Foveon and Bayer: My Editorial

Clint Thayer said:

Howdy Gang,

As you know, I have used the Sigma SD10 allot lately- with only two
lenses. The 50mm and the 150mm EX Macros. But my experience doesn't
stop there:

In the last several years I've owned and shot with a Nikon D1X,
Canon D60, Canon 10D, Canon 1DMKII, Nikon D70, Olympus E1.... and
even more. And everyone of those cameras had a distinctive feature
about it that I really enjoyed. I am very fond of the Oly E1 system
for producting some of the most exciting colors ever to come out of
a digital camera. Be it the lens-- be it myself or post production,
each one of these has some outstanding attributes.

In many ways, the Sigma SD10 is a large step backwards. It's output
resolution is low, its' extended shutter time quality is awful,
it's shot to shot time is sluggish. All of these qualities you
would expect from a camera made four years ago. At best, the Sigma
SD10 would be comparable to the fine Nikon D1H. Similar resolution
at least.

For a set-up and shoot scenario, the Sigma works fine. But it has
it drawbacks too-- like today when my buddy and I shot all day in
the city of Seattle. I loaned him my Nikon D70, and I shot with the
Sigma. Candids-- boats, bicycles-- trolleys and the works. Which
camera do you think had more keepers? You are right if you thought
the Nikon D70. The Nikon's split second focus kept my friend going
to the next shot while I was still massaging the Sigma.

Be that as it may, the Foveon image sensor cannot be ignored. And,
you cannot directly compare it to other sensors regardless of
resolution. Because there is no direct relationship they share. You
get the right shot-- like the one here



and even an $8000
camera would struggle to get the complexion, light, tone and patina
on target. Pixel perfect? That may be so. But we all know it's the
photographer, right?

So, I've opted to call the Sigma SD10 a "fine art" style camera.
More studio than portable-- more precise than candid. Yet, in the
back of my mind, "fine art" does take on more subjects than still
landscapes and portraits. Sigma does eventually need to merge the
quick handling of its' competitors and the fine photo quality from
the Foveon imager. There is no reason why this cannot be done.
Nikon with the D2X-- and the Canon 1DSMKII both combine very high
output resolution with very responsive handling and performance.
Albeit it at a high cost. But no one is complaining if they here
about a step up more costly Sigma are they?

The computing power inside a Foveon camera must be enormous. We're
handling three levels of sensor information and managing it. Low
level light capability with extended shutter speeds is a must in
this day and age. Keep the 3.4 MP x 3 concept-- but before we bump
the resolution- lets bump the performance we can get from the
current sensor size.

At it's best, a printed photo from an enlarged X3F file looks
fantastic. And better than anything I've shot with any camera
regardless of price. Up to 16 x 20 even under close scrutiny. This
is not a casual happening though. It's a long workflow to get it
just right- but its' worth every minute you spend with it.

Interesting, today I was reviewing 11 x 17 prints from the Canon
1DMKII I used on a commercial interior shot this last Spring. The
Canon does produce marvelous prints. Then I brought out the "Eye To
The Sky" portrait and "Cougar Rock" at the same size image and the
Foveon put the Canon to rest. It's that good. Size interpolated as
it was.



I've decided to keep the Sigma (I like it that much), and look
forward to creating more images with it. But in the background, I'm
hoping that Sigma or another DSLR affiliate with Foveon will bring
the handling and performance up to date with current offerings from
other brands.

Clint Thayer
http://www.stereografx.com

Click to expand...

Paul Paris Les Images said:

Hi Clint,

These could be my words.

Click to expand...

Paul Paris Les Images said:

Yes, the Sigma is an outdoor camera, landscape, flora; photos of
these items knock every other camera down .

Click to expand...

Paul Paris Les Images said:

Indeed, my wishes are also: a more riable autofocus and lesser
noise and better colors with shuttertimes of 3 seconds or longer.
I have trust that Sigma is concious of these problems.
In the mean time , I go on photographing with my SD10...

Click to expand...

