SD15 vs SD9....

You can get this unique SD9 look from any camera. Here is how:

1. Take a raw file from any Bayer camera and bring it into Adobe RAW Converter. Settings:
clarity +30
vibrance +30
detail +100
color detail +100
blues luminance -25

2. Open in Photoshop as a16 bit image
3. Convert to Lab
4. Select A channel
5. levels midtone 1.05 - 1.1
6. contrast -20
7. select B channel
8. contrast +30
9. convert to RGB
10. bilinear downsample to 50%
11. enjoy unique SD9 look!

Here are a few examples. They are pretty close to what my SD9 does.

















You may adjust settings to your taste.

DISCLAIMER: I am not saying this processing will give the exact look of the same scene photographed with SD9. It won't. SD9 still can capture some subtle colour variations and nuances Bayer cameras can't see. Especially nuances that aren't there.

--
http://www.gridenko.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alex_virt/

Interesting how everybody has such differing opinions. I own a SD9, SD10, SD14 and DP1s. The SD14 and SD10 are new (just bought them), but I finally had a chance to test both over the course of a week. My opinion: I am getting another SD9 back-up body. They are great cameras and I may keep the SD10 but as much as I like the SD14 and SD10 output, I prefer what my Sony A100 and Panasonic L1 give me, the output of those two non-foveon cameras is more reliable. Both have low AA Filters. The DP1s is awesome because I get DSLR quality in a tiny package.

But I love the original funky-colored Foveon look of the SD9. Call it a one-trick Pony, I happen to really like that one trick. The SD9 pictures are not always on, but the "wow factor" is over the top when they are on. I have taken some pictures with it that I would not have been able to duplicate with another camera, no matter what kind of post processing I would do. So for me it is the SD9 all the way with all its beautiful funkiness and quirks and oddnesses.

There is a magic to the pictures, some get it some don't.

DMillier said:

The sd9 was the first attempt at a completely new technology. Since that model, sigma/foveon have worked hard at taming colour issues as have the Bayer manufacturers.

None of them make cameras/software that yields forensically accurate colours - you can see this is tests, there is always some deviation from neutrality.

Click to expand...

I don't believe forensically accurate colours are possible with a three-primary system - there will always be some metamerism. Big galleries recording paintings are in some cases recording the light in about ten narrow wave bands - earth pigments in particular need much more detail than simply the ratio of a red filter to a green filter.

The same applies to skin tones, rocks, soil, wood etc in the natural world. Three primaries are just the bare minimum that can give an acceptable image for most purposes.

DavidMillier said:

Usually that is deliberate: everyone is trying to find the magic formula that yields both believability and emotionally satisfying colour. It's not an easy balance to strike because they can't stray too far from neutrality because people have got used to digital colour being much more accurate than film and spot wrongness quickly.

Click to expand...

Kodak ended up making various films for different purposes - there was even a film for photographing babies. They did a fair bit of research on preferred colour versus accurate colour.

SandyF said:

I'm not very fond of the SD9, having learned the Foveon RAW and processing on the SD10. For my usage, the SD9 is more limited in useability because it needs 'better' light than the SD10. In fact, my SD9 is out on loan to adegroot again! The quick, out of camera 'color' of the SD10 is different from the SD9.. the SD10 is probably more neutral than the SD9, definitely than the SD14. The SD10's biggest disadvantage to me is resolution, size/weight, heavy shutter in that order. I can see more detail in landscapes on my SD14/DP1/DP2 shots than my SD10 shots. The SD9 reminds me of the saying, "when it's good, it's very, very good; when it's bad, it's awful."

Click to expand...

SandyF said:

Being New Year, I'm into my should-I-buy-another camera mode, not to replace the SDx/DPx, but perhaps replace the Pentax K20D. I've actually looked online at used Canon 5D MIIs.... The Pentax K20D just doesn't give me the oomph (good tech term) of the Foveon RAW. "Color" is such a human perspection... I like your point about what's believable vs pleasing. The Pentax seems to be so BLUE, I cannot tame the blueness, and I'm much more used to magenta/yellow/aqua types tones from the Sigma cameras I suppose. So what's "real" ... does reality matter? (see flickr link below for some recently posted examples).

