you with their
    higher-end products. What may happen is that a company that doesn't
    have a professional series may come out with a prosumer camera with the
    larger sensor, etc. and this will force the hand of the other
    companies. I own a Nikon 8800 and it has a tack sharp lens from 35-380
    with ED galss and VR. It has certain limitations as does every camera
    in this category, however, if it was as fast as the D70 the 8800 would
    steal away market share from semi-pros. With the D70 the consumer will
    probably buy several lenses and that means more dollars for the
    companies who make these cameras.
     
    , Jan 9, 2005
    #17
  18. Alfred Molon

    Charlie Self Guest

    Alfred Molon responds:

    >In article <Xns95D98CC121DCFklotjohan@130.133.1.4>, Roland Karlsson
    >says...
    >
    >> Moreover, the APS sized sensors used in SLR do not
    >> allow for live preview. So, either you have to make
    >> special sensors for those cameras or you have to
    >> abandon live preview.

    >
    >Should be no problem making an APS-sized CCD with live preview. If the
    >tiny ones have this feature, there is no reason why the bigger CCDs
    >can't have it.


    Sure. And putting wings on a battleship and flying it should be no problem. But
    will it do anything useful?

    Charlie Self
    "One of the common denominators I have found is that expectations rise above
    that which is expected." George W. Bush
     
    Charlie Self, Jan 9, 2005
    #18
  19. Alfred Molon

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <>, Timo Autiokari
    says...

    > The live preview has effect on image quality versus imager size, a
    > sensor that does not provide the live preview is using all of its
    > active photon sensing area for capturing the image. Sensors with live
    > preview only use half of the active area for image capture and the
    > other half for the video stream.


    Not sure if I understand this, because you have to read out the image in
    some way, even with a CCD with no live preview.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://myolympus.org/8080/
     
    Alfred Molon, Jan 9, 2005
    #19
  20. Alfred Molon

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <Xns95D9A8886213Bklotjohan@130.133.1.4>, Roland Karlsson
    says...

    > > I guess there are lots of people who would like to have the low noise of
    > > DSLR CCDs in a much more compact package (and don't need interchangeable
    > > lenses, an TTL viewfinder etc.), so why has no manufacturer yet launched
    > > such a compact camera ? Given that DLRs now cost less than $1000, it
    > > can't be the cost alone.

    >
    > I have a question for you Alfred.
    >
    > Why do you ask this question again and again?
    > This is at least the fourth time you ask it.


    When was the last time I put this question (about the prosumer with the
    APS-sized CCD) ?
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    Olympus 4040, 5050, 5060, 7070, 8080, E300 forum at
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://myolympus.org/8080/
     
    Alfred Molon, Jan 9, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. zxcvar
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    663
    Charlie D
    Sep 2, 2003
  2. NJH

    Why "APS size"?

    NJH, Dec 13, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    2,337
  3. Miguel Gonzalez

    Tech Ques: About 1-ccd, 3-ccd, sensor filters, etc

    Miguel Gonzalez, Jun 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,272
    Dave Haynie
    Jun 6, 2004
  4. Marky Mark

    APS-sized prints from digital

    Marky Mark, Jul 14, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    640
    LastYJ
    Jul 27, 2004
  5. deryck  lant

    New Sony DSC-R1 APS Sized 10 Meg Camera

    deryck lant, Sep 8, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    193
    Views:
    2,618
    Chris Brown
    Sep 16, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page