Paul Paris Les Images said:

greetings, Paul

Clint Thayer said:

Howdy Gang,

As you know, I have used the Sigma SD10 allot lately- with only two
lenses. The 50mm and the 150mm EX Macros. But my experience doesn't
I've decided to keep the Sigma (I like it that much),

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Paul Paris Les Images said:

Paul Paris Les Images said:

forward to creating more images with it. But in the background, I-

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Clint Thayer said:

Howdy Gang,

As you know, I have used the Sigma SD10 allot lately- with only two
lenses. The 50mm and the 150mm EX Macros. But my experience doesn't
stop there:

In the last several years I've owned and shot with a Nikon D1X,
Canon D60, Canon 10D, Canon 1DMKII, Nikon D70, Olympus E1.... and
even more. And everyone of those cameras had a distinctive feature
about it that I really enjoyed. I am very fond of the Oly E1 system
for producting some of the most exciting colors ever to come out of
a digital camera. Be it the lens-- be it myself or post production,
each one of these has some outstanding attributes.

In many ways, the Sigma SD10 is a large step backwards. It's output
resolution is low, its' extended shutter time quality is awful,
it's shot to shot time is sluggish. All of these qualities you
would expect from a camera made four years ago. At best, the Sigma
SD10 would be comparable to the fine Nikon D1H. Similar resolution
at least.

For a set-up and shoot scenario, the Sigma works fine. But it has
it drawbacks too-- like today when my buddy and I shot all day in
the city of Seattle. I loaned him my Nikon D70, and I shot with the
Sigma. Candids-- boats, bicycles-- trolleys and the works. Which
camera do you think had more keepers? You are right if you thought
the Nikon D70. The Nikon's split second focus kept my friend going
to the next shot while I was still massaging the Sigma.

Be that as it may, the Foveon image sensor cannot be ignored. And,
you cannot directly compare it to other sensors regardless of
resolution. Because there is no direct relationship they share. You
get the right shot-- like the one here



and even an $8000
camera would struggle to get the complexion, light, tone and patina
on target. Pixel perfect? That may be so. But we all know it's the
photographer, right?

So, I've opted to call the Sigma SD10 a "fine art" style camera.
More studio than portable-- more precise than candid. Yet, in the
back of my mind, "fine art" does take on more subjects than still
landscapes and portraits. Sigma does eventually need to merge the
quick handling of its' competitors and the fine photo quality from
the Foveon imager. There is no reason why this cannot be done.
Nikon with the D2X-- and the Canon 1DSMKII both combine very high
output resolution with very responsive handling and performance.
Albeit it at a high cost. But no one is complaining if they here
about a step up more costly Sigma are they?

The computing power inside a Foveon camera must be enormous. We're
handling three levels of sensor information and managing it. Low
level light capability with extended shutter speeds is a must in
this day and age. Keep the 3.4 MP x 3 concept-- but before we bump
the resolution- lets bump the performance we can get from the
current sensor size.

At it's best, a printed photo from an enlarged X3F file looks
fantastic. And better than anything I've shot with any camera
regardless of price. Up to 16 x 20 even under close scrutiny. This
is not a casual happening though. It's a long workflow to get it
just right- but its' worth every minute you spend with it.

Interesting, today I was reviewing 11 x 17 prints from the Canon
1DMKII I used on a commercial interior shot this last Spring. The
Canon does produce marvelous prints. Then I brought out the "Eye To
The Sky" portrait and "Cougar Rock" at the same size image and the
Foveon put the Canon to rest. It's that good. Size interpolated as
it was.



I've decided to keep the Sigma (I like it that much), and look
forward to creating more images with it. But in the background, I'm
hoping that Sigma or another DSLR affiliate with Foveon will bring
the handling and performance up to date with current offerings from
other brands.

Clint Thayer
http://www.stereografx.com

Click to expand...

Clint Thayer said:

Howdy Gang,

Click to expand...

Clint Thayer said:

the Foveon imager. There is no reason why this cannot be done.
Nikon with the D2X-- and the Canon 1DSMKII both combine very high
output resolution with very responsive handling and performance.
Albeit it at a high cost. But no one is complaining if they here
about a step up more costly Sigma are they?

Click to expand...