Click to expand...

SandyF said:

I won't buy the SD1 at the present price, and I just don't think the SD15 offers enough resolution. What would you buy for mid US$1500 or under for primarily landscape? High resolution (and dynamic range) are my key features.

Click to expand...

As a recent buyer of a lightly used SD14, I am enjoying these SD9 vs. SDXX threads. They help me learn. Having bought a camera that I enjoying I nonetheless wonder whether I bought the "right" model. This has nothing to with the SD14, which I am still learning and like so far.

I bought the SD14 right after upgrading from the Nikon D5000 to the D5100, so actually I am learning two cameras. I also own a Panasonic DMC-L10 and Olympus E-510. I hang onto the E-510 because there has always been something special about Olympus color, the lenses exhibit the advantage of the 4:3rds system with corner-to-corner sharpness, and the E-510 has the lightest AA filter of any Olympus 4:3rds DSLR. The Panny L10 is a bit sharper yet and has nice color when developed in ACR.

I always loved my D5000 but after two and half years with it, the additional DR, lighter weight, and other advantages of the D5100 tempted me. I always considered the D5000's color (Neutral Picture Control with minor increase in saturation) to be highly accurate but a bit unexciting compared to Olympus DSLRs. I was surprised to find that the D5100 has really narrowed that gap. I'm not sure whether it's the new sensor or improved processing, but I think it starts with better DR--gradations are more subtle and the color is (as a result?) more lively, and perhaps a bit warmer. My first reaction is that this calls into question whether the Olympus equipment has much comparative advantage.

When I first shot the SD14 side by side with the new D5100 I could see right away that the SD14 is about vivid color, so in a sense it re-opens the gap vs. the Nikon product. Whether it is (or can be made to be) accurate, will depend on downloading the latest SPP and working with it. In buying the SD14 I was looking more for the Foveon difference, whatever that is, than color-accuracy, but the latter remains important. In answer to Sandy's question above, I mainly want to point out that the D5100 (and presumably the D7000) have made some changes in color rendering that bring its cameras a bit closer to Olympus and Sigma.

--
William Wilgus

What are you using to convert the pentax raws?

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

ACR in PS Elements... now v10... I've also used 2 earlier versions of PSElements.

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

I've found that the colors on the SD-9, 10, and 14 require a lot of correction using both RGB and CMYK modes, but the 15 requires little, if any.
--
William Wilgus

If you use ACR even in elements i would imagine you can use custom dng profiles instead of the canned ones. this means you can download the free adobe dng profile editor and fine tune the colour to your taste. it worked for me with the sd14, should be easier with the pentax.

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

Interesting. I bookmark this post. Maybe I will try it.

Would be even more interesting if some SD9 photographers tried it.

--
Roland

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

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

I've bookmarked it too and will try along those lines with various cameras. I like the building shot, but the clouds in others look a bit strange IMHO.
Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (new from April)

I've always had the feeling that something different in the SD9 might have been related to internal circuitry using Lab space in differentiating colors from the sensor, rather than RGB. And you are right - if you convert an image from a 'neutral' colored camera by increasing the contrast of the 'b' channel in Lab mode with an s-shaped curve, you come very close to the sunlight setting on the SD9.
-John

D Cox said:

Mostly Lurking said:

It's been a very long time since I used the SD-9, but I don't remember an special color qualities that it provided that can't be duplicated in post-processing. The 'vibrance' control in Adobe's PS and ACR especially comes to mind regarding 'Technicolor'.

Click to expand...

Somebody posted an SD9 versus Canon comparison a few days ago - the same scene shot with two cameras.

I tried the vibrance in Photoshop on them, but even at the most extreme setting the Canon was nowhere near the SD9 colours.

However, taking the Canon image into Lab mode and greatly increasing the contrast of the "b" channel (which represents blue-to-yellow contrast) did give something quite like the SD9 colours.

Those who have a full version of Photoshop (i.e. not Elements) may like to play.

Click to expand...

