Reading mode: Light Dark

More or less the end of the SD era for me

Go to last post
Charles2 said:
Ringwraith69 said:
... the Foveon-sensor manages to produce a look that I truly love. No other camera can really compete in that undefinable area, not even todays FF competitors.
Click to expand...
I begin to question even that. Old Yashica and Zeiss lenses made for the Contax bayonet mount, but now on an Olympus E-P1, produce images similar to the Foveon (Sigma DP2). What do you think?
Click to expand...
There doesn't appear to be any area in this shot that is in focus. Do you have a link to the original?

--
http://www.pbase.com/miketuthill
 
The focus issue is certainly worth raising. Taking another look I notice:
  • Even though I uploaded a small image for my free Flickr account (its maximum dimension is 1024 pixels), Flickr compressed it from 932 KB to 625 KB.
  • The compression and the way browsers enlarge images (presumably emphasizing speed over photographic quality) combine to degrade images viewed at larger than actual size. Most of us, I suspect, have our browsers enlarging images as we enlarge text, particularly on small-font dPreview.
  • This image was shot at 1/8 second, perhaps over-taxing the Olympus image stabilization that my arms really need.
Net result, there is a big difference between the typical web view of this image and the "original" viewed with FastStone (actually the original resized to fit my monitor). There is another jump in clarity of foliage detail from the "original" of this image to the excellent DP2 landscape you posted.

My previous post was supposed to be mainly about the colors and color transitions as rendered by Foveon and as done by legacy lenses on an Olympus Bayer sensor. One might perform better than the other, but overshadowing the performance gap is, to my eye, a similar rich, "filmic" treatment of color that is aesthetically very different from modern sharp lenses like the Olympus 17 mm f/2.8, even the Panasonic 20mm pancake, on an Olympus E-P1. What do you think?

I hope people can address that topic apart from my admitted deficiencies as a photographer.
 
"Color" is IMHO the element of photographic scene 'capture' which is most easily edited, assuming one is shooting RAW. What I've often called "fine detail capture" is there at the time of capture.... or isn't... and I think a great strength of all the Sigma/Foveon cameras.

What I mean is fine detail of blades of grass, leaves, foliage, trees on the distant mountain side; or sand, pebbles, rocks, boulders on the distant mountain side all having an appearance of reality, a "versimilatude" as Pete Sprader calls it. Many, not all, photos from other cameras seem to me flat or green mush. Many, not all, photos from Sigma/Foveon cameras have this visible detail.... whether the photog blurs it a bit or not. I can see it in photos ranging from the SD9/10 to MORE fine detail capture with the SD14 and the DP1, DP2. That's why I prefer the newer cameras (DPs and SD14) to the SD9.10. More detail.

Since I tend to take a lot of 'busy' landscapes, ie lots of foliage and detail, I see the fine detail capture time and time again in my Sigma/Foveon photos. Then in processing... question of color? if I don't like the results straight from the RAW processor's basic settings (usually SPP4).... I edit. Usually with my DP2, first I'll experiment with the white balance. Then the color mode. Then the colorwheel, then the sliders.

Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann
 
Peter,

I totally agree with everything you said. It's tough to give up on a creative tool that has as much promise as the Foveon system. However, the effort required to extract a great image out a mediocre system is just not worth it. I have two SD-14's, one of which has been modified to take Leica R lenses, and I have had some success over the last three years. However the many recurring failures due to lousy software and quirky sensor output has convinced me to sell the equipment and switch to a Canon 5D Mark II six months ago. I will be back when Sigma can produce a camera body worthy of the Foveon.

Richard
 
Thanks for stressing the need to check focus. I took another shot at higher ISO and faster shutter, putting the image this time in a dPreview gallery. I notice dPreview compressed it from 983 KB to 805 KB, but if you download it and view it in FastStone, I think you will find it captured more detail with less blur than my earlier example.

Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm lens, f/5.6, on an Olympus E-P1.



 
Peter

I understand you very well.

I have, and are enjoying the images from the SD14. But on almost every session, I curse at the camera, and have been really close at throwing it into the ocean.

