Sigma - Foveon financial stability

How profitable is Sigmas camera division and Foveon as a company? From what I can tell Foveon sells to Sigma and Toshiba, with Toshiba only using the sensor in a single industrial camera. The reason I ask this is, there are rumors that Fujifilm will be dropping their SLR's like the S5 because of poor sales and focusing on compacts. Sigma has a profitable lens division, but with global economy taking a hit lately they might see their camera division becoming a financial drain. If Sigma was to stop making cameras, how long could Foveon exist, or even have the money to develop improved sensors.

Another scenero I see is Sigma seeing that while the Foveon X3 is a unique Sensor, it has weaknesses in perceived technology. The general public wants high MP counts and other tech terms they know nothing about, but think they do. Sigma users are a different lot, you people see the beauty in the Foveon and work through the quirkiness. With the MP confusion of the Foveon and poor high ISO, the general public will stay away. Sigma might stop using the Foveon and move to a mainstream CMOS and focus on increasing profts, instead of trying to teach people about a relatively unknown sensor,
--
http://www.winnert.com

The only reason anyone buys a Sigma camera is the Foveon sensor. If it had a generic CMOS sensor, there would be absolutely no reason for owning one. Entry level Canons and Nikons are priced so competitively these days that there is no room compete on cost. Same for compacts- Canon G9 is head and shoulders above DP1 in design, speed, and handling and Ricoh does 28mm prime compact much better than Sigma. The redeeming quality (at least for the DP1) is the fantastic IQ from the Foveon chip.

AlexZN said:

The only reason anyone buys a Sigma camera is the Foveon sensor. If
it had a generic CMOS sensor, there would be absolutely no reason for
owning one. Entry level Canons and Nikons are priced so
competitively these days that there is no room compete on cost.
Same for compacts- Canon G9 is head and shoulders above DP1 in
design, speed, and handling and Ricoh does 28mm prime compact much
better than Sigma. The redeeming quality (at least for the DP1) is
the fantastic IQ from the Foveon chip.

Click to expand...

As life is today, I agree with you. However and this is a big however, if the DP1 didn't have performance issues they would have sold a boatload of them and not because it was Foveon but more simply that it offered better IQ than anything else in that form factor. People I had conversations with before the launch didn't give a hoot that it was Foveon, it was simply big sensor small camera. If the DP1 was exactly the same (with the same non IQ issues) but with a CMOS sensor, I really don't think the sales would have been substantially better (although I do know some people that did not want to fight with SPP and the particular workflow the DP1 adds to the equation). The deciding factor for many in buying a DP1 (other than the current Foveon devotees) was not the sensor but the overall package.

I am active in a few different forums at sites other than this and it is the same refrain over and over. Now with Micro 4/3 there is something else on the horizon. People on this forum will say ohhhhh but it another one of those awful Bayer sensors but the bulk of the buying public doesn't know the difference between the different types of sensors (CCD/CMOS/Foveon).
--
terry
http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/

I would hate to see them go. The current digital camera market is flooded with homogeneous products in every segment. Ricoh’s RD series and Panasonic’s Lux 3 are, imho, not much more than some marketing stuns and have little substance in them. Only Sigma are able to deliver something truly different, and find a niche thanks to its IQ at pixel level. Other than that, they have almost nothing going for them. The IQ advantage is, however, largely eroded by the sheer number of pixel counts of the current crop of Bayer sensor cameras (typically 2.5 - 3 times). Sigma really needs to come up with new models featuring significant improvements, to stay in the game.

DP1, while a brave move, may not be a wise one. It serves to prove, to the delight of competitors, that it is feasible to put an APS size sensor in compact form factor. Thence, the micro 4/3, and, on its heel, Sumsung’s announcement of APS sensor non-SLR’s. Not that these will compete head-on with DP1 and its follow-up’s, but they will eat deep into the DSLR market, thus the lens sales, which is Sigma’s bread and butter. But then it is also quite possible that micro 4/3 would come anyway, with or without the prior attempt by Sigma on the courageous DP1. I hope that after so many years of development Sigma and Foveon is at the threshold of a major breakthrough in both the CMOS fabricating and image processing.

May god be with them.
--
Maple

It's just a guess, but I think Sigma is doing very well with the DP-1. We may be able to get an idea here in this forum, by comparing serial numbers from early cameras to the current stock.

