Sigma, tired of LYING about resolution, admit they needed more

"SMS" wrote in message
...
On 10/5/2010 6:28 PM, nospam wrote:
In g.com, Gary
wrote:

http://dpreview.com/news/1010/101005...ainterview.asp

sleaze knows no bounds.

Whose sleaze?

sigma's sleaze. not only are they lying about the pixels, but they are
coming up with absurd claims and bogus math to justify it.

They've simply redefined a pixel as a photosite rather than a spatial
element. They could add some more layers to their sensor and get even more
"pixels." Unfortunately for Sigma, they've never been able to show an
advantage for pixels made up of stacked photosites, as opposed to a Bayer
sensor with the same number of photosites. The big problem is that silicon
color separation never worked as well as Foveon had hoped. Perhaps this
time will be different, but a camera is more than just a sensor.

I just thought of an analogy.

A three-chip video camera is precisely comparable to the 3-stack Foveon
chip, as far as the number of photosites. But they do NOT triple the claimed
number of pixels in their image. It is still 720 x 480, or 1920 x 1080, even
though each chip has that resolution.

No?

Gary Eickmeier

On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 10:18:54 +0200, Alfred Molon
wrote:

In article , Gary
Eickmeier says...
A three-chip video camera is precisely comparable to the 3-stack Foveon
chip, as far as the number of photosites. But they do NOT triple the claimed
number of pixels in their image. It is still 720 x 480, or 1920 x 1080, even
though each chip has that resolution.

By the way, there is no formal definition of "pixel". See what wikipedia
writes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel

"In some contexts (such as descriptions of camera sensors), the term
pixel is used to refer to a single scalar element of a multi-component
representation (more precisely called a photosite in the camera sensor
context,"

Citing any Wikipedia entry is like going to a high-school drop-out neighbor
who is still living in their mother's basement and asking them for their
opinion. Knowing full well that they might be better qualified.

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

By the way, there is no formal definition of "pixel".

yes there is.

Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , Gary
Eickmeier says...
A three-chip video camera is precisely comparable to the 3-stack Foveon
chip, as far as the number of photosites. But they do NOT triple the claimed
number of pixels in their image. It is still 720 x 480, or 1920 x 1080, even
though each chip has that resolution.

By the way, there is no formal definition of "pixel".

There most certainly is.

See what wikipedia
writes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel

"In digital imaging, a pixel (or picture element[1]) is a single point
in a raster image."

--
Ray Fischer