Does anybody worry? APS-C Lens Investments

[WilsonFlyer]

I'm starting to have quite the investment in lenses for my T2i. I realize (OK, believe), that this CMOS is prevalent yet only a stepping stone to full-sized (true 35 MM) CMOS's. Once the sweet point in manufacturing cost and price per unit gets to its inevitable place, it will be out with the APS-C and in with full size, even in the high end consumer market.

Does anybody have any reasons, pro or con, to be concerned about continused investment in lenses for the APS-C cameras? I'm really starting to get a little worried and I'm not really sure why.

What I do know is this; just as soon as I can buy a reasonably priced full frame, it's out with the old and in with the new for me. I'd kill to have a full framme DSLR that I could actually afford.

Does anybody else think about this or worry about this or is it just me?

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Yes, I have had similar concerns and like you I don't know why. My camera company doesn't even offer a FF camera (Pentax). For my own sanity, all my faster ( aka more expensive) lenses will work on both. Even if Pentax eventually does offer FF, I don't know if I would switch. I have been very happy with my current model and have had no reason to upgrade yet.

 

[Master Mason]

Not at this moment, but then I have no aps-c lenses, the only one on my wish list is the 10-22. However, I'm not convinced that aps-c will go away either, yes there are a bunch of folks looking for affordable full frame, but there will always be a bunch of folks that don't care that much and would be more interested in a cheaper aps-c than a full frame.

And this can be proven by the existance of medium and large format film cameras, those were better than 35mm but there wasn't any great clamering to bring the price down to consumer level.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

Yes, I have had similar concerns and like you I don't know why. My camera company doesn't even offer a FF camera (Pentax). For my own sanity, all my faster ( aka more expensive) lenses will work on both. Even if Pentax eventually does offer FF, I don't know if I would switch. I have been very happy with my current model and have had no reason to upgrade yet.

My reason for wanting an upgrade is really very simple and I guess it shows my age and my "old style thinking" in that I owned a Canon AE-1 and a Canon A-1 in my college days.

I want a 10mm WA to be a 10MM WA lens. I don't like having to compensate for needing a 16 and knowing I have to use a 10. That math is easy. It gets considerably more difficult to do on the fly and in a hurry (and I majored in CSC and applied mathematics! LOL).

I guess it just confuses me a little when I don't see concerns about this posted very often. Maybe it is just me!

 

[Master Mason]

My reason for wanting an upgrade is really very simple and I guess it shows my age and my "old style thinking" in that I owned a Canon AE-1 and a Canon A-1 in my college days.

I want a 10mm WA to be a 10MM WA lens. I don't like having to compensate for needing a 16 and knowing I have to use a 10. That math is easy. It gets considerably more difficult to do on the fly and in a hurry (and I majored in CSC and applied mathematics! LOL).

I guess it just confuses me a little when I don't see concerns about this posted very often. Maybe it is just me!

And we are getting close to a whole generation of folks that have never once used a film camera, so they don't get why people are even worried about what a 10mm WA lens would be on a 35mm film camera...

 

[WilsonFlyer]

And we are getting close to a whole generation of folks that have never once used a film camera, so they don't get why people are even worried about what a 10mm WA lens would be on a 35mm film camera...

Just wait until everything actually goes full frame and they suddenly realize that what they thought was a 30mm shot all this time was actually about a 48-49mm shot. Imagine the panic and confusion! LMAO

I'm serious. I'd bet there are thousands of DSLR owners that don't even realize there's a computation involved and that an 18mm lens doesn't fcn as an 18mm lens on their camera at all. Sad, actually.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

If (and I don't see any sign that we're moving that way) FF comes to replace APS-C, it will happen very slowly and gradually. You'll have plenty of time to transition.

Personally, I just don't see it going away. There is nothing "magical" about full frame that will cause everyone to switch to it. Yes, it offers better image quality and control over DOF, but it adds cost. I suspect that there will be a market for APS-C sensor gear for a long, long time.

That said, if I was a pro or serious hobbyist that expected to move to a FF camera, I'd be cautious about my investment in APS-C sized lenses. You can sell them, so owning a few isn't a disaster. I just wouldn't pour tons of money into building out an entire lens collection with the intent of reselling it.

 

[ukcatfan]

I agree with Mark on this. I do not see APS-C going away anytime soon. I really doubt it will ever go away. You have to consider that the majority of buyers are not like us. They just go in the store and buy a camera that catches their eye. They do not have a clue what FF is. With the advancements in APS-C, there could even end up being less demand for FF in the future.

 

[photo_chick]

I do not think APS-C will go away. What I can see happening is APS-C sized sensor cameras gravitating more to the mirrorless concept to make them smaller because that seems to be what consumers want. The "pro" APS-C cameras do seem to be dwindling in numbers while the "consumer" models are expanding rapidly. So the format isn't going to go away but it may evolve.

I use APS-C because it meets my needs and I consider myself a very serious photographer (otherwise why did I spend all that tuition money, LOL). I've got no plans to switch to full frame unless I win the lottery and grow bigger hands... those cameras are huge and I have freakishly small hands.

 

[boBQuincy]

Read this Canon paper on making sensors
http://www.usa.canon.com/uploadedimages/FCK/Image/White Papers/Canon_CMOS_WP.pdf
or at least the part on sensor economics, and it appears clear that a full frame sensor is not likely to ever come close in cost to a APS-C sensor. Even if the FF came *way* down in cost to where the FF camera cost $200 more than APS-C there would still be a market for APS-C at that price point, just as there is a market for the entry-level dSLRs today.