Foveon, it seems to me, would be a very valuable acquisition for Sigma, or a Chinese or Korean camera company if it wanted or needed to sell.

It is surprising that Fuji, Oly, or Samsung etc. don't seem to be interested in the Foveon sensor, when the image quality advantages are so easily seen. I wonder if Sigma has an exclusive deal with Foveon.

I think the DP-1 has made many more people aware of the beautiful imaging qualities of the Foveon. Even the samples on this site from the most recent Nikon and Canon 12-15mp wonders still look 2D, digital and fuzzy.

Hemidart said:

How profitable is Sigmas camera division and Foveon as a company?
From what I can tell Foveon sells to Sigma and Toshiba, with Toshiba
only using the sensor in a single industrial camera. The reason I ask
this is, there are rumors that Fujifilm will be dropping their SLR's
like the S5 because of poor sales and focusing on compacts.

Click to expand...

That's because large companies usually have no individual will, they serve at the pleasure of the accountants and to a limited extent product marketers. Fuji is absolutely an example of this, if the numbers don't add up pleasingly or if they feel like they are in a market they cannot dominate, they simply quit.

Sigma is very much a company driven my vision more than profit, along the lines of Apple or Oracle (though I would say from meeting the president of Sigma and his son at PMA they do not share the same brashness those companies leaders exhibit).

Hemidart said:

Sigma has
a profitable lens division, but with global economy taking a hit
lately they might see their camera division becoming a financial
drain. If Sigma was to stop making cameras, how long could Foveon
exist, or even have the money to develop improved sensors.

Click to expand...

Economy hit or no, Sigma seems to be reasonably happy with the camera performance - they continue to issue updates for both the DSLR and compact and still show the camera at trade shows. Related, the thing to look going forward for obviously would be further announcements at Photokina, speculation before then would seem to be premature.

Hemidart said:

Another scenero I see is Sigma seeing that while the Foveon X3 is a
unique Sensor, it has weaknesses in perceived technology. The general
public wants high MP counts and other tech terms they know nothing
about, but think they do. Sigma users are a different lot, you people
see the beauty in the Foveon and work through the quirkiness. With
the MP confusion of the Foveon and poor high ISO, the general public
will stay away. Sigma might stop using the Foveon and move to a
mainstream CMOS and focus on increasing profts, instead of trying to
teach people about a relatively unknown sensor,

Click to expand...

WIth MP counts reaching a plateau, this is no longer a consideration for many people. They simply expect the camera resolution to me much the same across the range of mid or low range DSLR's, which is true now - so they turn more to consideration of features or output. Sigma has always been focused on the output side of that equation.

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

zato said:

It is surprising that Fuji, Oly, or Samsung etc. don't seem to be
interested in the Foveon sensor, when the image quality advantages
are so easily seen. I wonder if Sigma has an exclusive deal with
Foveon.

Click to expand...

The advantage is look....but it has many disadvantages like high ISO quality.

I bought a SD-14 and DP-1 because of the Foveon and it's look. But while I would love to, I cannot give up on my Canon 40D. The Foveon blows at high ISO. While some do not care about high ISO, that is the single capability in a camera I crave.

While it was grainy, I used to love shooting Kodak recording film with my Nikon FM and 50/1.2...and later T-Max 3200.

I hope Foveon/Sigma keep the fight up....

--
http://www.winnert.com

Zato: Even you can buy Foveon chips... if you order enough of them. Go to the Foveon website and place an order. ;-) I really don't believe Sigma has any exclusive deal.

zato said:

It is surprising that Fuji, Oly, or Samsung etc. don't seem to be
interested in the Foveon sensor, when the image quality advantages
are so easily seen. I wonder if Sigma has an exclusive deal with
Foveon.

Click to expand...

--
Regards,

Vitée



http://www.pbase.com/vitee/galleries

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

That's because large companies usually have no individual will, they
serve at the pleasure of the accountants and to a limited extent
product marketers. Fuji is absolutely an example of this, if the
numbers don't add up pleasingly or if they feel like they are in a
market they cannot dominate, they simply quit.

Sigma is very much a company driven my vision more than profit, along
the lines of Apple or Oracle (though I would say from meeting the
president of Sigma and his son at PMA they do not share the same
brashness those companies leaders exhibit).

