If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.
In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Steven M. Scharf wrote:
"Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... Really, the *main* stupid thing Sigma did was the development of the 'Sigma' mount. They should simply have picked one of Nikon / Canon / Pentax. Not so easy. These manufacturers are under no obligation to share the technical details of their lens mounts with Sigma. Sigma already makes lens for those mounts. Look at all the problems Sigma lenses have with compatibility with other manufacturer's cameras. Can you imagine if Sigma bodies had to be compatible with Canon or Nikon or Pentax lenses? Well. we'll soon see if the Sigma manufactured, Kodak DCS14/c works with all the Canon lenses. yes but how much of that is real insurmountable incompat vs tradeoffs in making all the same lens for 5 different mounts? -- Sander +++ Out of cheese error +++ |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.
"Sander Vesik" wrote in message
... In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Steven M. Scharf wrote: "Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... Really, the *main* stupid thing Sigma did was the development of the 'Sigma' mount. They should simply have picked one of Nikon / Canon / Pentax. Not so easy. These manufacturers are under no obligation to share the technical details of their lens mounts with Sigma. Sigma already makes lens for those mounts. Yes, but they reverse-engineer the camera to lens protocol. They often have problems when a new Canon body comes out because the new body uses features that were not present in the older Canon bodies that Sigma used during the reverse engineering process. Genuine Canon lenses, even older ones, will, except in extremely rare instances, be compatible with newer Canon bodies. Sigma will, if possible (and for a fee), re-chip their lenses to be compatible with Canon bodies--this isn't always possible. Canon may have been willing to license Sigma to make lenses that fit the Canon mount, but licensing them to do it doesn't mean that they tell them how to do it. Unlikely that Canon will license their lens mount for a non-pro camera. They probably licensed Kodak because Canon expect to sell lenses, which are more profitable than bodies. And since the DCS14/c is ostensibly a pro camera, Canon isn't worried about lost lens sales to Sigma, since Sigma doesn't make pro lenses. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.
"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message
hlink.net... "Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Steven M. Scharf wrote: "Sander Vesik" wrote in message ... Really, the *main* stupid thing Sigma did was the development of the 'Sigma' mount. They should simply have picked one of Nikon / Canon / Pentax. Not so easy. These manufacturers are under no obligation to share the technical details of their lens mounts with Sigma. Sigma already makes lens for those mounts. Yes, but they reverse-engineer the camera to lens protocol. They often have problems when a new Canon body comes out because the new body uses features that were not present in the older Canon bodies that Sigma used during the reverse engineering process. Genuine Canon lenses, even older ones, will, except in extremely rare instances, be compatible with newer Canon bodies. Sigma will, if possible (and for a fee), re-chip their lenses to be compatible with Canon bodies--this isn't always possible. Canon may have been willing to license Sigma to make lenses that fit the Canon mount, but licensing them to do it doesn't mean that they tell them how to do it. Unlikely that Canon will license their lens mount for a non-pro camera. They probably licensed Kodak because Canon expect to sell lenses, which are more profitable than bodies. And since the DCS14/c is ostensibly a pro camera, Canon isn't worried about lost lens sales to Sigma, since Sigma doesn't make pro lenses. ....yet pros do use Sigma lenses as David has already pointed out to you. You continue to make statements that are blatantly false. You made a statement earlier regarding "blind allegience" to Sigma on the part of some - including me. I'm still waiting for you to cite proof of that statement regading me. Let me save you some time and tell you to forget about it because I don't have blind allegience to Sigma as you have stated. You, however have a blind hatred towards Sigma. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.
"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message
news:BgoDc.14813 Yes, but they reverse-engineer the camera to lens protocol. They often have problems when a new Canon body comes out because the new body uses features that were not present in the older Canon bodies that Sigma used during the reverse engineering process. Genuine Canon lenses, even older ones, will, except in extremely rare instances, be compatible with newer Canon bodies. Sigma will, if possible (and for a fee), re-chip their lenses to be compatible with Canon bodies--this isn't always possible. Canon may have been willing to license Sigma to make lenses that fit the Canon mount, but licensing them to do it doesn't mean that they tell them how to do it. Unlikely that Canon will license their lens mount for a non-pro camera. They probably licensed Kodak because Canon expect to sell lenses, which are more profitable than bodies. And since the DCS14/c is ostensibly a pro camera, Canon isn't worried about lost lens sales to Sigma, since Sigma doesn't make pro lenses. Well, I just tried my 4 year old Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 on my buddy's new 1D mkII (I hate him) and it worked just fine. Maybe Sigma has overcome the compatibility problems, or the EX series does better. -- Skip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.
|
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.
"Georgette Preddy" wrote in message om... SNIP The Canon 1Ds has 2.76M RGB triplets,... SNIP Which is nonsense, because a Bayer CFA doesn't have RGB triplets. Shooting center glass is also indisputable optically superior... Can be, but requires more magnification of the resulting image, which offsets the potential benefit. You reach the same result by cropping a larger image. What you *also* don't understand, is that the projection in the center of the image is also using the refracted light from the lens' off-axis rays. Only a smaller aperture will cut of those contributions, cropping won't. SNIP Outer frame glass is very, very poor in the 35mm format. Again, anyone who disagrees is simply irrationally disregarding the facts in a futile attempt to self-justify their own ignorance with respect simplest concepts in camera optics. It's apparent that YOU are the ignorant one. The SD9 totally dominates the Canon 1Ds in all of those respects: Which proves the point. You are ignorant. Bart |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.
"Skip M" wrote in message newsxrDc.601$876.411@fed1read07... Well, I just tried my 4 year old Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 on my buddy's new 1D mkII (I hate him) and it worked just fine. Maybe Sigma has overcome the compatibility problems, or the EX series does better. It's not every lens that has the problem. Four years old is relatively new. I'd worry more about ten year old lenses. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Foveon to rock the DSLR world again, with 16.8MP sensor.
"Giorgio Preddio" wrote in message om... The compatibility problems only occur if the Canon camera body is newer than the Sigma lens. Even then, Sigma will rechip any lens, but I fail to see why anyone would want to use Sigma lenses on a crappy Canon body. The Kodak is a piece of crap. It may use the Sigma body housing, but it is lacking the most critical gem of the Sigma SD* series....the Foveon X3 sensor advantage. Wow, how enormously clever and erudite you are. I so wish I was an important professor of photography and master photographer of hard core pornography and filth. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|