Clint Thayer said:

Howdy Gang,

As you know, I have used the Sigma SD10 allot lately- with only two
lenses. The 50mm and the 150mm EX Macros. But my experience doesn't
stop there:

In the last several years I've owned and shot with a Nikon D1X,
Canon D60, Canon 10D, Canon 1DMKII, Nikon D70, Olympus E1.... and
even more. And everyone of those cameras had a distinctive feature
about it that I really enjoyed. I am very fond of the Oly E1 system
for producting some of the most exciting colors ever to come out of
a digital camera. Be it the lens-- be it myself or post production,
each one of these has some outstanding attributes.

In many ways, the Sigma SD10 is a large step backwards. It's output
resolution is low, its' extended shutter time quality is awful,
it's shot to shot time is sluggish. All of these qualities you
would expect from a camera made four years ago. At best, the Sigma
SD10 would be comparable to the fine Nikon D1H. Similar resolution
at least.

For a set-up and shoot scenario, the Sigma works fine. But it has
it drawbacks too-- like today when my buddy and I shot all day in
the city of Seattle. I loaned him my Nikon D70, and I shot with the
Sigma. Candids-- boats, bicycles-- trolleys and the works. Which
camera do you think had more keepers? You are right if you thought
the Nikon D70. The Nikon's split second focus kept my friend going
to the next shot while I was still massaging the Sigma.

Be that as it may, the Foveon image sensor cannot be ignored. And,
you cannot directly compare it to other sensors regardless of
resolution. Because there is no direct relationship they share. You
get the right shot-- like the one here



and even an $8000
camera would struggle to get the complexion, light, tone and patina
on target. Pixel perfect? That may be so. But we all know it's the
photographer, right?

So, I've opted to call the Sigma SD10 a "fine art" style camera.
More studio than portable-- more precise than candid. Yet, in the
back of my mind, "fine art" does take on more subjects than still
landscapes and portraits. Sigma does eventually need to merge the
quick handling of its' competitors and the fine photo quality from
the Foveon imager. There is no reason why this cannot be done.
Nikon with the D2X-- and the Canon 1DSMKII both combine very high
output resolution with very responsive handling and performance.
Albeit it at a high cost. But no one is complaining if they here
about a step up more costly Sigma are they?

The computing power inside a Foveon camera must be enormous. We're
handling three levels of sensor information and managing it. Low
level light capability with extended shutter speeds is a must in
this day and age. Keep the 3.4 MP x 3 concept-- but before we bump
the resolution- lets bump the performance we can get from the
current sensor size.

At it's best, a printed photo from an enlarged X3F file looks
fantastic. And better than anything I've shot with any camera
regardless of price. Up to 16 x 20 even under close scrutiny. This
is not a casual happening though. It's a long workflow to get it
just right- but its' worth every minute you spend with it.

Interesting, today I was reviewing 11 x 17 prints from the Canon
1DMKII I used on a commercial interior shot this last Spring. The
Canon does produce marvelous prints. Then I brought out the "Eye To
The Sky" portrait and "Cougar Rock" at the same size image and the
Foveon put the Canon to rest. It's that good. Size interpolated as
it was.



I've decided to keep the Sigma (I like it that much), and look
forward to creating more images with it. But in the background, I'm
hoping that Sigma or another DSLR affiliate with Foveon will bring
the handling and performance up to date with current offerings from
other brands.

Clint Thayer
http://www.stereografx.com

Click to expand...

Clint Thayer said:

So, I've opted to call the Sigma SD10 a "fine art" style camera.
More studio than portable-- more precise than candid. Yet, in the
back of my mind, "fine art" does take on more subjects than still
landscapes and portraits. Sigma does eventually need to merge the
quick handling of its' competitors and the fine photo quality from
the Foveon imager.

Click to expand...

Clint Thayer said:

So, I've opted to call the Sigma SD10 a "fine art" style camera.
More studio than portable-- more precise than candid. Yet, in the
back of my mind, "fine art" does take on more subjects than still
landscapes and portraits. Sigma does eventually need to merge the
quick handling of its' competitors and the fine photo quality from
the Foveon imager. There is no reason why this cannot be done.
Nikon with the D2X-- and the Canon 1DSMKII both combine very high
output resolution with very responsive handling and performance.
Albeit it at a high cost. But no one is complaining if they here
about a step up more costly Sigma are they?

Click to expand...

