[eddie1960]

Does anyone have firm knowledge of FF and APS-C sensors prices used in the currently produced cameras? I read somewhere in the threads that 645D sensor costs about $4000 per unit. Knowing the prices it would be easier to draw any conclusions on how profitable a FF camera could be.

I'm pretty certain that was the price of the sensor when the 645D came out. it would have dropped in price since then I would assume -technology being older, certainly reasonably large volume plus another brand using the same sensor now(leica)
but i doubt it's much less than 2500-3000 because the volumes are still small compared to FF where even the most expensive FF outsells the Pentax and Leica combined
It'll be interesting to see what the next sensor will be for both leica and Pentax in MF since. Leica had said they will move towards a CMOS at some point
(not sure why it's not like MF guys are chasing video and high iso they are primarily concerned with iq and ccd still wins that one at low iso AFAIK)

[recando]

Well FF is nice but I doubt that the IQ will be much better! especially in the corners. The K5 has a pretty good quality and if you compare it wit the D700 there is no big difference on IQ (checkt on DxOMark - DxOMark by DxO Labs).
Pentax says they are keen on searching for niches for there products.
Well I really do not want a nich product!
I just want good quality to a reasonable price. Nothing more or nothing less.

[eddie1960]

Well FF is nice but I doubt that the IQ will be much better! especially in the corners. The K5 has a pretty good quality and if you compare it wit the D700 there is no big difference on IQ (checkt on DxOMark - DxOMark by DxO Labs).
Pentax says they are keen on searching for niches for there products.
Well I really do not want a nich product!
I just want good quality to a reasonable price. Nothing more or nothing less.

D700 is much older sensor tech than a k5 the K5 should be there. the closest true comparison will be K5 versus D800 (where the crop is the K5 resolution)
the D700 is like comparing a K5 to a K20 - no contest

[recando]

But at the moment I can not compare the two cameras (no informatin for D800) ...
I wanted to say, that APS-C is not so bad (at the moment), FF is not musch better. If you got a FF lens, the quality in the corners won´t be better than on APS-C.

[falconeye]

Well FF is nice but I doubt that the IQ will be much better! especially in the corners.

Another reason why I wrote this
-> Falk Lumo: Camera equivalence (click the title)

[recando]

Another reason why I wrote this
-> Falk Lumo: Camera equivalence (click the title)

I argee with you in any point exept the shallow depth. If you got a larger sensor, you have to get closer to the object to get the same picture. The closer you get the more shallow deth you get

[konraDarnok]

Another reason why I wrote this
-> Falk Lumo: Camera equivalence (click the title)

I'll be convinced when a double blind test of camera enthusiasts or pros can discern statistically significant differences -- whatever the theoretical and technical differences are.

[falconeye]

If you got a larger sensor, you have to get closer to the object to get the same picture.

So where exactly in my paper did you spot an error?
It covers this question and says otherwise.

If you disagree on this fundamental point (the perspective is not allowed to change -- the image would be different, this must be very easy to understand) I cannot believe you can agree on many other points.

[falconeye]

I'll be convinced when a double blind test of camera enthusiasts or pros can discern statistically significant differences -- whatever the theoretical and technical differences are.

Please, read the paper.
Ideal cameras when equivalent cannot be distinguished. That can be proven in an exact manner.

But in real life, cameras won't be ideal and the paper covers this. This is where things start to become interesting. But only if starting from an equivalence point of view -- otherwise, differences will be due to trivial reasons.

[elho_cid]

Did you just call me a baby?

I just saw this: Falk Lumo: Wiesn Girls in dirndl ;-)
Which makes you grown man, I'm sorry.

Now back to subject - going FF may or may not help us as photographers and may or may not help Pentax as a brand. The point is that discussing it here is pointless.
But I admit it could be a nice discussion over a glass of beer on the Oktoberferst. :-D

[Zygonyx]

Hi Falk, i assume that one "clarification" would be needed in your paper re. "sensor size", wich looks "monodimensionnal", whereas sensors are "twodimensionnal" in reality. Hence the crop factor equal to sensor's diagonal ratios, rather than to "size" ratios

[johnmflores]

Some wishful thinking here?

Meanwhile, I checked it up and it is an official news from an established news agency (The official portal of Malaysian National News Agency (BERNAMA)). So, it is as well documented as such a number can actually get.