Click to expand...

Actually it has nothing to do with vision - no company has shown more "vision" over the years than Apple. It has to do with Sigma and Foveon are privately held companies. They are not answerable to the share holders and are not required to have be visibility (by law) that publicly owned companies do. There are advantages to each - privately owned vs. publicly owned. One big advantage of a publicly owned company is their ability to raise capitol.

Most start up companies are started for the investors to either go public and or sell to get a return on their investment - especially if venture capitol is involved. Private companies have to raise money from their investors or get new investors.

It is very difficult to get the visibility on the financial stability of a privately held company unless you are an investor.

At some point for a company - making money becomes the key. This is especially true for technology companies were the technology is changing rapidly which is the case of the digital camera industry. Developing and implementing technology cost money.

I think the jury is still out on Foveon right now. The next five years will probably be critical for them. Time holds the answers.

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

Economy hit or no, Sigma seems to be reasonably happy with the camera
performance - they continue to issue updates for both the DSLR and
compact and still show the camera at trade shows. Related, the thing
to look going forward for obviously would be further announcements at
Photokina, speculation before then would seem to be premature.

Click to expand...

--
Truman
http://www.pbase.com/tprevatt

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

WIth MP counts reaching a plateau, this is no longer a consideration
for many people. They simply expect the camera resolution to me much
the same across the range of mid or low range DSLR's, which is true
now - so they turn more to consideration of features or output.
Sigma has always been focused on the output side of that equation.

Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?

Lets say that the next generation DSLR comes with 30 MP sensors --- do you think that the customers will say - nah -- it as OK with 10? And the sales guys in the camera shops - do you think they will say - nah - you can buy this older one with 10 MP --- no need for 30? And tha camera maker - do you think they say - nah - time to stop competing with more pixels than our competitors?

--
Roland

Hemidart said:

How profitable is Sigmas camera division and Foveon as a company?

Click to expand...

My guess is they (and us) can both be happy that they are privately owned and not public. Otherwise there would be no Cameras from Sigma.

Hemidart said:

From what I can tell Foveon sells to Sigma and Toshiba, with Toshiba
only using the sensor in a single industrial camera. The reason I ask
this is, there are rumors that Fujifilm will be dropping their SLR's
like the S5 because of poor sales and focusing on compacts. Sigma has
a profitable lens division, but with global economy taking a hit
lately they might see their camera division becoming a financial
drain. If Sigma was to stop making cameras, how long could Foveon
exist, or even have the money to develop improved sensors.

Click to expand...

GLobal economy is doing fine as far as I would say. It has slowed down in the last months but - that's ok since we are coming from a quite good 2007. Always a little hangover after a good party. Re Foveon: Not very long possibly but I am sure they will have Sigma as a customer for a long time.

Hemidart said:

Another scenero I see is Sigma seeing that while the Foveon X3 is a
unique Sensor, it has weaknesses in perceived technology. The general
public wants high MP counts and other tech terms they know nothing
about, but think they do. Sigma users are a different lot, you people
see the beauty in the Foveon and work through the quirkiness. With
the MP confusion of the Foveon and poor high ISO, the general public
will stay away. Sigma might stop using the Foveon and move to a
mainstream CMOS and focus on increasing profts, instead of trying to
teach people about a relatively unknown sensor,

Click to expand...

The problem is that in earlier days, there was indeed a measurable quality difference between Sigma DSLRs and the competition (at least in good light and in regard of system prices - see the SD9/Canon Eos D60 comparison from 2002). Now I think the competition has really advanced a lot and from prints, I would say one'd have a hard time to rate a (low-end!) Canon 450D pic significantly below an SD14 pic. Similarly, one would have a hard time to rate an SD14 body even only slightly above the 450D body.

The "Pro" that remains for Sigma is the character of the image, which us guys like. IMO Sigma should try and make a relatively affordable full frame SD camera with one heck of a resolution (12 MP should be enough) and keep on using smaller versions of the sensor in DP cameras (maybe including a MFT or Micro-Aps cersion) .

The worst thing they could do is use a mainstream sensor in their cameras simply because their only competitive advantage would vanish.

O.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollivr/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ollivr/popular-interesting/
http://seen.by.spiegel.de/ollivr-1

Plateau? what Plateau?