Clint Thayer said:

Howdy Gang,

As you know, I have used the Sigma SD10 allot lately- with only two
lenses. The 50mm and the 150mm EX Macros. But my experience doesn't
stop there:

In the last several years I've owned and shot with a Nikon D1X,
Canon D60, Canon 10D, Canon 1DMKII, Nikon D70, Olympus E1.... and
even more. And everyone of those cameras had a distinctive feature
about it that I really enjoyed. I am very fond of the Oly E1 system
for producting some of the most exciting colors ever to come out of
a digital camera. Be it the lens-- be it myself or post production,
each one of these has some outstanding attributes.

In many ways, the Sigma SD10 is a large step backwards. It's output
resolution is low, its' extended shutter time quality is awful,
it's shot to shot time is sluggish. All of these qualities you
would expect from a camera made four years ago. At best, the Sigma
SD10 would be comparable to the fine Nikon D1H. Similar resolution
at least.

For a set-up and shoot scenario, the Sigma works fine. But it has
it drawbacks too-- like today when my buddy and I shot all day in
the city of Seattle. I loaned him my Nikon D70, and I shot with the
Sigma. Candids-- boats, bicycles-- trolleys and the works. Which
camera do you think had more keepers? You are right if you thought
the Nikon D70. The Nikon's split second focus kept my friend going
to the next shot while I was still massaging the Sigma.

Be that as it may, the Foveon image sensor cannot be ignored. And,
you cannot directly compare it to other sensors regardless of
resolution. Because there is no direct relationship they share. You
get the right shot-- like the one here



and even an $8000
camera would struggle to get the complexion, light, tone and patina
on target. Pixel perfect? That may be so. But we all know it's the
photographer, right?

So, I've opted to call the Sigma SD10 a "fine art" style camera.
More studio than portable-- more precise than candid. Yet, in the
back of my mind, "fine art" does take on more subjects than still
landscapes and portraits. Sigma does eventually need to merge the
quick handling of its' competitors and the fine photo quality from
the Foveon imager. There is no reason why this cannot be done.
Nikon with the D2X-- and the Canon 1DSMKII both combine very high
output resolution with very responsive handling and performance.
Albeit it at a high cost. But no one is complaining if they here
about a step up more costly Sigma are they?

The computing power inside a Foveon camera must be enormous. We're
handling three levels of sensor information and managing it. Low
level light capability with extended shutter speeds is a must in
this day and age. Keep the 3.4 MP x 3 concept-- but before we bump
the resolution- lets bump the performance we can get from the
current sensor size.

At it's best, a printed photo from an enlarged X3F file looks
fantastic. And better than anything I've shot with any camera
regardless of price. Up to 16 x 20 even under close scrutiny. This
is not a casual happening though. It's a long workflow to get it
just right- but its' worth every minute you spend with it.

Interesting, today I was reviewing 11 x 17 prints from the Canon
1DMKII I used on a commercial interior shot this last Spring. The
Canon does produce marvelous prints. Then I brought out the "Eye To
The Sky" portrait and "Cougar Rock" at the same size image and the
Foveon put the Canon to rest. It's that good. Size interpolated as
it was.



I've decided to keep the Sigma (I like it that much), and look
forward to creating more images with it. But in the background, I'm
hoping that Sigma or another DSLR affiliate with Foveon will bring
the handling and performance up to date with current offerings from
other brands.

Clint Thayer
http://www.stereografx.com

Click to expand...

Lin Evans said:

I would agree with everything except the part about the Sigma's
"resolution" being about the same as the Nikon D1H. I'm assuming
you really meant "file size" rather than resolution because they
are really nowhere near in the same league.

The D1H has a measured B&W resolution of 1100 lines horizontal with
an extinction resolution of 1300 lines. The vertical is 1150 with
an extinction of 1250. On the other hand the SD9/SD10 has 1550
lines horizontal and vertical with an extinction of greater than
2000 lines - that's a "major" difference in optical resolution.

