Q Looses the 3-D of the M?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Scottelly
Senior MemberPosts: 1,799Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to richard stone, 2 months ago

richard stone wrote:

I don't think Sigma can do all that, but surely there would be a "market" for two different DSLRs and sensors based on the q, one full frame and one APS-c? The full frame DSLR at low res would be fast and easy to use, with delicious color, and with the capacity of astounding detail when desired. The low res setting on the SD10 produces superb color with only some minor loss of detail. And obviously much smaller files.

I really think the q is a winner, once people come to grips with the idea that the M is somewhat limited, and one reason it is limited is the "file bloat" from so many pixels contributing, in the end, so little to the image. It's not that they don't contribute at all, but is the cost worth the benefit? Effectively using both big and small pixels on one sensor is a breakthrough, in terms of imaging in general. But at 10MPx3, as it would be on a FF q at low res, that would be a superb image, with a file half the size of the M. And probably quite capable of ISO 1600 and above: a much more versatile camera.

I can see the attraction of the M, and it works great for certain images, but surely Sigma must be tired of hearing how people have to buy an additional camera for more general use and for high ISO images. In addition, the idea that the M IS the Foveon look, and that such a look has to be "pure" to be valid and "true," tends toward religious and magical thinking, which I find disturbing, for several reasons.

Richard

-- hide signature --

But the marketing of two camera lines, even though they really would only incorporate one new camera body (the SD1 Quattro and SD1x Merrill could use the SD1 body), would be a marketing triumph. It would be like Sigma would have four new cameras instead of two. It would not take a lot to make a second new model . . . in the same body . . . with a new, higher-res Merrill sensor. It would be a different sensor and a badge, and the design of the sensor would not have to change much from the old Merrill sensor . . . just bump up the density of the pixels a little. There would likely be very little extra work involved. Maybe a doubling of the buffer memory and a slight change in the processor (a tweak, like maybe 50% more cache in the processor core or an increase in the speed, like 3 GHz vs. 2 GHz . . . but that's something the processor maker would need to do, at Sigma's request of course).

The religious attitude some people have toward the original Foveon design is exactly why it makes sense for Sigma to make cameras with two lines of sensors (Quattro and Merrill). It gives them the ability to have a bunch of different cameras, without having to design a completely different camera for each model. THAT is a marketing triumph . . . much better than what Pentax did with all their different color schemes . . . though that was a smart marketing move too, in my opinion. Nikon even followed suit with their red and bronze models of the Nikon D3200 and D5200 bodies.

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sigma SD14 Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Tamron SP AF 10-24mm F/3.5-4.5 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow