Originally posted by sir_bazz I'm with you.....
It's a choice of larger sensors or keep rehashing similar APS-C products over and over and over again.
Mind you, FF isn't that far behind APS-C in terms of development headroom. Roughly twice the MP count will give us the same pixel desnsity as the current APS-C sensors.
bazz.
This whole "APS-C has hit the limit" thing is incredibly misguided. So far, we have 2! APS-C sensors at or above 14mp, the one in the K20D and the one in the canon 50D. That's not a whole lot to base a scientific opinion off of. One of those two sensors, the K20D sensor, performs great. The other, the 50D sensor, has been given a lot of bad-mouthing, particularly by DPReview. I don't see why we consider DPR so inept at testing pentax cameras but jump on a bad review of another brand's camera? Many of the flaws that point to the 50D sensor having "reached the limits of APS-C" in the DPR review have been shown to be due to flawed testing methodology and mistunderstanding of things like noise-per-pixel and diffraction limitation. The other flaws (poor pixel-level sharpness, anyone?) do not point to high pixel density as a problem, as there are numerous other potential causes of such problems. Their attribution to pixel density is little more than wild conjecture. Most of the "evidence" for the idea is based on misunderstanding. To me the evidence shows the opposite, that higher pixel densities on the same size sensor will deliver higher IQ in print (the real test) and the real limiters on IQ with a given sensor size is the current state of sensor technology and cost. With advances in sensor tech and the ever-falling cost of components, APS-C still has a LOT left in it.
Remember when people thought 10mp was the ultimate practical limit?