As Sigma says, with these cameras you develop your own style. Well, thats right, for me it includes:
  • remember to tilt it slightly to the left, to compensate for misaligned sensor or creen
  • remember to not shoot faster than 1 image per. 5-6 seconds.
  • expecting errors at any time, needing to drop the battery.
  • dust building up
  • accepting that the colors are pleasing, but no way accurate
  • accept that my very old Sony DSC-70S are far superior at indoor shots w/o flash
  • lack of vital info in the view (ISO and WB)
  • lack of tethered shooting
Sometimes I pick up my old Nikon F3, and enjoy easy focusing on a twice as big viewfinder picture, and wonder if I should go back to slide film.

With my Nikons I shot 2-300.000 portraits when I worked as a pro. Now, heading back to the profession, I really question the SD14s ability to reliably deliver the goods. And asking £900 for a HW-fix to a bugged camera is close to a scam.

--
Kind regards
Øyvind
My best images:
http://foto.nordjylland.biz/porta/Portfolio/Best/album/index.html
http://www.pbase.com/norwegianviking/sd14
SD14 Compendium:
http://www.foto.nordjylland.biz/SD14/sd-usertips.htm
 
Still out of focus everywhere.
Charles2 said:
Thanks for stressing the need to check focus. I took another shot at higher ISO and faster shutter, putting the image this time in a dPreview gallery. I notice dPreview compressed it from 983 KB to 805 KB, but if you download it and view it in FastStone, I think you will find it captured more detail with less blur than my earlier example.

Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm lens, f/5.6, on an Olympus E-P1.

dpr:/ galleries/6257687438/photos/346879;
Click to expand...
--
Laurence

Never look down to test the ground before taking your
next step; only he who keeps his eye fixed on the far
horizon will find the right road.

Dag Hammarskjold

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/root
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/dp1
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd14
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd10
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
 
I got rid of my SD9 when I saw the Foveon technology was going nowhere. That was 3 years ago. Today the same SD14 sensor still lingers and in fact is the basis of their new flagship DSLR.

Sigma got its start as an after market inexpensive lens company. It still is an after market inexpensive lens company. It sells lenses because when one rolls in the cost into the equation - the Sigma lens cost less than the Nikkor, Canon, etc.

While Nikon and Canon want to sell lots of cameras - they still have top end lines dedicated to quality. Of course you pay for that and that's fine. Leica is quality - there are few Leica (ignoring the Panasonic versions) devoted to the beginner.

I sincerely have my doubts that Sigma will produce a body worthy of the Foveon or will support development of the Foveon worthy of its potential. I hang around and watch but I don't think it is in their DNA.

Truman
pixledude said:
Peter,

I totally agree with everything you said. It's tough to give up on a creative tool that has as much promise as the Foveon system. However, the effort required to extract a great image out a mediocre system is just not worth it. I have two SD-14's, one of which has been modified to take Leica R lenses, and I have had some success over the last three years. However the many recurring failures due to lousy software and quirky sensor output has convinced me to sell the equipment and switch to a Canon 5D Mark II six months ago. I will be back when Sigma can produce a camera body worthy of the Foveon.

Richard
Click to expand...
--
Truman
http://www.pbase.com/tprevatt
 
Charles2 said:
Ringwraith69 said:
... the Foveon-sensor manages to produce a look that I truly love. No other camera can really compete in that undefinable area, not even todays FF competitors.
Click to expand...
I begin to question even that. Old Yashica and Zeiss lenses made for the Contax bayonet mount, but now on an Olympus E-P1, produce images similar to the Foveon (Sigma DP2). What do you think?
Click to expand...
That image looks nothing like the DP2's output. It is soft, flat and mushy. The colours have no punch and it looks like a flat digicam pic.

Even the photos from my Leica M9, which also lack an antialiasing filter, do not have the same kind of 'look' that come from a Foveon camera. They are reminiscent in some respects, but the colours are quite different.

--
Archiver - Recording the sights and sounds of life
http://www.flickr.com/photos/archiver/
 
I have to say that these sorts of things are why I shoot Nikon. For DSLR systems their legacy equipment compatibility cannot be beaten. Every lens made since 1977 or thereabouts will work in some shape or form on my D3 body made in 2008.

I am seriously considering a DP2s for a pocket camera because - like you - I cannot get past that amazing Foveon Look. Imagine a Foveon sensor in a Nikon....!
 
