Sandy Harris wrote:
> On 10/22/07, Wayne Harridge <wayneharridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Then what is the advantage of a small sensor ?
>
> One is manufacturing cost. Large chips are far harder and more
> expensive to make.
Actually, another really good point. The same buddy I had a convo with
last night informs me that Canon's desperately trying to come out with
more "consumer-grade" FF camera bodies, 'cause they've invested billions
of dollars into FF chip fabbing and are having a hard time justifying
ROI based on sales of 5D and 1D*** bodies alone.
On a related note, Canon announced last June that they had created (in
the lab, I assumed) a 50-megapixel FF chip that would someday be
incorporated into their DSLRs. I thought at the time, "If Canon can
create a 50 MPix chip on a surface area twice the size of the 4/3rds
sensor, there's nothing stopping the creation of a 25 MPix 4/3rds sensor
for an Oly (or other) camera body with all the desirable characteristics
people keep claiming for Canon's chips." Part of the problem Oly has in
comparison to Canon is that Canon (for good or ill) fabs its own imaging
chips, whereas Oly is dependent on third-party chips for the goods. If
anyone is seriously suggesting that Oly should fab their own chips, my
response to Oly's strategic marketing folks, based on my business and
financial training, would be "Exit the DSLR market immediately!"
Garth
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|