Here you go:
-> BERNAMA - Nikon Targets To Produce 30,000 Units Of D800 Per Month

Note: The news is obviously coming from Zakaria Abdul Wahab (Bernama) when participating at a factory tour at Sendai, Japan, where the D800 is assembled. There seem to have been 30 representatives from the media at this tour, so maybe, more sources for this number will emerge.

Face it, the D800 is a 1 billion $ annual revenue for Nikon.

Never again I want to hear the words "niche" and "full frame" together in one sentence

Update:
The source cites Sendai Nikon President Jiro Saito, so I think, it is a trustworthy source. The figure is even detailed down to the daily production plan (one full frame camera every minute 24/7) and there are another 5000 D4 per month (which if produced thrughout the year which I doubt, would be another 300 million $$ business). Including lenses, Nikon's annual full frame business could be worth 3 billion $$. That's worth 3 weeks of iPhone revenue. Not bad at all ...

UPDATE2:

I found an independent source from another tour member, which is more accurate, uses betetr English and includes photos of the event. It vasically confirms the 30,000 figure, but it is meant to be a maximum capacity. OTOH, the D800 sells like hot cake, so they'll likely produce at full capacity and this si what the article confirms (operation resumed full capacity).
-> What goes on inside Nikon's Sendai factory - Crave - CNET Asia

Thanks for the updates. Here yet another datapoint to discuss over pints of beer...

"Mirrors are still lucrative. Canon earned 114.8 billion yen ($1.5 billion) in profit by selling 5.9 million traditional SLRs last year, four times the profit it made from compact cameras, according to Nomura Holdings Inc. estimates last month. Nikon earned more from SLRs and lenses last fiscal year than with any other product, according to Nomura."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-07/canon-clinging-to-mirrors-means-opp...y-cameras.html

5.9 million? Wow, that's a big number. Canon's got a bigger market share than Nikon, but still, Nikon's SLR sales must be in the neighborhood of 3-4mil or more, corroborating the other data point of ~300k per month for APS-C. Looking at the profit numbers, Canon's numbers yield ~$254 profit per camera. For argument's sake, let's assume that Nikon's books are similar, but that both make larger margins on FF, say $500 per FF camera. 360,000 x $500 = a cool $180 million. That's still a drop in the bucket of overall profit (likely single % points or overall profit), but still, that's a big drop in a big bucket!

So if Nikon sells 30k D800s per month, that's approximately 29.99k people per month with more money than photographic skill LOL!

I just saw this: Falk Lumo: Wiesn Girls in dirndl ;-)
Which makes you grown man, I'm sorry.

Now back to subject - going FF may or may not help us as photographers and may or may not help Pentax as a brand. The point is that discussing it here is pointless.
But I admit it could be a nice discussion over a glass of beer on the Oktoberferst. :-D

This only proves that Falk is 12 years or older. Nothing more.

[recando]

Grüas Good,

So where exactly in my paper did you spot an error?
It covers this question and says otherwise.

If you disagree on this fundamental point (the perspective is not allowed to change -- the image would be different, this must be very easy to understand) I cannot believe you can agree on many other points.

Well if you say the point of takeing the picture is the same, than of course you have the same shallow deth.But the picture is not the same ...
If you want to make a equal picture, then you have to get closer to the object with FF, than you have more shallow deth. Look at the distancemeter on your lens; (Sorry my english is not very good in this point) the closer you get the more shallow deth you have.
A 75 mm lens has more shallow deth than a 50 mm right? But with an APS-C you have the equal picture with 50 mm like 75 mm on FF.

[monochrome]

I just saw this: Falk Lumo: Wiesn Girls in dirndl ;-)
Which makes you grown man, I'm sorry.

This only proves that Falk is 12 years or older. Nothing more.

It does nothing of the sort. Either sort. But it does prove that Falk's Wiesn Girls are grown women.

[falconeye]

Hi Falk, i assume that one "clarification" would be needed in your paper re. "sensor size", wich looks "monodimensionnal", whereas sensors are "twodimensionnal" in reality. Hence the crop factor equal to sensor's diagonal ratios, rather than to "size" ratios

You are right, I skipped all the complications of differences of aspect ratio and assumed a constant one, like 3:2. I use the sensor diagonal to mean s but don't make it clear. I'll clarify in the next version. Thanks for pointing me to this.