SD 16

425i said:

Since the SD1 is a bit dearer than we thought it would be
What about a Sigma releasing a SD16 for the rest of us
...

Click to expand...

Sigma has currently put themselves in a situation where there is nowhere to go with regard to a new camera, i.e. SD16.

A new APS-C 6x3 MP camera, based on SD15 technology, will not attract many buyers even if it is cheap.

A new APS-C 12x3 MP camera, based on SD1 technology, will be too expensive.

Personally I think they have to take an extra look at SD1 --- take half a year and make it cheap to manufacture - and then release a cheap version called SD1x - hopefully not cutting all that many edges - hopefully still 15x3 MP.

When this is done there is ample of time to plan for the even cheaper SD16 at 8x3 MP and release it 18 months from now.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/
(Sleeping - so the need to support it is even higher)

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

DMillier said:

Assuming the Sd15 has solved the reliability problems of the SD14, what is needed more than video is for Sigma to actually demonstrate that their so called philiosphy of no-frills-photgrapher-centric design is real rather than a smokescreen for incompetence and cost-cutting.

I suspect most people realise by now that you don't actually get anything in exchange for the absence of features and performance from Sigma. IMO, if Sigma's bare-bones cameras improve the shooting experiece over more complicated competitors, it's by accident, not design:

• In what way does continually fitting crappy LCD screens help the photographer?

• In what way does having 7 sec per shot write times help the photographer?

• In what way does having to wait an eternity for the review histogram help the photographer?

Click to expand...

+1

DavidMillier said:

• In what way is a physical dust filter superior to an effective dust shaker?

• In what way does the absence of live view help the photographer achieve accurate focus when using a tripod?

Why after 4 DSLR models, can't Sigma produce a camera that comes remotely near the abilities of say Canon's 1000D or Nikon's D3100, cameras that sell for as little as £300, especially as they like to price everything up against far superior camera bodies like the D7000.

Do you really buy the marketing that says the absence of industry standard features and performance is a virtue? I don't. To me it says either that Sigma can barely build functioning cameras or (perhaps more worryingly) that they think their customers are mugs. Perhaps the SD1 fiasco has got through even to the diehards, and taught then that they aren't mugs...

--
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/default.shtml

Click to expand...

All excellent points. I bought my SD14 new for $450 when Cameta Camera was unloading their stock. For that price, I can't gripe too much about the camera's quirkiness. For the money, the SD14 has been a blessing to me. I would never pay what Sigma asks for their DSLR bodies though, especially the SD1. It's a joke. The SD15 is a $600 body at most and not a penny more. The SD1 should never have broken the $2,000 mark. If it ends up being as quirky as previous Sigma bodies, it should never pass $1,000 new asking price.

Yes, I have gotten some amazing and impressive images with my SD14. I've also gotten a ton of screwed up and lost images that are the fault of the camera and not me. It most certainly is not a general purpose, all around shooting camera. I fail to see the great trade off there. It's like work place evaluations. Just about everyone can do a great job at work once in a while for review, but not so many can do so every day.

The Nikon model is to introduce their top of the line camera and then release a second camera with fewer features but the same sensor, e.g. the D3/D700. Now with the Nikon D4 which is rumored at 38 MP is released then the D3x 24 MP sensor will most likely end up the the D700x which will be a less featured camera than the D3x but at half the price.

Sigma can't cut the features of the SD1 and have any feature left. I expect there are more than manufacturing start up cost in the SD1 sensor. There may be fundamental upsizing issues with the Foveon sensor that it is going to take a lot more talent than Sigma can bring to bear - given the small number of cameras that will be sold - to actually lower the sensor cost.

Sigma might be the point where they have to expand a huge engineering effort to sell a few cameras which will come out of their money to develop new lenses.

The Foveon or Sigma sensor - whatever you want call it - may just not scale in size or pixel number. It may just turn out that the Foveon design might not be the final design of a "true color sensor." It may be the original Foveon founders and engineers chose a small sensor - cell phone - target market.

We will soon find out.

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

Truman Prevatt wrote:
.....

Truman Prevatt said:

The Foveon or Sigma sensor - whatever you want call it - may just not scale in size or pixel number. It may just turn out that the Foveon design might not be the final design of a "true color sensor." It may be the original Foveon founders and engineers chose a small sensor - cell phone - target market.

Click to expand...

.....

FWIW my understanding of why Foveon "chose a small sensor - cell phone - target market" was simply the huge size of the international addressable market.

