Prosumer Camera With a DSLR-Size-Quality CCD !!!..

[Joe_Brown]

Why still we dont have a DSLR-Size-quality CCD in a prosumer camera [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]?... I dont want to purchase a real DSLR & to brush my CCD sensor plate periodically [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img], to carry lots of lenses [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img] etc ... I do want a really capable prosumer camera (DSLR-quality-multifunctional optics, ISO800-1600 noiseless images , extremely-long shutter speeds etc ) ... Is this really that much difficult to manufacture [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]...

Huh? There's no such thing as a noiseless DSLR in the ISO 800-1600 range. Some have more or less than others, but it's there. Have you tried the Nikon Coolpix 5400 or 8700? They are excellent cameras that produce amazing quality. I use two D2H bodies professionally, a D70 for "vacation" type stuff and a Coolpix 5400 when I'm just out running errands or want to travel light. The 5400 gives me incredible images and the lens is one of the sharpest I own (plus Nikon just released a RAW upgrade for the 5400 today). It can be completely automatic or completely manual for total ccontrol.

[Jonathan_Wienke]

[ QUOTE ]
Why still we dont have a DSLR-Size-quality CCD in a prosumer camera

[/ QUOTE ]
DSLR-sized sensors require DSLR-sized lenses, which to duplicate the aperture and focal length range of digicam lenses would have to weigh several pounds and be large and bulky. I know, I have such a lens, the Canon EF 35-350mm f/3.5-5.6. It weighs over 3 pounds, is over 4 inches in diameter, and extends to over 12 inches in length. And that is for a max aperture of f/3.5; an f/2 version would be over 8 inches in diameter and weigh over 8 pounds and likely cost more than your car. Yet small-format lenses with an equivalent range can be made to good quality standards and integrated to a digicam for less than $1000.

Even DSLR sensors are noisy above ISO 800, digicams are useless at that ISO range. What you're asking for is beyond current technology and in some cases beyond the bounds of physics.

[AndrewCassino]

Well, this isn't quite so. A DSLR, like a regular SLR, requires the use of retrofocus lenses that form an image plane well behind the lens, so as to allow room for the SLR mirror and focal plane shutter mechanism. This requirement is not present in rangefinder and point-and-shoot cameras (they have no mirror), and so the lens designs can be considerably more compact. Compare a 50mm Nikkor to a 50mm Leica and this is quite evident! The forthcoming (announced at PMA 2004) Epson R-D1 is a digital rangefinder with an APS-size sensor and it is designed to use the same compact M-mount lenses also accepted by Leica and Bessa film rangefinders. See the latest issue of Camera Arts for an article discussing the various issues of designing of this digital-rangefinder camera. Also, there are some very nice samples from the R-D1 online (see the dpreview.com website).

[Jonathan_Wienke]

That's true to a certain extent, but a 24x35mm sensor is always going to require a much physically larger and heavier lens than the ones found in digicams with the 6.6x8.8mm sensors.

[Chuck_Fadely]

<<<<That's true to a certain extent, but a 24x35mm sensor is always going to require a much physically larger and heavier lens than the ones found in digicams with the 6.6x8.8mm sensors.>>>

Hmmmm. Let's see, one of my earliest point-and-shoots was a full-frame Olympus 35RC from the 1970's. Then a full-frame 35mm Minox. And a full-frame Olympus XA. And a Contax. All were smaller than my Canon G3 digi, all were full frame and all had f2.8 or faster lenses. Did I mention they were full frame? A small quality digicam can be done; I'd buy it but don't know who elese would.

Anyone know who will be selling the Epson RD-1 in the U.S.?

Chuck

[SheldonNoland]

I would too, but at $3,000, I don't think the RD-1 qualifies as "prosumer." It looks exciting, but it seems like epson sees this as a photo buff's collectors item-- not a camera that a pro could use in situations that would normally call for a Leica (whereever you need compact, quiet, or unobtrusive). Aside from the price, the limited run and the fact that epson's press releases ar dripping with lanuguage about the "heritage of photography" there's the fact that the shutter is manual advance and it uses analog gauges. That makes sense on a film body, where a motor drive adds a lot of bulk and a manual advance camera can still work with no battery. But on a digital, where the battery is a given, motorizing the shutter becomes trivial-- it makes no sense to have manula advance. It seems like they did this to make the camera feel retro, not to work better. On top of that, the test images that I saw on were unimpressive. Hopefully, epson will treat this as a proof of concept, and then release a compact M-lens rangefinder in a somewhat reasonable price range (at least competive with the the D2?) that is meant to be used.