Because of this I am not concerned about APS-C lenses going away anytime soon or even anytime not so soon.

 

[Groucho]

APS in DSLRs will not be eliminated by FF for the same reason that the little 1/2.5" sensors in PnS cameras will not be eliminated by the EVIL cameras with APS sensors. The push is for smaller, lighter cameras - FF is unavoidably larger and heavier and requires larger, heavier lenses. As a Canon owner, the existence of the 7D should be good evidence to you that Canon certainly doesn't plan on dropping APS any time soon, or making it solely the domain of mass-market entry-level cameras sold at Best Buy or Office Max. Then again, Canon doesn't even offer a fisheye lens for their APS cameras... boo!

If you feel bad about FF, don't forget that they're easily out-sensored by the medium format DSLRs out there... and the prices on those are coming down (the just-released 645D will certainly help that trend in a big way.) However, I'm not ready to start buying medium format lenses exclusively and use adapters to use them on my APS.

That being said, I am leaning towards FF-friendly lenses. They work nicely on my film cameras and I am thinking that we'll see a FF DSLR from my favorite company before too terribly long. I only really have a couple lenses that I care about that are APS-only, and they are desirable enough that I will probably be able to resell them for what I paid for them.

The last part is an important consideration if you are thinking about moving to FF some day - if you've got good-quality, desirable lenses, chances are that any loss you'll take from reselling them will be minimal.

 

[pjacobi]

Read this Canon paper on making sensors
http://www.usa.canon.com/uploadedimages/FCK/Image/White Papers/Canon_CMOS_WP.pdf

This paper is getting a little dated, but still a very good explanation.

In silicon fabrication, wafer costs are fixed. The cost is divided among the working chips yielded from the wafer. There will always be defects, like burnt or broken cookies from a sheet taken out of the oven.

An 8" wafer can produce either 20 Full-Frame sensors or 200 APS-C sensors. With 10 defects, it yields either 10 Full-Frame sensors or 190 APS-C sensors from the same fixed cost per wafer.

Because of the dramatic difference in yield, Full Frame sensors will ways cost more to produce.

Each CMOS generation with smaller dimension circuits actually costs *more* to produce. Chip cost must be controlled with improving yields and moving to larger wafers. This requires building new fabrication plants at a cost of multiple Billions of dollars.


-Paul

 

[Master Mason]

Just wait until everything actually goes full frame and they suddenly realize that what they thought was a 30mm shot all this time was actually about a 48-49mm shot. Imagine the panic and confusion! LMAO

I'm serious. I'd bet there are thousands of DSLR owners that don't even realize there's a computation involved and that an 18mm lens doesn't fcn as an 18mm lens on their camera at all. Sad, actually.

Actually an 18mm lens on their camera functions exactly as 18mm. It isn't the same as it would be on a 35mm film camera, or on a FF digital, but that doesn't change the mathmatics of the lens in any way.

 

[WilsonFlyer]

Master Mason: Semantics.

 

[Master Mason]

Master Mason: Semantics.

Actually not really

In the picture above shows what you get with a specific lens.

The yellow is what part of the total is captured by a full frame, the pink the part that is captured by a crop. The magnification is exactly the same, one is simply, cropped.

Photo above complements of Obilo

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Actually an 18mm lens on their camera functions exactly as 18mm. It isn't the same as it would be on a 35mm film camera, or on a FF digital, but that doesn't change the mathmatics of the lens in any way.

Doesn't it produce a different angle of view from a fixed point? ie - if you take pictures from one spot. And I'd say that's what WilsonFlyer really was referring to. At 18mm the angle of view will be significantly less taken with an aps-c camera than at 18mm with a full frame. To achieve the same angle of view you'd need approx a 12 mm for the aps-c or else approx a 28mm on the full frame (or just crop the picture).

The function is the same - but the results for angle of view are different.

 

[Mosca]

My investment; how about canon's! I don't think there's going to be a proble. And if there is why should i worry? It's not like my camera then stops taking good pictures. FD Lenses are obsolete but FD cameras still take pretty damn nice shots. APS-C Will probably be the obsolete about the same time APS will be.

 

[Master Mason]

Doesn't it produce a different angle of view from a fixed point? ie - if you take pictures from one spot. And I'd say that's what WilsonFlyer really was referring to. At 18mm the angle of view will be significantly less taken with an aps-c camera than at 18mm with a full frame. To achieve the same angle of view you'd need approx a 12 mm for the aps-c or else approx a 28mm on the full frame (or just crop the picture).

The function is the same - but the results for angle of view are different.

The focal lenght is the same at 18mm on a full frame or a crop sensor, the Angle of view changes however, because the angle of view is the reverse triangle of the size of the sensor with the focal lenght of the lens. The smaller the sensor the smaller the angle of view. But there is no increase in magnification. See the example I posted already.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

The focal lenght is the same at 18mm on a full frame or a crop sensor, the Angle of view changes however, because the angle of view is the reverse triangle of the size of the sensor with the focal lenght of the lens. The smaller the sensor the smaller the angle of view. But there is no increase in magnification. See the example I posted already.

Not a problem - I understood what you meant. I was pointing out that I don't think that's what was really being referred to. It was the angle of view you get with that 18mm lens on crop and full frame.

 

[photo_chick]

Keep in mind, when talking about the functionality of "crop lenses" as opposed to other lenses... some of them will not physically mount on full frame cameras. It's a concern that's more fundamental than functionality. And the whole enlargement/magnification debate is irrelevant if the lens won't mount.