Are you sure the D1x has a separate internal battery? Never heared about that, I only know some older Canon and Kodak dSLR's that had an internal battery, no other makes...

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'
 
MPA1 said:
I have to say that these sorts of things are why I shoot Nikon. For DSLR systems their legacy equipment compatibility cannot be beaten. Every lens made since 1977 or thereabouts will work in some shape or form on my D3 body made in 2008.

I am seriously considering a DP2s for a pocket camera because - like you - I cannot get past that amazing Foveon Look. Imagine a Foveon sensor in a Nikon....!
Click to expand...
Ah yes, something like the Fuji S5 Pro... Really, having a D300 based body with the Foveon sensor would be my ultimate camera dream, but I think we can safely assume that's not going to happen :(
--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'
 
I've suggested a rangefinder concept with EVF (like the Panasonic LC1), a Leica M mount and a full frame Foveon sensor... but I think that I will end with a second hand Leica M9.
 
In stead of an EVF, I'd rather see a true rangefinder concept. Something like an Epson R-D1, which has an M-mount, built around a Foveon sensor.
--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'
 
I'm an ex-Leica M shooter (film) and I binned the lot (including a Noctilux f1!) because my eyesight was no longer good enough to focus the rangefinder accurately.

When it worked it was fabulous - but I always felt it was just usually ever so slightly out. At the time the M9 was a pipe dream (the M8 was not even out) and Leica kept telling us a digital M just wouldn't happen...!

Also it was professionally irrelevant - I just could not afford to keep that level of cash tied up in gear that worked about once a year.

I'd like a D3 with a 24MP Foveon sensor please!!

Pending price confirmation (no one keeps the DP2s in stock here in NZ - I have to special order it in from Australia) I'm going to get one I think.
 
Ringwraith69 said:
Are you sure the D1x has a separate internal battery? Never heared about that, I only know some older Canon and Kodak dSLR's that had an internal battery, no other makes...

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'
Click to expand...
Just kiidding. The D1x has a battery which is not user changable. It's good for five years; in fact I got eight. My D2x has a similar battery, but IS user changable, although I have not yet had to change it. They control the LED display on the top of the camera and the internal clock.

But my point remains. Although the D1x is a "Professional" camera, parts are hard to come by. The SD9 is only a few years younger than the D1x, and like my camera is waaaaaay obsolete. On the other hand I think these companies Should be criticised, but why single out Sigma?

Dave
 
Chato said:
But my point remains. Although the D1x is a "Professional" camera, parts are hard to come by. The SD9 is only a few years younger than the D1x, and like my camera is waaaaaay obsolete. On the other hand I think these companies Should be criticised, but why single out Sigma?

Dave
Click to expand...
Hmm, I really had no idea that the D1(x) has a separate internal battery, never read about that yet I have owned both a D1 and a D1x...

As for 'singling out Sigma': by no means do I intend to single out Sigma. But the are the only camera maker from whom I am using cameras and about whom I hear these stories concerning camera types I am actually using. Besides that, it's a bit ironic that the camera maker with probably the worst QC and most problem prone cameras is now failing to supply spare parts...

--
'We are only immortal for a limited time'
 
Ringwraith69 said:
Chato wrote:

Hmm, I really had no idea that the D1(x) has a separate internal battery, never read about that yet I have owned both a D1 and a D1x...
Click to expand...
I'd quote the manual, but it now resides with the new owner. On the other hand the manual is available on line... :)

The Clock Battery

The clock-calendar is powered by an independent battery with a life of about ten years. When no charge remains, the clock battery indicator ( )will appear in the control panel on top of the camera. This will not affect camera operation, but the correct time and date will no longer be displayed. Take the camera to a Nikon-authorized service center, where the battery can be replaced for a fee.
http://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/16860
Pg 45
Ringwraith69 said:
As for 'singling out Sigma': by no means do I intend to single out Sigma. But the are the only camera maker from whom I am using cameras and about whom I hear these stories concerning camera types I am actually using. Besides that, it's a bit ironic that the camera maker with probably the worst QC and most problem prone cameras is now failing to supply spare parts...
Click to expand...
Canon and Nikon are better at covering up the QC problems. Such is my impression... :)

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top