In one year we have seen 10MP-> 12MP-> 14MP-> 15MP all in the same basic class of body. 50% Increase

And then there are the FF bodies going from 16MP to 21MP and coming on the 9th 24MP. 50% Increase

And in Medium format we saw a jump from 39MP to 50MP and 60MP. 50% Increase

Pixel counts aren't slowing down at all.

On the output side, Sigma hasn't done a very good job of convincing people their output is the winner.

The world could have been a lot different if Sigma had made there camera in F, EOS, A, K mounts. People would have bought one to try and see if they want it. But as long as you have to switch to sigma, it's dead end. As is, Sigma will probably kill off the SLR line, maybe continue some P&S efforts. And of course there is the question of if Foveon is still going. I couldn't find confirmation that National Semi bought them or not. Their future could be the owners just sell them off to a semiconductor maker and cash out.

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

WIth MP counts reaching a plateau, this is no longer a consideration
for many people. They simply expect the camera resolution to me much
the same across the range of mid or low range DSLR's, which is true
now - so they turn more to consideration of features or output.
Sigma has always been focused on the output side of that equation.

Click to expand...

PhotoTraveler wrote:
lots of unfounded info there...
just to clarify a couple points....
.....

PhotoTraveler said:

And of course there is the question
of if Foveon is still going.

Click to expand...

Of course, see http://www.foveon.com

PhotoTraveler said:

I couldn't find confirmation that
National Semi bought them or not.

Click to expand...

?? huh, no

Foveon uses Dongbu as their fab.... see the press release info September 2006, try the Foveon website for isome correct nfo ;-)

nothing further has changed to my knowledge since National Semi sold their imaging division except their "interest" in Foveon. I wrote about that a looong time (years) ago. You might be able to find it via search here at dpreview.
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann

Roland Karlsson said:

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

WIth MP counts reaching a plateau, this is no longer a consideration
for many people. They simply expect the camera resolution to me much
the same across the range of mid or low range DSLR's, which is true
now - so they turn more to consideration of features or output.
Sigma has always been focused on the output side of that equation.

Click to expand...

Are you sure about that?

Lets say that the next generation DSLR comes with 30 MP sensors ---
do you think that the customers will say - nah -- it as OK with 10?
And the sales guys in the camera shops - do you think they will say -
nah - you can buy this older one with 10 MP --- no need for 30? And
tha camera maker - do you think they say - nah - time to stop
competing with more pixels than our competitors?

--
Roland

Click to expand...

Hi, Roland,

Hope all's well with you. You raise an interesting point, and if my reply is a tired refrain, mea culpa.

I think there are at least two big variables in the growth of megapixels for most high end amateurs and "working" professionals. (Those in the latter category, please correct me).

1. Beyond pride of ownership, what measurable IQ does one need to take the kind of pictures the serious amateur or the professional (or his/her clients) require? Does one "need" a 25 or 30 or 50 mp imager to make the kind of image I can reasonably expect to view electronically or in print?

2. What "infrastructure" beyond the camera itself is required to process, store, and archive/display the images we make? What processing power via Photoshop, or SPP, or whatever software, particularly for RAW formats - what computing power via PC or Mac - what storage capacity and with what redundancy?

I have no doubt that for wall sized fine art prints or similarly demanding requirements, such imaging technology is desirable - even "required". But for the "prosumer" market if that's appropriate, I wonder whether and to what extent such mega-megapixel imaging is cross elastic with what might foreseeably be available via Foveon or competitive technologies. Just wondering.

Kind regards,
--
Ed_S
http://www.pbase.com/ecsquires

Ed_S said:

1. Beyond pride of ownership, what measurable IQ does one need to
take the kind of pictures the serious amateur or the professional (or
his/her clients) require? Does one "need" a 25 or 30 or 50 mp imager
to make the kind of image I can reasonably expect to view
electronically or in print?

Click to expand...

1a. This is somewhat ironic given that Sigma markets the SD series at trade shows using very large prints.

1b. Even if you do not print larger, you can crop more. This automatically "extends" your reach with telephoto lenses. A new body is positively cheap compared to a good 600mm lens.

Ed_S said:

2. What "infrastructure" beyond the camera itself is required to
process, store, and archive/display the images we make?

Click to expand...

Increase in pixel count is still well behind increases in computer capacity. Pixel count has merely doubled (for the same price) in 5 years.

--
Erik

Ed_S said:

I think there are at least two big variables in the growth of
megapixels for most high end amateurs and "working" professionals.
(Those in the latter category, please correct me).
1. Beyond pride of ownership, what measurable IQ does one need to
take the kind of pictures the serious amateur or the professional (or
his/her clients) require? Does one "need" a 25 or 30 or 50 mp imager
to make the kind of image I can reasonably expect to view
electronically or in print?

Click to expand...

Ed I think the answer is "if you build it - they will come." Seriously as the DSLR is migrating from ASP format to 135 format. Canon and Nikon are there and Sony will soon be. There is more room for more pixels and still maintain a decent pixel pitch. Nikon has broken the price barrier for an 135 sensor with the D700. Canon and Sony will soon follow with a similarly priced product. The larger sensors will allow 24 megapixels with the same pixel pitch as a D300 or similar Canon model.

I have to agree with Roland - the megapixel war is alive and well. The battle field has just changed to the 135 format sensor. For ASP sensors, you are probably correct the current 12 megapixels (4.7 for Foveon) is probably at the point of diminishing marginal returns. I think that the reason Fuji has dropped its DSLR line is the inability to build a full frame super CCD for a competitive price.

Ed_S said:

2. What "infrastructure" beyond the camera itself is required to
process, store, and archive/display the images we make? What
processing power via Photoshop, or SPP, or whatever software,
particularly for RAW formats - what computing power via PC or Mac -
what storage capacity and with what redundancy?

Click to expand...

Computer technology is progressing much more rapidly than camera technology. Disk space is about a half a buck per gigabyte today. I just looked at a Mac Pro Server. For the capability it's a steal compared to what similar technology would have been 3 years ago. Of course it still cost money and it's a pain to have to go buy a new computer because you bought a new camera .

--
Truman
http://www.pbase.com/tprevatt

Ed_S said:

Hope all's well with you.

Click to expand...

Yeah ...

Ed_S said:

1. Beyond pride of ownership, what measurable IQ does one need to
take the kind of pictures the serious amateur or the professional (or
his/her clients) require? Does one "need" a 25 or 30 or 50 mp imager
to make the kind of image I can reasonably expect to view
electronically or in print?

Click to expand...

Dont underestimate the pride factor!

When it comes to IQ - you can never get enough accuracy. The optimal would be to detect each photons position and wavelength. The better you do it - the better images you get.

One example is AA filter. SD14/DP1 has no AA filter. Then you get artifacts. But you say - you rather want those artifacts instead of AA blur. So - it is a kind of compromise. But - if you had 30 million of the Foveon triplets - then the artifacts would be invisible or an AA filter would not add any visible blur. No need for any compromise - everyone would get what they want. And - if you had an 100 MP Bayer CFA sensor - then no need at all for any Foveon alternative

Ed_S said:

2. What "infrastructure" beyond the camera itself is required to
process, store, and archive/display the images we make? What
processing power via Photoshop, or SPP, or whatever software,
particularly for RAW formats - what computing power via PC or Mac -
what storage capacity and with what redundancy?

Click to expand...

I make stitched images. They usually ends up being 50 MP or so. Yeah - I had to upgrade to 3 Gbyte in my computer. Cost is almost zero. But ... I have to upgrade to Vista 64 bit if I want more memory.

--
Roland

Erik,
Roland,
Truman,

Thanks, all, for your thoughts. I guess I asked a "provocative" question.

Of course I'm beyond all that megapixel envy - right! If I had the $$$ I'd probably be looking for a full frame or larger format with all the attendant supporting hardware. But I have the current luxury of not shopping in that high rent neighborhood.

Although to Erik's point - not entirely sure what POV you intended - since Sigma (successfully?) markets using large format prints - I think it at least gives an argument that more MP is not always necessary within a certain set of performance parameters.

Kind regards,
--
Ed_S
http://www.pbase.com/ecsquires

Ed_S said:

Although to Erik's point - not entirely sure what POV you intended -
since Sigma (successfully?) markets using large format prints - I
think it at least gives an argument that more MP is not always
necessary within a certain set of performance parameters.

Click to expand...

