Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Tue Jul 29, 2014 1:50 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:06 am
Posts: 1977
I've been pondering this question now for over a year...

Why hasnt anyone come out with a DSLR with a fixed lens or a superzoom compact with a sensor size the same as a DSLR and a few more of the extended features of DLSRs?

The only things I can come up with are:

1) The technology isnt here yet

2) No demand for such a camera

3) the impact this would have on the DSLR market and the loss of revenue when it comes to accessories for DSLRs such as lenses.

Any thoughts? I know would be willing to pay 1000.00 or more for such a camera with no problem at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 1:25 pm
Posts: 2619
Location: Scotland
do sigma and richo and do such things..

_________________
Mark Osborne
My life through an iPhone


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8022
Location: UK
DSLR with fixed lens - no point? If you're going through the pain of implementing everything else, having the changeable mount isn't going to add much.

Compact superzoom with DSLR sized sensor: Quite simply it wont be compact if they did one. A DSLR sensor requires a certain physical sized lens. A superzoom range lens to match a DSLR sensor will be huge.

The nearest to either of the above will be the micro Four Thirds format.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 1:25 pm
Posts: 2619
Location: Scotland
http://www.sigma-dp1.com/main.html

_________________
Mark Osborne
My life through an iPhone


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:47 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:30 pm
Posts: 9805
Location: UK
Hi Wolfsong,

Good question. I don't really know the answer but for your two scenarios:
  1. a DSLR with a fixed lens
    If it's already the size and weight of a DSLR there's no advantage I can see to limiting it to one lens
  2. a superzoom compact with a sensor size the same as a DSLR
    If the sensor is APS-C sized, or 4/3rds for that matter, then the size of the lens required for a normal focal length range and aperture probably means the whole package is pretty much the same size as a DSLR
Case two is a wonderful chance to show a totally gratuitous picture of a camera we all might like to own even if we can't think of any way to justify the cost...
    Image
The sensor size is 18 x 27 mm which is pretty much the same size as the APS-H EOS 1D MkIII (midway between full-frame and APS-C) and, at 37mm, it's difficult to see how the camera body could usefully be a lot thinner. But the moment you strap a lens on the amount of glass needed by that large sensor negates a lot of the size advantage of the body. At around £3000 for the body an M8 is not likely to be found as a free gift in a packet of cornflakes. Even the new Epson E-D1xG, at an SRP of ¥299,800, is out of reach of most of us.

My compromise was to buy a PowerShot G10 which has pretty good IQ if you can shoot at ISO 80.

Bob.

P.S. I see that while composing the above popo beat me to it but what the heck, I can't resist the opportunity to show a picture of the M8. :D

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M1 + M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8, Lumix 7-14mm f/4, Leica DG Summilux 15mm f/1.7 ASPH, M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8, M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8.
Leica D Vario-Elmar 14mm-150mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 ASPH.
OM-D E-M5, H-PS14042E, Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:16 pm 
Just want to know more about Range finder Camera

Previously before Cameras turns to Digital, like Canon & Nikon does have their own film mid range camera like my Dad's Canon A1. But as Digital Camera arrived but why both Canon & Nikon does not produce any Digital mid range camera just like Leica & Epson. Is it possible that both manufacturer ( Canon & Nikon ) will produce digital mid range Camera in order to compete with Leica. & why mid range camera ( Leica M8 ) always pricy than the top of the line Full Frame model ( i.e Nikon D3X or Canon 1DS MKIII )

Still wondering about mid range camera :?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 09, 2009 9:26 pm 
Wolfsong wrote:
I've been pondering this question now for over a year...

Why hasnt anyone come out with a DSLR with a fixed lens or a superzoom compact with a sensor size the same as a DSLR and a few more of the extended features of DLSRs?

The only things I can come up with are:

1) The technology isnt here yet

2) No demand for such a camera

3) the impact this would have on the DSLR market and the loss of revenue when it comes to accessories for DSLRs such as lenses.

Any thoughts? I know would be willing to pay 1000.00 or more for such a camera with no problem at all.


Good question. I think the answers from popo and Bob Anderson are smack on the money, in that it all gets down to the size of the lens. Your question is of interest to me because I also would actually prefer to buy a top class fixed lens style camera, rather than any of the existing SLRs. I have given some thought as to what is technically possible.

