Which scenario is more likely in the future?

[EchoingWhisper]

Which scenario is more likely in the future?

1. Cropped Sensors reaches its limit on image quality, Full Frame Sensors take over as the price of it goes down.

2. Cropped Sensors continue having better and better image quality ruling out Full Frame Sensors.

3. Better Point and Shoots takes over Cropped Sensors, and Full Frame Sensors remain.

 

[chaosrealm93]

i think 3>1>2. i dont think anythings going to replace the 35mm format, its users and the history behind it any time soon, however i do think that people, especially girls prefer a smaller and lighter camera. dslrs, especially 35mm with good glass weighs quite a bit and that would be the biggest deciding factor for people. with technology pushing higher and cleaner ISO and programs like photoshop, i think the importance of get a clean shot from the beginning is slowly being phased out by how well you can edit your shot afterwards. i would say option 3 is already happening. the new m4/3 cams are getting smaller and smaller, with those pancake lenses and the new nikon mirrorless camera is raising the bar for size reduction even higher with a sensor even smaller than m4/3.

* i just dont think you can get better results with a cropped sensor over a full frame sensor. size matters!

 

[KmH]

None of those. P&S, crop, and FF all have a place.

If FF sensors get cheaper to make, crop sensor also get cheaper to make, only more so.

Image quality begins to suffer if to many pixels are crammed onto an image sensor. The pixels get to small to make affordable lenses that can match the resolution of the image sensor. SNR suffers greatly too, resulting in lower usable ISO.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

For scenario 1 to happen, Crop Sensors' noise levels must be too high.
For scenario 2 to happen, Crop Sensors must earn a lot more money than Full Frame Sensors.
For scenario 3 to happen, the miniaturization technology must improve.

 

[KmH]

1. Image quality is also a function of lens quality.

2. Crop sensors have already reached the limits of pixel density relative to ISO and lens resolution.

3. P&S image sensors are to samll and their lenses to limted to achieve effects like shallow DOF and decent high ISO performance.

 

[Josh66]

For scenario 2 to happen, Crop Sensors must earn a lot more money than Full Frame Sensors.

Provided that crop sensors are cheaper than full frame sensors, that will always be true. Yes, full frame cameras cost much more than basic entry level crop bodies - but those entry level bodies are where the sales are.

For scenario 3 to happen, the miniaturization technology must improve.

Pretty sure that's inevitable.

 

[Josh66]

Here's what I think will happen - eventually crop sensors will be phased out as full frame sensors get cheaper. Full frame sensors will be the new crop sensors, and medium format sensors will be the new full frame sensors.

Of course, small sensors will always have their place - P&S cameras and such... BUT, eventually those will be full frame too.

Look at film cameras - (some) full frame P&S (film) cameras are comparable to the size of crop P&S digital cameras of today. APS film cameras are probably closer to the size of digital cameras today though.
That said, there are full frame 35mm cameras as small or smaller than their APS counterparts.

You can only make it so small before it becomes harder to use though. Personally, I think a camera about the size of a Canon Elph (APS) is about as small as you can go before it's just too small to hold. (That's about the size of a cigarette pack.)

 

[Garbz]

Which scenario is more likely in the future?

1. If we ever reach anything resembling that limit we will never need to buy another camera again.
2. If cropped sensors are good, full frame is better for the same pixel count. You can simply catch more photons with a bigger receptor. If both are so good that you can't tell their quality apart, full frame still have great benefits for diffraction limits and thus will still be more desirable for the shallow depth of field crowd.
3. The sensors are still the most expensive part of any camera. P&S aren't priced for larger sensors and I doubt ever will be. A bigger sensor means bigger glass, and ultimately that means it no longer fits in your pocket.

So I say 1 despite being certainly unlikely to happen it is still more likely than the other 2.

Look at film cameras - (some) full frame P&S (film) cameras are comparable to the size of crop P&S digital cameras of today. APS film cameras are probably closer to the size of digital cameras today though.

I have to disagree with this. Even the smallest 35mm cameras ever made compare in size only to bridging cameras with typically slightly larger than normal sensors. Sure width and height they were tiny, but still 3 times thicker than the cheap $150 thing my sister has which itself doesn't win any size awards.

APS cameras maybe, but consumers in general aren't going after fixed focal length digital cameras. They seem to want it so thin it'll slide through cracks in the pavement, so small it can fit in a pocket, so versatile it has a 500x zoom on it, and with the highest possible quality. All of those are at odds with each other and the zoom factor for versatility often wins out. There have been a few larger sensor P&S cameras compensated by a fixed focal length lens to keep the size and weight down, and they have all been quite sub-standard in sales.

 

[jake337]

I see Full frame, medium format, and large format sensors in Pen/M9/nex sized cameras.

DSLR's will still be around for people who are still looking for more than the size of the sensor. IE ruggedness, weathersealing, button layout, features, etc.

 

[KmH]

How will the setback needed for larger image sensors like MF and LF, and larger image circle size that has to be projected, be handled in small camera bodies like Pen/M9/Nex.

 

[jake337]

How will the setback needed for larger image sensors like MF and LF, and larger image circle size that has to be projected, be handled in small camera bodies like Pen/M9/Nex.

I can dream.....
I agree that a nex size FF or large sensor is pushing it.
I am leaning more m9/pen sized. I can see d90/d700 sized bodies with larger than 35mm sensors in the future though.


This Medium format from 50's is pretty small.
CleanImages.com - Medium Format In Your Pocket, ©MMII by Darrell Young

 

[Garbz]

I am leaning more m9/pen sized. I can see d90/d700 sized bodies with larger than 35mm sensors in the future though.

Yep just don't expect any from our favourite manufacturers. Technical ability does not necessarily trump marketing, and the marketing department says why release a camera which would be incompatible with our HUGE lens lineup. Though admittedly Canon has set a president for abandoning old lenses in a newer body.

 

[jake337]

I am leaning more m9/pen sized. I can see d90/d700 sized bodies with larger than 35mm sensors in the future though.

Yep just don't expect any from our favourite manufacturers. Technical ability does not necessarily trump marketing, and the marketing department says why release a camera which would be incompatible with our HUGE lens lineup. Though admittedly Canon has set a president for abandoning old lenses in a newer body.

I do! The thing is my mind is thinking 10-20 years from now, not the near future.

 

[Garbz]

That is still very short in terms of some lens mounts. The Nikon F mount is quite compatible with AI lenses from 40+ years ago. Even before that most of the critical dimensions were still the same.

It may happen, but a move like that is not something companies take lightly. Worked well with 4/3rds where you had industry support from a number of manufactures, but when all your invested history is tied up in a lens mount design it becomes a career defining move for the CEO to stray away from it.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

I would really like to see a Full Frame at the size of point and shoot.