> > [Regardless of future technological developments, cameras with full- > frame sensors will always cost much more than [ ... ] > (Interestingly, the APS-H sensor of the EOS-1D MarkII N is the largest > size that can be imaged in one shot onto a wafer. [ ... ] ] > > OK, obviously, they are trying to justify the price of their models > with larger sensors but it does say that the APS size is indeed the > max size obtainable in one shot by a stepper (sigh of relief.... :-). > That's "APS-H", though. Meaning 1.3x crop, not 1.5x, I think.
> I also saw an article just a couple of days ago, stating that the cost > of FF sensor is 10 to 20 times larger than that of APS sized one and > it won't narrow. But I have a bad habit of not bookmarking. Maybe I > read it somewhere in this white paper. I will take a time to read it > more in detail later ;-). > Really? *Someone* provided some info *somewhere* in the context of the release of the Canon 5D that suggested it had actually narrowed quite a bit since the release of the 1Ds, and that there was also a lot more room for improvement. I think it said that the yield was up from 10% to 25% - while it had remained stable for a while at 80% or whatever for smaller sensors. But perhaps your article was written after that and/or gave a good reason while this gap won't be reduced further? - Toralf -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
