The cameras I have would have given me either totally blown out photos or blacked out photos depending on which part of the image I spotted on AE. Good vibrant colors, good detail, good everything that's of concern to me. Too bad it's a Sigma camera with proprietary lenses. The flares are all the same indicating either a lense phenomenon or "shutter" phenomenon. Likewise, the flares would have totally killed any digital I've either owned or seen. Looks like they have a winner in this one. (they could have used a polarizer in the water seen)
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
SD9 sample pictures from Japan
- Thread starter Hirokun
- Start date
Igor R.
Senior Member
This is a electrons leak from overexposed (overcollected) pixels.
kalahari
Senior Member
Thanks for the info.
I was under the impression that each pixel had an electron trap around it to prevent this from occuring? i wonder if the Foveon chips have this trap.
I was under the impression that each pixel had an electron trap around it to prevent this from occuring? i wonder if the Foveon chips have this trap.
Generally, I would have to say that a professional wouldn't take photos across a body of water, against the sun. Unless they were trying to show the dynamic range of the camera, they wouldn't do that sort of thing. taking photos into the sun and across a body of water causes far too many problems such as the flares already mentioned. Bodies of water also cause heat waves over the water surface that produces focus problems. It's a bit like taking a photo using a coke bottle for a lense.
tim martin
Senior Member
Okay, so when it's really a bright purple, that's "blooming" ?
Okay.
Okay, I see that too, in shadow of the light pole. Green fringe on
the left, purple fringe on the right. But not a bright purple like in
the lamp above. That's "blooming", you say.
Okay. Thanks for the info.
Yup, they look fine to me too. Only if one really zooms in does one
notice anything. And maybe it is the lens ( ? ).
E
Erik Magnuson
Guest
They appear to be what you get by default out of the Sigma software when you select JPEG output. So they are roughly equivalent to "in-camera" JPEGs from other cameras (and can reasonable be compared to such.)
--
Erik
Igor R.
Senior Member
Photographer has croped it, so what?
Igor R.
Senior Member
Every chip has electrons leak, even film has this effect, but it is caused by different physical effect. But result is the same, spreading of the overexposed part.
Igor R.
Senior Member
CA of a lens.
lens flare
birds
CA and/or electron leak
Igor R.
Senior Member
...with the hood.
Z (is real)
Senior Member
There is blooming, which is the tendency of overexposed pixels to spill into neighboring pixels. The electron trap mentioned is usually called anti-blooming circuitry. Most modern sensors have fairly good anti-blooming protection. If this is blooming, the take away is to be very very careful about blowing out highlights. This is already true for all digital cameras to some degree.
There is also a small amount pixel to pixel leakage at normal exposure levels which causes slight "crosstalk" and a minute softening of the image. (Once again, true of most if not all image sensors.)
The purple spots are kind of strange for chromatic abberation, but I suppose it is possible.
-Z-
rick decker
Forum Pro
SFJP
Senior Member
I have changed monitor for a much better one. Now I see the green lines along the electric lines. This may be CA, but that's all what I see that might not be just jpeg artifact. The purple in the lamp seems to me to be just a natural color reflect captured by the camera. I still see no band in the blue and not purple fringing in the leaves. And trying to interpolate to a higher size I see this is a hugely compressed jpeg that does not allow clean upsampling as other pictures from Foveon (like Phil's ones) allow.
SFJP
SFJP
http://www.pbase.com/sfjp
SFJP
--All those images have really bad CA, but the colours are beautiful!
(Leaf pic)
--
Carl Rytterfalk
http://www.pbase.com/rytterfalk
Today Epson 850z - tomorrow Foveon!
SFJP
http://www.pbase.com/sfjp
kalahari
Senior Member
Considering the fact that this lens is considered very good for a zoom in that range, I am concerned. Can the lenses be this bad? If this lens has CA this bad, then the non-EX grade lenses will probably be completely unusable.
I notices that none of the wide angle zooms are listed as APO. APO is specified only on tele Zooms.
I notices that none of the wide angle zooms are listed as APO. APO is specified only on tele Zooms.
rick decker
Forum Pro
If that is the 20-40, I don't think it was rated especially high. Haven't check lens review though.
In case no one noticed, the "flares" are all the same with respect to the flare arms. This suggests a flare filter and/or a "shutter" phenomenon. While shooting into the sunlight with a digital is certainly permissible, it's really putting the camera to the near-ultimate test. If they had used a polarizer turned to its horizontal position, the photos very likely wouldn't had had this problem. Maybe the photographer intended having the flares. We just don't know what filters (if any) were used. In any case, the camera performed admirably and I wouldn't want to put any digital that I know of against the SD-9. JMHO
Dana Jacobsen
Leading Member
It is the lens, but I'm surprised I've seen it on a number of them, not just the 20-40, and we haven't seen that many reports of bad CA on other cameras with these lenses. The good thing is that since there is no demosaicing, the correction should be more accurate. There would still be different aliasing in different channels, so of course you want no CA. With all these samples, I'm surprised they didn't build in an option to correct CA in the conversion software.
Regarding zooming in, if you make a 10x15 print ($3 at my local Costco), you'll be scaling up by 2x. I don't know for sure, but I think you could see it since it will be 2-6 pixels wide at that point. Now you have to wonder how often you'll print this large (some people never print much bigger than 8x10, while others regularly do 16x24).
B
Benzart
Guest
--
Any guesses to why Phil has been so Silent the last several days? Maybe he has a new camera he is reviewing,,,Maybe the SD9?????
Benzart
rick decker
Forum Pro
So that is flare and the other artifacts are lens-driven also. Well it is good to know that it isn't the sensor or the firmware. I hope I don't have to buy primes as I am a real zoom fan! I have several old sigma zooms that I want to start with but am almost afraid to put them on the body!
Thanks to everyone for the expanation about the posts. I think the images look pretty good overall. The leaves look great and IMHO outdo the 1Ds shot I saw.
Thanks to everyone for the expanation about the posts. I think the images look pretty good overall. The leaves look great and IMHO outdo the 1Ds shot I saw.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum