I was surprised that Canon , the biggest manufacturer, brought our the 7D...it sort of restored my faith in ASP-C continuing.

I have a friend who has a 7D and I think it's a fabulous camera...excellent quality....but I wonder if things will start tailing off soon with few other, if any cutting edge ASP-C's being introduced in the future.

Nikon brought out the D300S...great camera, but an update on the D300.

I've heard rumors that the next top Pentax DSLR will be a K7 Super...which like the D300S...seems to me to be an updated...interim ASP-C.

Sony will be interesting to watch. I don't know how well their econo FF A850 is doing sales wise....but it , IMO, triggered both Canon and Nikon to significantly cut prices on their FF D700 and 5D Mk. 11.

Could be that the manufacturers are holding their development plans close to their vest....almost waiting to see which way the market goes.

I think any wholesale change over to FF from ASP-C will be something carefully considered because of advanced amateurs who have a sizable investment in ASP-C bodies...and more important...ASP-C lenses.

As they say...bodies you change every so often...lenses you want to keep.

In the end I tend to agree with John G, when he says:

"The two ends will rob the middle within the next decade I think aps-c will be gone. "

Some of my opinions are based on gut feelings, and others according to what we've seen in the past. An example, so no one will get the idea it can't happen, is when Canon moved from the FD to EF lens mount, thus alienating an entire "generation" of Canon users. I was one of those, and it was unbelievable that they would "betray" us that way.

Minolta did the same thing. When the winds of change begin to blow in the photography field, grab something that's anchored down to avoid being swept away.

None of us has a crystal ball, but just be ready for the unthinkable, it will happen, and leave many casualties in its wake..

I was also thinking of those two examples. Another was the Pentax change from M42 Screwmount to the K Bayonet mount around '75.

I bought the last of the Pentax M42 screw mount bodies........a new ES 11 ($ 363) ...shortly before the S mount bit the dust and the new K mount came out.

At least I bought cassette rather then 8 track, but then I went Beta rather then VHS.

My track record at guessing which systems to go with, isn't very good.

For a lot of people FF is not the blessing you think as there is shallower DOF which is good for someone who is skilled but not so for someone of lesser ability. FF is not the best for all people. Lets look at wildlife, I would rather shoot with my 7D rather than my 5DmkII (even if the latter had a faster continuous shooting and better AF). Why, because the better reach putting pixels on target for something small.

Also, you can have the ergonomics of a dSLR but with lighter, cheaper lenses when using APS-C, it is not all about the body cost but also the glass you want to put on in to make the use of the potential quality.

My guess is that they will live in harmony for quite a long time and with the huge money invested by Canon and Nikon in developing APS-C specific glass they are unlikely to drop that.

I don't think we are talking about Betamax v VHS here as with APS-C and FF both are stable in the market, there is compatibility in a lot of areas and many of us use them in conjunction with each other when on a shoot.

So, explain to me what the attraction is. FF dSLRs are bigger, heavier, more expensive, and have fewer lenses to choose from. And that won't ever change. If you don't need the shallower depth of field, why bother?

I'm with TCav. What exactly is the attraction for FF? What is the advantage over size, cost, etc.?

FF has a huge advantage in low light and shallow dof, only reason I want one for shoot at 3200 and 6400iso. Everything else a m4/3 and aps-c does the job nicely.

Don't get me or others wrong, there are benefits, look at the results from the 5DmkII, D3 range, D700 and even going back to the 'old' 5D original. They are fantastic, great details, in the latest ranges amazing low noise at high ISO, good dynamic range, on top of that there is the added creative control of the larger sensor so you can get the DOF down if you really want.

Not everyone is going to need this as the results from modern APS-C cameras are lovely too, I get great shots from my 7D and although still pick up the 5DmkII first for portraits etc the 7D does really well.

There are several benefits:
1) increased dynamic range
2) shallower DOF
3) better high ISO performance
That is in general, now I know a lot of sports photogs are in love with the D700/D3 because they get true wide-angle performance in a sports outfit. With sports shooting, quality of focus motor in lens is important and most sports-capable lenses tend to stop at 24mm - that's not really wide angle on aps-c.

I concede that there are certain very specific benefits that 'FF' dSLRs have over APS-C dSLRs. But they do not apply to the vast majority of photographic applications, and they come at a significant cost, and not just monitarily. The vast majority of dSLR owners will get exactly what they want from an APS-C dSLR, and won't ever need to go 'FF'.

All the advantages 35mm film SLRs used to have over medium format film cameras, APS-C dSLRs now have over 'FF' dSLRs. Conversely, all the advantages medium format film cameras used to have over 35mm film SLRs, 'FF' dSLRs now have over APS-C dSLRs. The advantages of the smaller format will attract more market share than those of the larger format, though the larger format will still have applications at which it excells. It's not going to go away, but it will never again dominate the market.