"Addressable market" : In other words, enormously more camera sensors get into cellphones than into cameras.

Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (current)

Truman Prevatt said:

The Nikon model is to introduce their top of the line camera and then release a second camera with fewer features but the same sensor, e.g. the D3/D700. Now with the Nikon D4 which is rumored at 38 MP is released then the D3x 24 MP sensor will most likely end up the the D700x which will be a less featured camera than the D3x but at half the price.

Click to expand...

Yepp - a sound strategy.

Truman Prevatt said:

Sigma can't cut the features of the SD1 and have any feature left. I expect there are more than manufacturing start up cost in the SD1 sensor. There may be fundamental upsizing issues with the Foveon sensor that it is going to take a lot more talent than Sigma can bring to bear - given the small number of cameras that will be sold - to actually lower the sensor cost.

Sigma might be the point where they have to expand a huge engineering effort to sell a few cameras which will come out of their money to develop new lenses.

Click to expand...

Reasonable analysis

Truman Prevatt said:

The Foveon or Sigma sensor - whatever you want call it - may just not scale in size or pixel number.

Click to expand...

Maybe - I dont see why though.

Truman Prevatt said:

It may just turn out that the Foveon design might not be the final design of a "true color sensor."

Click to expand...

Thats always true - that the latest design not is the final design.

Truman Prevatt said:

It may be the original Foveon founders and engineers chose a small sensor - cell phone - target market.

Click to expand...

No - absolutely not. The cell phone track is a dead end for Foveon - and have always been.

Truman Prevatt said:

We will soon find out.

Click to expand...

I dont think we will. Whatever happens to Foveon sensors is dependent on political decisions at Sigma. It proves nothing regarding the technology.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/
(Sleeping - so the need to support it is even higher)

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

SandyF said:

.....

FWIW my understanding of why Foveon "chose a small sensor - cell phone - target market" was simply the huge size of the international addressable market.

"Addressable market" : In other words, enormously more camera sensors get into cellphones than into cameras.

Click to expand...

It does not matter. Cell phone camera sensors have to be dirt cheap. The revenue might be less than 1 US cent per sensor. And the competition is fierce. And ... and thats the most important thing ... Foveon sensors so far have not shown to scale down all that well.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/
(Sleeping - so the need to support it is even higher)

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

Not knowing where the cost of the SD1 is accounted, it's difficult to say that any camera with a 'new' X3F sensor will ever be priced at consumer level again, since it seems that the sensor is the only place to put the high price of the SD1.

But with the advances of new technology since 2002, maybe they could take the original foveon chip and just make it FF. I would be happy if they made the sensors larger - maybe that would allow for removing the foveon magenta/green blotches (which seem to be inherent in the technology).

-John

--
http://www.johnlindroth.com/gallery/
[email protected]

My future starts when I wake up every morning ...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
--Miles Davis

JohnLindroth said:

Not knowing where the cost of the SD1 is accounted, it's difficult to say that any camera with a 'new' X3F sensor will ever be priced at consumer level again, since it seems that the sensor is the only place to put the high price of the SD1.

Click to expand...

My guess is that all Foveon sensors have been developed and made at a great loss ... taken either by Foveon´s founders or by Sigma.

My guess is that there are many generations of Foveon sensors to come until any one can cover its own costs.

My guess is that the SD1 sensor has so extremely low yield that it hurts and that the cost for testing out a good chip is extraordinary. Thereby, even though the chips are reasonable cheap to make ... the cost of making each camera is huge. Therefore ... its impossible to sell them cheap.

JohnLindroth said:

But with the advances of new technology since 2002, maybe they could take the original foveon chip and just make it FF. I would be happy if they made the sensors larger - maybe that would allow for removing the foveon magenta/green blotches (which seem to be inherent in the technology).

Click to expand...

Making 3x area SD10?

I am not sure its a clever idea.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/
(Sleeping - so the need to support it is even higher)

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

Roland Karlsson wrote:

If Sigma choses to drop it - it is dead unless they are willing to give the rights away. Some rumors have it that Nikon has a "true color technology" in test. I can't see anyone paying much money for the Foveon technology. If Sigma doesn't use it - I expect it is dead.

Roland Karlsson said:

Roland Karlsson said:

We will soon find out.

Click to expand...

I dont think we will. Whatever happens to Foveon sensors is dependent on political decisions at Sigma. It proves nothing regarding the technology.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/
(Sleeping - so the need to support it is even higher)

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html

Click to expand...

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