Best regards,

Lin

Clint Thayer said:

Howdy Gang,

As you know, I have used the Sigma SD10 allot lately- with only two
lenses. The 50mm and the 150mm EX Macros. But my experience doesn't
stop there:

In the last several years I've owned and shot with a Nikon D1X,
Canon D60, Canon 10D, Canon 1DMKII, Nikon D70, Olympus E1.... and
even more. And everyone of those cameras had a distinctive feature
about it that I really enjoyed. I am very fond of the Oly E1 system
for producting some of the most exciting colors ever to come out of
a digital camera. Be it the lens-- be it myself or post production,
each one of these has some outstanding attributes.

In many ways, the Sigma SD10 is a large step backwards. It's output
resolution is low, its' extended shutter time quality is awful,
it's shot to shot time is sluggish. All of these qualities you
would expect from a camera made four years ago. At best, the Sigma
SD10 would be comparable to the fine Nikon D1H. Similar resolution
at least.

For a set-up and shoot scenario, the Sigma works fine. But it has
it drawbacks too-- like today when my buddy and I shot all day in
the city of Seattle. I loaned him my Nikon D70, and I shot with the
Sigma. Candids-- boats, bicycles-- trolleys and the works. Which
camera do you think had more keepers? You are right if you thought
the Nikon D70. The Nikon's split second focus kept my friend going
to the next shot while I was still massaging the Sigma.

Be that as it may, the Foveon image sensor cannot be ignored. And,
you cannot directly compare it to other sensors regardless of
resolution. Because there is no direct relationship they share. You
get the right shot-- like the one here



and even an $8000
camera would struggle to get the complexion, light, tone and patina
on target. Pixel perfect? That may be so. But we all know it's the
photographer, right?

So, I've opted to call the Sigma SD10 a "fine art" style camera.
More studio than portable-- more precise than candid. Yet, in the
back of my mind, "fine art" does take on more subjects than still
landscapes and portraits. Sigma does eventually need to merge the
quick handling of its' competitors and the fine photo quality from
the Foveon imager. There is no reason why this cannot be done.
Nikon with the D2X-- and the Canon 1DSMKII both combine very high
output resolution with very responsive handling and performance.
Albeit it at a high cost. But no one is complaining if they here
about a step up more costly Sigma are they?

The computing power inside a Foveon camera must be enormous. We're
handling three levels of sensor information and managing it. Low
level light capability with extended shutter speeds is a must in
this day and age. Keep the 3.4 MP x 3 concept-- but before we bump
the resolution- lets bump the performance we can get from the
current sensor size.

At it's best, a printed photo from an enlarged X3F file looks
fantastic. And better than anything I've shot with any camera
regardless of price. Up to 16 x 20 even under close scrutiny. This
is not a casual happening though. It's a long workflow to get it
just right- but its' worth every minute you spend with it.

Interesting, today I was reviewing 11 x 17 prints from the Canon
1DMKII I used on a commercial interior shot this last Spring. The
Canon does produce marvelous prints. Then I brought out the "Eye To
The Sky" portrait and "Cougar Rock" at the same size image and the
Foveon put the Canon to rest. It's that good. Size interpolated as
it was.



I've decided to keep the Sigma (I like it that much), and look
forward to creating more images with it. But in the background, I'm
hoping that Sigma or another DSLR affiliate with Foveon will bring
the handling and performance up to date with current offerings from
other brands.

Clint Thayer
http://www.stereografx.com

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Lin Evans said:

Hi Clint,

I would agree with everything except the part about the Sigma's
"resolution" being about the same as the Nikon D1H. I'm assuming
you really meant "file size" rather than resolution because they
are really nowhere near in the same league.

The D1H has a measured B&W resolution of 1100 lines horizontal with
an extinction resolution of 1300 lines. The vertical is 1150 with
an extinction of 1250. On the other hand the SD9/SD10 has 1550
lines horizontal and vertical with an extinction of greater than
2000 lines - that's a "major" difference in optical resolution.

Click to expand...

Tom Rowland said:

Not because I dont like my SD10. Like you I will keep mine too.
But other camera makers are bringing out new and better cameras at
lower prices, while Sigma has nothing new, even at a higher price.

Click to expand...

Clint Thayer said:

Point taken. And Lin-- what draws you to the Sigma with all your
other choices?

Clint

Click to expand...

SigmaSD9 said:

that Sigma appears to be out of the DSLR market, despite wishful
thinking.

Click to expand...