Simple question:

Started Jan 12, 2013 | Discussions
Roland Karlsson
Forum ProPosts: 20,742Gear list
Like?
Re: Simple question:
In reply to SigmaChrome, Jan 16, 2013

SigmaChrome wrote:

Are you sure the Foveon has to be a "low light//high iso performance" sensor? Can't it just be what it is? Or does it have be exactly the same as its Bayer competition?

My guess is that a miracle is needed for Foveon to compete with Bayer on high ISO. So, it is probably true that it has to compete on lower ISO, or maybe medium ISO. Whatever those are.

What it have to do is hard to tell. For many uses its OK with low ISO. The question is only how many that buys a low ISO camera. Some years ago medium format DSLR were low ISO - but I dont think they are any more.

Unfortunately, the Foveon chip also shows some problems at low ISO. It is noisy in the shadows.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma DP2 Quattro RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mike earussi
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,745
Like?
Re: Simple question:
In reply to SigmaChrome, Jan 17, 2013

SigmaChrome wrote:

mike earussi wrote:

Richard Franiec wrote:


I'm puzzled. What sigma is doing with Foveon sensor refinement is rather exemplary. What is lacking (in my view) is mainly (lackluster) performance on processing and utility side, including SPP.

-- hide signature --

Maple

Granted, and we'd all like to see those areas improved. But even fixed they wouldn't solve the underlying limitations of the chip technology regarding poor low light/high iso performance, especially the purple/green blotches in the shadows. The only cure for that (if possible at all) is lots of R&D which none of us are sure Sigma actually has the resources for.

Are you sure the Foveon has to be a "low light//high iso performance" sensor? Can't it just be what it is? Or does it have be exactly the same as its Bayer competition?

-- hide signature --

The low ISOs I can live with, but not the purple/green blotches in the shadows. I shoot a lot of night shots and even at iso 50 on my SD15 the skies are horrible. If they were just noisy with a uniform color that would be fine and something that could be corrected using NR in PS. But no amount of noise reduction will eliminate purple/green blotches, it just smooths them over a bit but they're still very noticeable. IMHO this is the biggest problem the Foveon chip has.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SigmaChrome
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,092Gear list
Like?
Re: Ehemmmm!
In reply to Roland Karlsson, Jan 17, 2013

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Thanx

So - what Foveon based camera has advanced video capability? And to be more specific - what Foveon based camera has full HD video?

None, I would say.

You claim the sensor can do it. So - are there any prototype cameras showing it?

Given how power hungry the chip seems to be, I guess it would be quite warm at 25 FPS.

This is very old ground you are covering here, Roland. The Foveon chip had video build into it pretty much from day one. And, as far as I know, there was at least one dedicated video camera that used it.

-- hide signature --
 SigmaChrome's gear list:SigmaChrome's gear list
Sigma DP1 Sigma DP2 Merrill Sony RX100 Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma SD14 +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Laurence Matson
Forum ProPosts: 11,196Gear list
Like?
Re: Ehemmmm!
In reply to Roland Karlsson, Jan 17, 2013

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Laurence Matson wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Sensor

  • No advanced video capability

Not true.

(two words just for you)

Thanx

So - what Foveon based camera has advanced video capability? And to be more specific - what Foveon based camera has full HD video?

None, I would say.

You claim the sensor can do it. So - are there any prototype cameras showing it?

Given how power hungry the chip seems to be, I guess it would be quite warm at 25 FPS.

You are so fussy about how bad or good or whatever your mood is about the technology, so I thought you should just have your fussiness set right. As far as I can tell - and please correct me if I cited your quote wrong - you said the sensor had no advanced video technology. Did I get that right? I see no mention of a camera in your statement, but perhaps I was meant to pick out the letters for "camera" from your statement. In which case, you forgot a word with an "m."

Word games aside, the sensor showed "advanced video capability" at PMA 2004, if I recall correctly. And much to the astonishment of the industry attendees.  If you want, I can probably still find the exact dates and the booth number. Las Vegas. Merrill was there. So was the other guy. And the big boss. I took this then, so there!

Yah-yah-yah-yah-yah!

-- hide signature --

Laurence
laurence at appledore-farm dot com
Sometimes, life is going to hit you with a brick. Don't lose faith.
Steve Jobs
http://www.pbase.com/lmatson
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr
http://www.howardmyerslaw.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
maple
Senior MemberPosts: 2,712
Like?
Re: Simple question:
In reply to Richard Franiec, Jan 17, 2013

Richard Franiec wrote:

Most of the weakness of SD (and DP) are sensor related. So changing to a Canon or Nikon body wouldn't solve many of the problems, except perhaps AF speed and accuracy.

I'm puzzled. What sigma is doing with Foveon sensor refinement is rather exemplary. What is lacking (in my view) is mainly (lackluster) performance on processing and utility side, including SPP.

Lackluster performance is surely sensor related. I’m no techno savvy, but could make a guess that reconstructing an image from the info captured by the X3 sensor must involve tremendous amount of data churning with extremely complex algorithm due to the inherent challenges with the multi-layer architecture. The amount of processing to deal with these challenges must be so many times more than that of the Bayer sensor of comparable image size that it needs much more time to do it, even if TRUE II engine may be already as powerful as their Bayer counter parts today.

Other most heard grievances about Sigma cameras include poor high ISO performance, colour blotches in shadows and mediocre AF (with DP’s CDAF). They are all largely attributable to the sensor.

Regarding SPP, I actually find it better than the RAW converters of two other brands I’ve used. It might be slower, but again it could be due to the larger file size and much more complicated algorithms involved, again leading back to the sensor, if indirectly.

In fact, the only major complaint I have about SD1M that’s not related to sensor is its AF, but then it could be the lens I use, - some lenses are much better.

But as an imaging system, you can bring lenses and accessories into the equation. There I rest my case. I don't have the knowledge of the pro’s. Suffice it to say that the big boys just wouldn’t touch Foveon. If you like Foveon, forget about your “what if’s”.

-- hide signature --

Maple

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads