Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.

In message ,
Crownfield wrote:

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:

"Pepys" wrote in message
...

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
news:FX2Cc.106551
If you ever used an SD9 or SD10 then you would realize what a
ludicrous statement you've made.

I have Peter, and was completely unimpressed.

Sam

It is anything but a "toy". It is a well-made camera.

at 25400 x 1500, hardly.

The Sigma SDs are 2268*1512. Why do you keep repeating wrong and odd
numbers?

If the SD cameras are toys, because they are only 3.43 MP, then what
about the Canon D30, or the 2.7MP Nikon DSLRs?
--


John P Sheehy

David Kilpatrick wrote:

The laugh is on him Peter. I've just shot something quite amazing on
the SD10 after rigging up the 105mm Super Takumar on it. I still have
not found anything - any other DSLR, or any method of scanning -
which can produce images looking this good at the size I'm creating.
Our colours anything like this.

Comparing it to even the better, larger competitors is rather
comparing a modern 35mm Fujichrome slide with 1950s Gevacolor
negatives shot on a 6 x 6cm folder. Sure, in theory the old folders
captured more detail; sure, the Gevacolor film was capable of
recording colour; yes, the 35mm is smaller; yes, the slide film may
not be all that true to life. But you make a 10 x 8 off each original
and you know which wins.

And these guys still haven't realised that despite all the
disadvantages, and the admitted restrictions on quality over ISO 400,
this is the kind of paradigm difference present with the Foveon image
compared to a colour filter array sensor.

If that's the case, then why isn't Sigma dominant in the professional market
over Canon and Nikon, the two widely acknowledged leaders in the field?

Mike

Crownfield wrote:


whay you missed is that QC on a bayer filter is very good,
while QC on a foveon sensor os not.

foveon: the color guessing chip.


I'll be the first to let this group(s?) know when I get a dead pixel or
hot pixel.

Quality control on some non-exactly Bayer cameras - Fuji FinePix Pro
SLRs - has been poor, with many cameras returned due to single pixel
failures which annoyed the photographers. Olympus use a pixel-mapping
routine to detect and interpolate-out pixel faults; I guess that most
DSLRs with noise reduction procedures (like the Kodak 14 mpixel models)
are also mapping out bad pixels. Canon CMOS seem very good QC wise.
Nikons, I've heard of pixels going astray or sensors with unusual colour
responses, but almost entirely in the pre-D1X, D2H generation (not heard
anything bad about D100 either).

As for Foveon, I do not yet know since not enough people are using the
camera to report much apart from the obvious dust on sensor thing. But
their QC must be difficult to do and involve testing, can't see how
inspection-level checking would tell you much about the hidden layers. A
lot of faulty Bayer production could be detected by optical inspection
(not visual, machine based of course) and never get beyond the first stage.

It's a colour guessing chip about as much as Kodachrome was a colour
guessing film.

David

"Crownfield" wrote in message
...
Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:

"Crownfield" wrote in message
...
Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:

"Mick Sterbs" wrote in message
...

" Miro" wrote in message
u...


I suppose that anything called SD11 might give a clue.


And when we reach SD23 we might some hope that they'll have
moved
out of the
toy camera market.

If you ever used an SD9 or SD10 then you would realize what a
ludicrous statement you've made.

my cameras are all nikon based.
I can get lenses from nikon, sigma, tamron, quantaray, vivatar,
....
you can get lenses from sigma.

I can get cameras from nikon, fuji, kodak,
You can get cameras from sigma.

I look for quality and open system design,
you look for cameras and lenses
from an off brand supplier of odd cameras and shoddy lenses.

You know what I look for? Wow, a real psychic is in our midst.

thank yew, thank yew...

This would be my opportunity for a witty reply but why don't you just
tell me what I would say.

"Alan D-W" wrote in message
...

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
.net...
"Mick Sterbs" wrote in message
...

And when we reach SD23 we might some hope that they'll have
moved
out of the
toy camera market.

If you ever used an SD9 or SD10 then you would realize what a
ludicrous statement you've made.


Why? His statement works for me.

Yippee.

Mike Kohary wrote:

David Kilpatrick wrote:

The laugh is on him Peter. I've just shot something quite amazing on
the SD10 after rigging up the 105mm Super Takumar on it. I still have
not found anything - any other DSLR, or any method of scanning -
which can produce images looking this good at the size I'm creating.
Our colours anything like this.

Comparing it to even the better, larger competitors is rather
comparing a modern 35mm Fujichrome slide with 1950s Gevacolor
negatives shot on a 6 x 6cm folder. Sure, in theory the old folders
captured more detail; sure, the Gevacolor film was capable of
recording colour; yes, the 35mm is smaller; yes, the slide film may
not be all that true to life. But you make a 10 x 8 off each original
and you know which wins.