Don't forget Sigma calls it 14MP so Sigma plays in the MP race the same as everyone else. BTW, you only know what detail is really missing when you see what a higher MP camera can capture.

--
Erik

Tiffles said:

Hemidart said:

How profitable is Sigmas camera division and Foveon as a company?

Click to expand...

My guess is they (and us) can both be happy that they are privately
owned and not public. Otherwise there would be no Cameras from Sigma.

light_reaction said:

From what I can tell Foveon sells to Sigma and Toshiba, with Toshiba
only using the sensor in a single industrial camera. The reason I ask
this is, there are rumors that Fujifilm will be dropping their SLR's
like the S5 because of poor sales and focusing on compacts. Sigma has
a profitable lens division, but with global economy taking a hit
lately they might see their camera division becoming a financial
drain. If Sigma was to stop making cameras, how long could Foveon
exist, or even have the money to develop improved sensors.

Click to expand...

GLobal economy is doing fine as far as I would say. It has slowed
down in the last months but - that's ok since we are coming from a
quite good 2007. Always a little hangover after a good party. Re
Foveon: Not very long possibly but I am sure they will have Sigma as
a customer for a long time.

light_reaction said:

Another scenero I see is Sigma seeing that while the Foveon X3 is a
unique Sensor, it has weaknesses in perceived technology. The general
public wants high MP counts and other tech terms they know nothing
about, but think they do. Sigma users are a different lot, you people
see the beauty in the Foveon and work through the quirkiness. With
the MP confusion of the Foveon and poor high ISO, the general public
will stay away. Sigma might stop using the Foveon and move to a
mainstream CMOS and focus on increasing profts, instead of trying to
teach people about a relatively unknown sensor,

Click to expand...

The problem is that in earlier days, there was indeed a measurable
quality difference between Sigma DSLRs and the competition (at least
in good light and in regard of system prices - see the SD9/Canon Eos
D60 comparison from 2002). Now I think the competition has really
advanced a lot and from prints, I would say one'd have a hard time to
rate a (low-end!) Canon 450D pic significantly below an SD14 pic.
Similarly, one would have a hard time to rate an SD14 body even only
slightly above the 450D body.

Click to expand...

The above is a very accurate statement. i just purchased a DRebel 450 XSi and it not only matches or trumps Sigma's best DSLR model: the SD14 (which I have owned in the past), but completely outperforms the DP1 in every single parameter, including overall IQ, and high ISO, @ a cost of just over $600.00. Granted it is larger and less compact than the DP1, but it sets a whole new standard in entry-level DSLR's in overall IQ and performance . At 3.5FPS, the XSi beats even the SD14 in speed. It's IQ is about 95% of what the 5D is right now, and it's high ISO is superlative @ 1600.

This is where Sigma should be aiming for if they are to be able to favorably compete with the "Big boys" in the coming years. I'm not sure that Sigma has the know how, or the resources to do so. It seems the the Foveon has plateaued in it's size, performance and resolution right now. And the kicker here is that Foveon cannot be post processed by anyone else but SPP, which is kinda a closed loop IMHO.

Also, whoever stated that the DP1 sales are presently "brisk" , is mis-informed at best. While the DP1 did enjoy a initial post release push in sales by Sigma and photo enthusiast, that has very rapidly died down to a minor trickle according to several in-house photo equipment sources I've discussed this with. They are mostly sitting on the shelves of countless, high-end stores, and are re-selling for $200-300 less than retail on CL and eBay - with exceptions like included accessories.

In fact, there is now a growing doubt that Sigma will ever release a DP2 ( despite a Sigmas earlier announced plans for the DP line). Seems that Sigma is having some serious technical problems advancing with the whole DP compact concept. It wouldn't be surprising at all to see the DP1 quietly discontinued in the next six months or so - due to low sales and advancing competition.

light_reaction said:

The "Pro" that remains for Sigma is the character of the image, which
us guys like. IMO Sigma should try and make a relatively affordable
full frame SD camera with one heck of a resolution (12 MP should be
enough) and keep on using smaller versions of the sensor in DP
cameras (maybe including a MFT or Micro-Aps cersion) .

The worst thing they could do is use a mainstream sensor in their
cameras simply because their only competitive advantage would vanish.

O.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollivr/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ollivr/popular-interesting/
http://seen.by.spiegel.de/ollivr-1

Click to expand...