Quote:
Why hasn’t anyone come out with a DSLR with a fixed lens …

The most compact SLRs presently available use a 4/3 size sensor. Examples are the new Panasonic DMC-G1, and the Olympus E-420 & E-620. Despite popular belief, it is the physical size of the lens that primarily sets the low light / image noise performance of any digital camera, rather than the sensor size as such – see the recent thread on “Large sensors and Image Noise”. The lenses on these cameras are already as small as it is possible to make them, consistent with the level of performance (especially image noise) that is expected from an SLR camera. Even then, the zoom range has to be compromised to a modest 3:1 for “standard kit lenses” in order obtain a compact size of lens. If you want SLR performance, then I can’t see much of a market for a fixed lens camera having only a 3:1 zoom range. However, if you are talking about a BRIDGE camera with say 5:1 zoom, with performance significantly better than any existing point and shoot, but still under SLR standard, then the possibilities become interesting, and I’ll talk more about that later.


Quote:
Why hasn’t anyone come out with a superzoom compact with a sensor size the same as a DSLR ….

There is a VERY good reason for that. At the risk of being repetitive, it is the physical size of the lens that primarily sets the low light / image noise performance of any digital camera, rather than the sensor size as such. Therefore, rather than asking what could be achieved with a larger sensor, it makes much more sense to look at specific existing models of point and shoot cameras, and ask what scope there is for using larger lenses. Some examples :-

(a) Consider a typical superzoom point and shoot, such as the Fuji Finepix S6500. The x10 zoom lens on this camera is already quite large, to the point where it would be impractical to make it larger, or the camera would become larger and heavier than the smaller SLR cameras. As the low light / image noise performance is set primarily by the size of the lens, and the lens cannot be made larger, there is simply no significant improvement to be had – end of story. Note that consideration of sensor size did not even enter the discussion.


(b) Consideration of what improvement in IQ could be achieved with a moderate zoom range (x5) camera such as the Canon G10 is more tantalizing. Personally I could live with x5 zoom range, so this example is of interest to me. The G10 is quite compact, literally large pocket size, so there is definitely scope here for scaling up the size of the lens (= larger absolute aperture) and still ending up with a camera of similar size to, say, a Finepix S6500. This could in principle be achieved by a “faster” lens, but this would likely be uneconomic. The other way to get a larger absolute aperture is to scale up the lens and the sensor together, and maintain the same f/number. Like most of the better point and shoot cameras, the G10 uses a 1/1.7” sensor. Here is my dream camera. Get Canon to instead drop in a 1” sensor, which is larger in dimension by a factor of x1.7. For the same f/number, this means the lens would also be larger by a linear dimension of x1.7, which would provide a substantial gain in light collection and, therefore, image noise performance. Yes, I reckon that would work out rather nicely, producing a camera with similar dimensions to existing point and shoot superzooms such as the S6500, which I could live with just fine. In terms of low light and image noise performance this camera would be superior by almost two full stops (actually 1.7) Or, if you prefer, as the gain in light goes as the aperture area, the improvement is by a factor of 1.7 squared, which is a factor of 2.9, relative to a Canon G10. That level of improvement is definitely worth having, and there is presently nothing in the non-SLR segment that even comes close. I believe there would be a significant demand for such a camera, and I predict that eventually such a camera will be built. I know I would buy one, even if it cost half as much again as a G10.

To rave just very slightly more, it would be possible to produce a 5:1 zoom lens for the existing 4/3 SLR cameras, that is no larger than the kit 3:1 zoom lenses. Of course, it would need to be a slightly slower (= higher f/number) lens compared to the 3:1 zoom kit lens, but for me that would be more than a good trade. In effect, what you would have here is an SLR version of the “dream” G10 bridge camera that I described above. So why don’t Olympus and Panasonic get off their backsides and make such a lens available? I suspect the reason has mostly to do with marketing, and the psychology of customers. Rather than see such a lens as producing the perfect “bridge” camera, the public and reviewers would more likely see it as an inferior SLR lens, and few people would buy it. That is a great shame.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group