Have you got X3 fever yet?

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Nope. It wont be available in my price range for some time, and I love my DA. Not rationalizing either, its the truth.

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

--Eric http://www.pbase.com/elamont/myf707

Just want to thank these guys at X3... hopefully some company will be interested for mass production. Alot of good products fail at this step and nobody hears from such great inventions again... But i can't wait to hold this type of camera in my hands... just because it's the ONLY camera @ the moment in direct competition vs the Sony DSC-F707...

I guess you all are on my side about that one Hopefully the guys are @ the Cebit in Hannover Germany...

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

--Ken N: The Dimage 7 seems to be one of those cameras that is best suited for people who like a challenge.--------------------------------------------------------------------------Visit my F707 forum/website at http://www.f707.net

I'm very curious to see more images and how it handles noise at all ISO speeds.

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

I'm not the type that holds onto a Pentium III while there is a Pentium IV out there, so bring it on. Let's see what'cha got? What can I say... I love tech and new toys to play with.

ScarBoro

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

--§çärßõrö

I've been holding off buying the 707 until after the PMA show. Now, I'll be holding off buying until we get some evidence of how good the Foveon works under normal test conditions. I'm really getting kind of tired waiting for this, that, and the other thing, but once you've bought a camera, it's pretty much yours for keeps....especially when there's a big break-through in the technology and you're not part of it. The one good thing I can say about all this is that those camera companies not using the 3X might make some drastic reductions in prices if this Foveon thing is as good as they say it is and buyers start flocking to it.

TurboTed said:

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hi,

I printed out the boxer after croping it to 8x10. 1520x1216 at 152dpi. Did it on my epson 870 with heavy matte paper. The print is georgeous.

And this is just one third the resolution the sensor is capable of. The color fidelity, sharpness, great tonal range are amazing.

Arlene

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

I use the DA for travel and family photos. Been putting off getting a pro camera--and this just might be the one.
Arlene

Ken N said:

TurboTed said:

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Impressive (The Boxer)

I was just as enamoured decades ago with the leaps in the various metering systems offered for the 35mm SLR. It seems in retrospect that my (and our) impression was correct. It was good technology.
The x3 science looks good. ISO? Independent tests?
The Sigma price is high.
Love my DA, as well as the now sold 505v, and, now, my wifes, F55.

But I understand that on this quest for a new photographic tool metering systems of old are now standard, the 'film' as always is the crux.

In short DA will suffice beyond my ability for at least a year.

Kerry Beverly

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

--Kerry Beverly

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

No I don't have X3 fever yet ... and probably won't for at least a couple of years [or more]. Because that will be the [minimum] time that it takes to first, work the bugs and minor glitches out of the technology and second, it will take at least that long for the price to come into my range. When I have a camera that fulfills my requirements in every way, I don't necessarily need to go out and get the latest and greatest just because it's available. If I had an unlimited budget, maybe I would think differently, but I don't. When my needs advance past what I have ... and my budget allows ... then I will look ... and I will have paid half as much for the latest iteration of the technology as those who had to have it "now", because the next "latest and greatest" thing will be in development. The technology moves to fast to jump at every new thing as soon as it's available (in my humble opinion). Just my 2 cents worth.
--RCM

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

--Jay JerveySony DSC-F707

It took about a half hour from the time they posted the articles. Phil's little sample shots with the prototype kit stunned me. Theoretically, Carver Mead's idea was obviously great, but I didn't expect proof to come so quickly that it really worked.

There could still be a fly in the ointment, but I'm about 90% convinced it's going to fly high. The implications are huge. For one thing, it's made with CMOS technology, not CCD, and CMOS is mainstream stuff. That means it can probably be fabricated in any state-of-the-art CMOS facility... National Semi Corp didn't indicate they had to do any expensive special tooling to fab it in their new CMOS plant. Over time that means commodity level pricing... i.e. dirt cheap sensors. CMOS gets lots of research so the learning curve is steep.

RAW data is a big deal to the pros because there's no messing up of the data by upsampling algorithms in the camera. Guess what, camera's with this sensor can easily output lossless JPEG which is 8-bit raw data that we can all use. Internal to camera, all the firmware gets a lot simpler... it's going to help everything from white balance to digital zoom.

I'd like to see the real products first. Until then I still consider this technology unproven.

Sure, in-house marketing can produce nice picture samples and impress Phil and others. But I wan't be too astonished if real product would have a fatal flaw in one area or another.
I've seen this too many times in the past.

--Vladimir.

I love my 707, but my ultimate FANTASY has recently been a Nikon D1X (for the interchangeable lens) but as soon as the X3 news hit, my wishes for a Nikon went out the window. I would never waste $5000 on THAT kind of obsolete technology. (in my fantasy land, that is)

Once the cameras are out, the reviews are in, and the initial bugs are fixed, I'm racing to be the first in line (saving starts today!)
Sony be damned, unless of course it is a Sony that is the best X3 or equivalent!

