In article <2vj8k.24578$kx.36@pd7urf3no>, NimPhrey
<gnimphrey@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> Perhaps there is a technical or economic reason. Any takers?
>
> Why must consumers be limited to SLRs when they want to purchase a
> full-frame digital camera.
they're limited to slrs for aps sized sensors too (the dp1 being the
lone exception). even olympus with a 2x crop factor has yet to put the
sensor in a compact camera.
give it time, once the dslr market slows down a little, camera makers
will put larger sensors in compact cameras.
NimPhrey wrote:
> Perhaps there is a technical or economic reason. Any takers?
>
> Why must consumers be limited to SLRs when they want to purchase a
> full-frame digital camera.
>
It has to do with the limited optical zoom factor. To keep them compact
they need small sensors. Put a large sensor in and you need a larger lens -
it will no longer fit in your pocket even with only a three or four optical
zoom.
> ~nimphrey
> "Our problems may not amount to a hill of beans. But this is our hill. And
> these are our beans."
>
>
Secret Squirrel
--
Ingrid Rose
clandestin.ecureuil(insert missing symbol here)gmail.com
NimPhrey wrote:
> Why must consumers be limited to SLRs when they want to purchase a
> full-frame digital camera.
>
> Perhaps there is a technical or economic reason. Any takers?
The larger sensors sensors are a substantial part of the cost so it
really wouldn't be much cheaper.
Adding a mirror gives a better viewfinder and autofocus.
Entry level DSLRs are already pretty small & cheap.
Maybe now that we have live view DSLR sensors it'll be easy to roll out
such a model. It might be interesting for Dx but Fx is still going to
cost $2500 or so I'd guess, maybe more. There will be live view on
smaller cheaper DSLRs in time too.
nospam wrote:
> In article <2vj8k.24578$kx.36@pd7urf3no>, NimPhrey
> <gnimphrey@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps there is a technical or economic reason. Any takers?
>>
>> Why must consumers be limited to SLRs when they want to purchase a
>> full-frame digital camera.
>
> they're limited to slrs for aps sized sensors too (the dp1 being the
> lone exception). even olympus with a 2x crop factor has yet to put the
> sensor in a compact camera.
You forgot the Leica M8.
>
> give it time, once the dslr market slows down a little, camera makers
> will put larger sensors in compact cameras.
nospam wrote:
> In article <2vj8k.24578$kx.36@pd7urf3no>, NimPhrey
> <gnimphrey@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps there is a technical or economic reason. Any takers?
>>
>> Why must consumers be limited to SLRs when they want to purchase a
>> full-frame digital camera.
>
> they're limited to slrs for aps sized sensors too (the dp1 being the
> lone exception). even olympus with a 2x crop factor has yet to put
> the sensor in a compact camera.
>
> give it time, once the dslr market slows down a little, camera makers
> will put larger sensors in compact cameras.
The Sony DSC-R1 also had an APS-sized sensor, and doesn't Leica make some
non-SLR large sensor cameras?
clandestin_écureuil wrote:
> NimPhrey wrote:
>> Perhaps there is a technical or economic reason. Any takers?
>>
>> Why must consumers be limited to SLRs when they want to purchase a
>> full-frame digital camera.
>>
>
> It has to do with the limited optical zoom factor. To keep them compact
> they need small sensors. Put a large sensor in and you need a larger
> lens - it will no longer fit in your pocket even with only a three or
> four optical zoom.
>
Also, experience using an SLR camera with contrast-detect AF in liveview
mode doesn't bode well for the possibility of usable AF with a non-slr.
Even with the DOF from a "normal f/l" zoom lens and not very wide
aperture of f2.8 or so, it's hopeless. It's usable with a slow kit lens
so long as the subject is dead. Some new focus system (or workaround to
allow use of phase-detect AF) would be needed. Reduced DOF as sensor
sizes increase places additional demands on AF accuracy, so "close
enough" for a compact camera would normally be hopeless on a larger
sensor P&S. A new focus system would be needed (The M8 has an old trusty
one, so that doesn't count).
nospam wrote:
> In article <fFk8k.15354$E41.2585@text.news.virginmedia.com> , David J
> Taylor <david-taylor@blueyonder.neither-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> The Sony DSC-R1 also had an APS-sized sensor,
>
> true, but it's discontinued and it wasn't really all that compact.
>
>> and doesn't Leica make some
>> non-SLR large sensor cameras?
>
> the m8 is 1.3x, the camera is compact, but it's price tag is not.
Agreed on both. I was horrified with the size of the Sony, and it ruled
out a purchase. I later got a Nikon DSLR and have been very pleased with
it. The only Leica items I have are the lenses on some Panasonic compact
cameras....
Paul Furman wrote:
> NimPhrey wrote:
>> Why must consumers be limited to SLRs when they want to purchase a
>> full-frame digital camera.
>>
>> Perhaps there is a technical or economic reason. Any takers?
>
> -The larger sensors [x] are a substantial part of the cost so it
> really wouldn't be much cheaper.
> -Adding a mirror gives a better viewfinder and autofocus.
> -Entry level DSLRs are already pretty small & cheap.
>
> Maybe now that we have live view DSLR sensors it'll be easy to roll out
> such a model. It might be interesting for Dx but Fx is still going to
> cost $2500 or so I'd guess, maybe more. There will be live view on
> smaller cheaper DSLRs in time too.
People would expect an EVF so it would end up looking & feeling like a
small DSLR. The couple that exist are rangefinders one of which needs an
accessory for that (awkward) and that one only has a single focal length
fixed lens.
The Leica uses short flange distance rangefinder lenses which don't
perform well on digital, especially wide angle, and wide angle is
cropped away. You could make one to accept any SLR lens pretty easy
though, maybe we'll see such a thing.
Full-frame sensor digicams are always SLRs? 
Linear Mode