And these guys still haven't realised that despite all the
disadvantages, and the admitted restrictions on quality over ISO 400,
this is the kind of paradigm difference present with the Foveon image
compared to a colour filter array sensor.


If that's the case, then why isn't Sigma dominant in the professional market
over Canon and Nikon, the two widely acknowledged leaders in the field?


It's obvious why Sigma isn't, and it is because Sigma isn't that Foveon
isn't... if Foveon's sensor had been found in a Nikon or Canon attitudes
would be a little different. The quality of the images has nothing at
all to do with the Sigma involvement.

And as for the status quo, you only need to look at magazines and
newspapers to realise why it makes no difference - they are happy with a
very ordinary standard of repro and most pictures are not there for
their colour, tonality or 'feel'. The average DSLR pro user at the
moment is either in social photography - wedding & port - or
news/PR/events/sports. In these fields, colour negative film has been
dominant for a decade (the news media changed to negative in the
mid-1990s after years of using reversal film for the little colour they
previously printed). Even the worst, earliest DSLR colour palettes were
a fair match for Ektapress 400 rush processed and scanned.

You might as well have asked thirty years ago why most professionals
used Tri-X and not FP4. FP4 was hailed as the best 125 speed film made,
but nearly all sales were to commercial, amateur and scientific
photographers - not the press corps! It was about as flawed a film as
Foveon is a sensor; early batches suffered from drastic speed errors
(down to as low as 64), development problems, anti-halo coating
problems, and even such ridiculous things as missing frame number and
film type printing. I was producing Ilford's magazine in 1985-6 when
they finally cracked all the problems are got FP4 100 per cent reliable.

Tri-X remained the universal press film despite all Ilford's attempts.
The Guardian used HP5 and FP4, just to be different. But hand a roll of
HP5 to a newspaper darkroom in those days and they KNEW you were not a
regular. Same as if you accidentally got seen in a press huddle with a
Sigma camera today!

David

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 21:37:20 +0000 (UTC), David Kilpatrick
wrote:

I'll be the first to let this group(s?) know when I get a dead pixel or
hot pixel.

Which brings up a question...
On a Foveon chip, would a dead sensor simply show up as a colored 'hot
pixel'?
Since Foveon and Sigma loudly proclaim they offer 'full color'
pixels', what does happen when a sensor goes out? Does it affect other
adjacent pixels?

Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"

"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message
.. .
In article , miro01
@hotmail.com says...
You'll never see it.

MIT university already have it.

They also have walking robots. Doesn't mean a whole lot.

Sigh ...... that is truly a sad comment.

David Kilpatrick wrote in message
...

Steven M. Scharf wrote:

The disastrous Sigma digital SLRs didn't do anything to
inspire confidence in Foveon. Even though it wasn't just the sensor that
was
the cause of all the problems, the sensor justifiably got a lot of the
blame.

Steven, the SD10 is not 'disastrous' - it's really very good - and if
there are problems with the sensor for sports and action, or low light news,
etc, then the shortcomings of the SD9/10 body are quite well matched to
avoiding those users.

I meant disastrous in terms of sales.

And for many people the shortcomings you list above are quite significant. I
do note in a couple of places that for studio photographers, and for well
lit landscapes, the SD10 is okay.

If a mainstream manufacturer had adopted Foveon, rather than all of them
deciding the technology was not for them, a larger number of photographers
would have been working with it and discovering some of the unique qualities
of its odd colour sensitivity and response, and how to defeat its gremlins.

But the first and second tier manufacturers didn't adopt if for some of
those very reasons. Kodak, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Minolta, were all
potential customers (Canon is doing their own sensors), and they chose
something else because of the shortcomings of the Foveon sensor.

Mine even managed to disposed of its own dust-on-sensor problem. I suspect
a bumpy car ride managed that. I am now considering marketing a captive bolt
device to place against the body of your DSLR while holding it face-down -
to give the entire body the same 'shock' as the Olympus E-1 gives to just
the sensor to shake off dust...

Funny.

IMVAIO, 5.6 Mpixel/16.8 megaphotodetector, is too little too late unless
they defeat the gremlins and odd color sensitivity and response, that you
noted.

At least you understand and acknowledge the issues with the SD10. I don't
understand the blind devotion of people like Peter, GP/LM/OW/SQ/DG, to a
product. I can take any product I own, including my digital cameras and tell
you the issues with them; I'm not emotionally attached to them or the
company that made them. Telling me that there are problems with a product I'
ve chosen to buy doesn't offend me. But some people take it personally when
facts about a product they own are presented.

Crownfield wrote:

Orville Wright wrote:

(Georgette Preddy) wrote in message . com...


Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.

I can't wait! The Sigma SD11 is on the way! Would it be possible for
Sigma to top the incredible SD10?


most manufacturers did it long before foveon even announced the x3.