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

"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message
ink.net...
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.

Blind devotion? Please cite any posts I've made to show I have blind
devotion to the Sigma cameras. Don't forget to include the posts
where I've praised the 10D and the D70. If anyone borders on blind
devotion it is you - a blind devotion to trash the Sigma cameras at
every opportunity. Your stating that I have blind devotion to the
Sigma is another example of your inaccuracies.

wrote in message . ..
In message ,
(Georgette Preddy) wrote:

Hold on...

You are so stupid, Steve,

My name is Martha, Betty.

it's pathetic. Do you ever think about
anything you type?

Yes, but you didn't understand a single thing. Its ok, not to worry.

About a week ago, you were saying that the 1.7 crop
factor of the Sigma SD9&10 was ideal because it uses "center glass", and
that a wider version of the same sensor would be pointless.

How bizarre you should think such a thing.

Now it's
here, and you are playing herald to it! Do the Math, SteveGeorge; the
pixel pitch is the same; this new sensor is just grabbing some more
"outer glass" for an extra 2.17MP (5.6MP - 3.43MP).

I said as long as MPs and pixel pitch are the same or higher, the
smaller the better. It is totally obvious since center glass is
dramatically better than full frame.

This is why the 2.76MP after color interpolation Canon 1Ds is optical
junk compared to the higher MP, bigger pixel pitch, smaller crop
Foveon Pro 10M (that is, it shoots dead center glass ON TOP of the
huge advantages above).

Think.

"Georgette Preddy" wrote in message
m...
Foveon Pro 10M (that is, it shoots dead center glass ON TOP of the
huge advantages above).

Think.

Same old spin from Preddy. Or do you prefer sg10.3?

"Mick Sterbs" wrote in message
...

"Georgette Preddy" wrote in message
m...
Foveon Pro 10M (that is, it shoots dead center glass ON TOP of the
huge advantages above).

Think.

Same old spin from Preddy. Or do you prefer sg10.3?

Shooting center glass does reduce CA. But of course there is a huge
trade-off in the crop factor. You could get the same reduction in CA in a
film camera by making some cropping all but the center of the photo!

Professionals want as small of a crop factor as possible, preferably 1. The
EOS-Mark II isn't bad though. If Foveon and Sigma ever want to get into the
pro or prosumer segment, then they'll need a larger sensor.

Latest review I read put Nikon 12-24 zoom ahead of similar Stigma EX on
resolution, contrast & chromatic abberation.

"Georgette Preddy" wrote in message
om...
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.

Love that ISO 200.

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.

Sigma is the largest lens maker in the world. Their newer EX line is
optically beating up everything else made, even at 5 times the cost.
Sigma is the only lens maker that has the technology to build lenses
for digital, the others are currently playing catch up. No, I'm not
talking about DC, but rather DG.

dylan wrote:

Latest review I read put Nikon 12-24 zoom ahead of similar Stigma EX on
resolution, contrast & chromatic abberation.


Quite correct, though it does have aberrations. However, the comparison
is between a lens covering ANY sensor size including full frame (Sigma)
and one which only covers APS, DX size 1.5X factor sensors. The Nikon is
a much simpler design and has a cleaner image centrally, but the Sigma
has slightly better geometry, even on a 1.5X sensor, and better
illumination on the DX format too. It has awesome light-fall of full
frame, but you can't expect much else with a 12mm for simple reasons
affecting all lenses - good or bad.

The Sigma 12-24mm is much better than it should be - two years ago it
might have been described as impossible to make. Well, they made it. Now
it is up to Nikon and Canon to make better full-frame 12-xx mm lenses.

This is the usual way it works - Sigma produces something no-one has
made before, to an acceptable standard but not exceptional, and the
others follow. One big exception - Canon's 35-350mm zoom. They were the
first to do a 10X tele zoom of this range, and I don't think anyone has
matched it to date (Sigma made their 50-500mm later and it's nothing
like as good).

David

"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message link.net...
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.

The SD10's servo focus mode is infinitely better than the 10D's, which
has a virtual 100% AF miss rate. FPS (which is about the same as the
SD10 at only 6MP interpolated) is useless without an AF system that
works. As a result the 10D is the worst possible DSLR choice for
action, and the SD10 is one of the very best due to its truly superb
sharpness compared to any Bayer.

The SD10 body is also the best in the world ergonomically (nothin
remotely close--with Canon being total junk) and near the best in the
world in terms of ruggedness, if not the best. That is exactly why
Kodak chose Sigma to produce their highest end DSLR's body.

On 24 Jun 2004 09:39:49 -0700, (Georgette
Preddy) wrote:

"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message link.net...
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.

The SD10's servo focus mode is infinitely better than the 10D's, which
has a virtual 100% AF miss rate. FPS (which is about the same as the
SD10 at only 6MP interpolated) is useless without an AF system that
works. As a result the 10D is the worst possible DSLR choice for
action, and the SD10 is one of the very best due to its truly superb
sharpness compared to any Bayer.

The SD10 body is also the best in the world ergonomically (nothin
remotely close--with Canon being total junk) and near the best in the
world in terms of ruggedness, if not the best. That is exactly why
Kodak chose Sigma to produce their highest end DSLR's body.
Lets see your sports pics gp

David Kilpatrick wrote:
Mike Kohary wrote:

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...

Talking in circles isn't a very good start to your argument.

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.

Non-responsive. My question stands.

And as for the status quo...

I understand that you feel that this is the way things are (though I happen
to think you're quite misguided in your assessment). But again, my
question: WHY is this the way things are, if Sigma/Foveon technology is so
superior?

Mike

"David Kilpatrick" wrote in message
...
I don't personally know any pros who use Sigma anything either. And
I've seen enough of their products through the years to know what
they're about - crap.

Most DSLR-using pros I know have one or more Sigma lenses, usually the

I wonder which pro world you are associated with? In what context do you use
the abbreviation 'pro'?
If it's supposed to be an abbreviation for 'professional' then I'm wondering
about which dictionary you used for the definition of the word 'most'?