[dylansalt]

Say I owe you $400

I pay you $380 and qualify that I don't need to pay you that $20 because "$20 is really nothing to worry about"

Would you feel ripped off??

However small or inconsequential the amount they are "ripping off" the consumer by delivering less - by shaving off those mm the company is putting thousands back into their banks.

[pingflood]

Say I owe you $400

I pay you $380 and qualify that I don't need to pay you that $20 because "$20 is really nothing to worry about"

Would you feel ripped off??

However small or inconsequential the amount they are "ripping off" the consumer by delivering less - by shaving off those mm the company is putting thousands back into their banks.

You honestly think Canon and Nikon made their sensors .1mm smaller in some dimension in order to save a bunch of money?

[Na Horuk]

You honestly think Canon and Nikon made their sensors .1mm smaller in some dimension in order to save a bunch of money?

Well depends how much, if at all, the 1mm makes the sensor cheaper. But if they sell a thousand cameras.. thats a thousand mm
This was the original reason of "crop" sensors - the cropping in APSC is just more substantial. But at least now Pentaxians can say "hah, you don't have full frame either!" to Canikon people

[sb in ak]

There are way worse things to worry about than the negligible sensor size difference between Canon and the others in the APS-C market.

Shoot on whatever works for you....then stop worrying and enjoy photography!

[navcom]

I work in design engineering and do companies actually plan on cutting such a small amount off a product to save money? You bet your a*s they do. It's the principle of scale. Shaving 1mm off the sensor size could possibly save a millions depending on the circumstances. And it's not just in material savings on the sensor. It might have saved a million on tooling or process expense as well.

I've had cost savings of thousands of dollars by simpy changing the sheet metal thickness on a silly little part from .032 to .028. It did absolutely nothing to affect its function or the quality of the unit but its a small change that adds up to the cost of keeping one worker employed for a whole year.

But I would whole heartedly agree that Canon just seems to produce cheap looking and feeling cameras. I held a 5Dii at the store and the model unit, which had only been on display for a couple weeks, already looked like the rubber grips had been through a war...they were all dried out and discolored. The Nikon D800 demo had been there longer and it looked brand new. Seeing is believing.