I posted this link in another thread and had several responses that it was nice to have a definitive answer as to why Full Frame cameras are so much more money, and the chance of a sub $1,000 body anytime soon is pretty much nil. This is a White Paper put out by Canon in 2006 explaining the process of making CMOS chips and why a Full Frame chip is so much better than an APS-C or APS-H sensor. http://tinyurl.com/fullframe To sum it up: One CMOS wafer can produce up to 200 APS-C (1.6) sensors compared to only TWENTY (20) Full Frame sensors The likelihood of random dust or scratches ruining all 20 on a wafer during manufacturing is much higher than losing all 200 SO. Producing 1 Full Frame sensor is in effect 10x's more expensive than producing 1 APS-C sensor. Also, I would think this explains the longer update cycles on the Full Frame bodies, it probably takes quite a while to just cut a profit after development, whereas the update cycle for 1.6 seems to happen more often as the recover the R&D costs quicker, and thar market is much more competitive. The end.