Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/08/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Marc, You may well be right. Over the last few decades, I'm accustomed to the "digital arms race" in computer CPUs, memory and hard disks. Progress there was driven by a number of factors: new software applications that kept challenging existing hardware; a voracious and well heeled industrial and commercial customer base; a horizontal industry topology with independent competing component manufacturers; and not least, a venture finance infrastructure for innovative but risky new computing technologies. I don't know that much about the structure of the photo industry, but I can imagine that the planets might not all line up in exactly the same way. Heck, if "good enough for consumers" were the only driving dynamic of the computer industry, we might all still be accessorizing our Commodore 64's and using Hayes or Telebit modems for all I know :-) Of course, I can *hope* that stasis is not near at hand. Perhaps the emergence of a more "Dell like" horizontal photo industry will drive rabid competition (and innovation) between the manufacturers of individual system components. In particular, we'll need chip manufacturing innovations to drive up "yield" and thus drive down the costs of CCD's with a large surface size. But of course, rabid competition and innovation might not exactly be a recipe for Leica-grade system stability. Still, a man can dream.... Scott Marc Attinasi wrote: > > From my casual observance of the developments in digital SLR's over > the past few years, I'd say that the full 35mm frame size will not be > in the consumer-priced SLR offerings - ever. It seems that the > development of more short focal length lenses is proving to be a more > prudent model, and now it seems like every 'hybrid' SLR system is > coming out with very short 'digital-only' lenses that do not cover the > full 35mm frame but provide the field of view that people want. > > My best guess is that large sensors are just too expensive to produce > and, in general, consumers don't care enough IF they can get a 12mm > lens for their 1.6x sensor - at a reasonable price. > >