Until that time arives, I still LOVE my 707, "but all things must pass"!--pabloProud owner: Sony DSC F-707 w/ B-300 tele http://www.pablosnet.com/photo/

I understand your point Vlad, but when you look at this sensor
objectively it seems soooo logical and intuitive that it's hard
to imagine any 'fatal' flaws at all. It may have its unique and
specific character of sorts under certain conditions, but I doubt
anything more than that. It's definitely the right path that
technology should be taking at his point. Enough with mosaic
sensors and their quirks imo.

Vladimir Koifman said:

Vladimir Koifman wrote:
I'd like to see the real products first. Until then I still
consider this technology unproven.
Sure, in-house marketing can produce nice picture samples and
impress Phil and others. But I wan't be too astonished if real
product would have a fatal flaw in one area or another.
I've seen this too many times in the past.

--
Vladimir.

Click to expand...

Heheheheh....

We each said almost precisely the same words about the S75... and then the F707... and... and... and... and on it goes.

But this time, I do believe that we may have the real McCoy here.

What I find so interesting is that we have two guys here, Gordon and Vladimir, who have worked in apparently similar fields. But they each have an almost 180º view of what this chip means for digital imaging.

To my mind, that's almost as fascinating as the news on the chip itself. And it makes me cautiously optimistic.

Frank C. said:

Member said:

Vladimir Koifman wrote:
I'd like to see the real products first. Until then I still
consider this technology unproven.
Sure, in-house marketing can produce nice picture samples and
impress Phil and others. But I wan't be too astonished if real
product would have a fatal flaw in one area or another.
I've seen this too many times in the past.

--
Vladimir.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

-- Ulysses

Member said:

Re: Have you got X3 fever yet?

Click to expand...

No!--cheersZip - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -BFS: NOSticker Status: ON...but on upsidedownPie Chute: UnCorked Lens Cap: No dangle at any angle - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Frank,

Well, there are some possibilites for flaw.

X3 is basically a CMOS type of sensor. The most basic problem of these sensors is not RGB separation and such, but pixel-to-pixel uniformity. They utilize transistors in each pixel. These transistors have their parameters a little vary on the pixel to pixel basis. These variations produce picture noise, if not corrected. Actually, in high-end cameras they are digitally corrected, which is pretty expensive (like Canon D30). In cheap cameras they are just ignored, resulting in noisy picture.

Mid-range cameras, like f707 and such, are using CCDs which do no not suffer from this problem.

Now, Foveon only mention they somehow improved the uniformity, but do not debrief by how much and how they did it. Note, this is the real problem of CMOS sensors, not a color division, which can be made by conventional methods. I'd like to hear from Foveon more details on this, instead big buzz on color division.

Second, to separate colors better they should subtract signals from all three layers, which increases noise to some degree. This might limit their high-ISO abilities.

Other question is a quantum efficiency, or sensor's ability to convert light to electrons efficiently. This depends on how they create doping profiles so photoelectones could be effectively collected. A generic CMOS process obviously does not have it's doping profiles optimized for x3 sensor. Foveon might take it as is, or optimize, where optimization means higher cost.

Also, a generic CMOS process often has relatively high leakage by CCD standards. This might kill x3 low light sensitivity. Alternatively, Foveon might optimize process for leakage, which could cost more.

Further, while Foveon claims they use a CMOS process, they actually use it's more rare flavor, called triple-well CMOS.

This flavor is commonly used for mixed-signal integration or for BiCMOS logic. This flavour is a little more expensive than a generic CMOS process and somewhat less widely available. Morever, they require a lightly-doped substrate version of this process. On the other hand, there are probably 10 to 20 companies having the this version in place, so it should not be a major obsatcle.

All in all, at this stage it's hard for me to say if this is a jewel or junk. I'd wait to see a finished product and independent reliable tests.

--Vladimir.

Frank C. said:

let's see how many of us are courageous enough to raise
our hands despite our "recent" and now "bordering
obsolete" acquisitions. heh.

Click to expand...

I'm getting a little flush after seeing those samples. And the technology seems logical. But like many have said, it'll be some time before the technology proves itself. Hopefully all of the new developments (X3, JPEG2000, EXIF2.2 w/Print Info) will converge into a $1000-$1500 SLR, in a years time. Then you'd have to dump me in a bathtub full of ice.--Jay P

Vladimir Koifman said:

I'd like to see the real products first. Until then I still
consider this technology unproven.
Sure, in-house marketing can produce nice picture samples and
impress Phil and others.

Click to expand...

Phil has taken his own pictures. Hundreds of them.
He says that it is the greatest breakthru since the very first CCD.
I trust Phil.

But I wan't be too astonished if real

Vladimir Koifman said:

product would have a fatal flaw in one area or another.
I've seen this too many times in the past.

--
Vladimir.

Click to expand...