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

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

I've never had issues with my SD9 with any lenses (some are much newer than 2005), and it has never locked up, unless the battery went dead. The batteries usually take around 500 per bottom set, and maybe 1000 for the the side batteries (but I don't use autofocus, which might make a huge difference).
-John

stanislaw stitchanow said:

SD9 is sharper than any other Sigma DSLR compared with the same lenses.

It has a special yellow cast which makes that Technicolor look, you get deep blue skies etc, out of the cam. The pictures have just a special look. The SD14, SD15 and SD1 files have a digital cold lifeless look compared to it.
ISO is good at 100

The SD9 and SD10 have massive problems with the new HSM from the lens generation of the 150mm Macro (around 2005) and onwards.

You need 2 batteries, battery life is very low, especially when it is cold outside.

Under load with full buffer and continous shooting to keep the buffer full, the SD9 and SD10 will crashing and you must remove the battery to get it working again.

The mirror slap is like an earthquake(Be carefull at seaside it might create a Tsunami ) and when shooting from tripod, mirror lock up is a must.
The Flash system is not really working perfectly.

Click to expand...

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

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

... and I could not say a few words.

It still amazes me the amount of "bad" reputation this camera gets from people that gave up on matters that do not matter.

I have asked David dmillier to send me a X3F file so I could have a look of on the perception he gets from the colour of his SD9... still waiting. I know he does not like the blue skies and even compared the "perfect" blue skies from a magazine (probably shot with a Canon)... so it is still perception. I said a few times that not all SD9s are equal and maybe his is very different (I have one like that by the way)

The SD9 takes shots that are different from other cameras. It is a different camera that sees a reality beyond our perception. It's failures...

Needs a lot of light ie does not take photos in the dark (a bizarre and alien concept to me)

Needs a new body. I wish I could have it on a Sony a580 at least.

It is totally underdeveloped by Foveon and Sigma. I still do not get why to this date they are keeping finding solutions when they do no know how to ask the proper questions in the first place; or why Sigma prefers to have feedback from translatord and dog breeders... and the odd engineer.

Now the things where it works.
It is the best under 4MP ever made with hidden gems.
This under 4MP camera upsizes better than any other.
It sharpens better than any other.
It makes prints of 40" x 60" where other more "powerful" cameras would struggle
It looks better on screen than any other camera.
It has better coulours and subttle tonalities than any other camera.
It does great B/W

It looks great on the street. People stop to ask what it is and how "professional" it looks. Photographers from Canon and Nikon look with an enhanced interest "Oh a SD9 never saw one! It is very interesting!" Now that is bizarre!!!

So FAPP (for all practical purposes) screen or prints it does the job better than any other.

What it doesn't

Movie like photo style ie 10 shots per second or more
Focus very well
Meters very well

Has a good power supply. I discovered recently that the battery tray is faulty as the clip thends to touch a contact after a while and short circuit the batteries. Hurrah Sigma!!! How incompetent...

So take a look at this here



Original here
http://www.pbase.com/pauloferreira/image/140511901/original
plus this one on full size





It may be yellow or green or whatever. It can be printed to infinity and beyond though.
--
--------------------------------------------------------

'Politicians and baby nappies should be changed regularly for exactly the same reason.'
Eça de Queirós (1845-1900)
-------------------------------------------
Paulo Ferreira
(equipment in profile)
http://www.pauloferreira.co.uk
http://pauloferreira.imagekind.com
http://www.pbase.com/pauloferreira
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/paulo_ferreira

i have had SD10, 14 and currently have SD15.
to be honest I hate SD15 look and would be very happy to get SD14 back.

the camera is much better but it doesn't produce the same pictures (even having the same exact sensor) as SD14. And it is not supported by Adobe which makes it useles...

IMHO if you are happy with SD14 and can live with its hardware shortcomings stick to it. for SD15 you will have to completely change your workflow and shooting habbits.

Pawel
--
http://nopixels.net
http://photo.polas.net

Pawel Olas said:

i have had SD10, 14 and currently have SD15.
to be honest I hate SD15 look and would be very happy to get SD14 back.

the camera is much better but it doesn't produce the same pictures (even having the same exact sensor) as SD14. And it is not supported by Adobe which makes it useles...

IMHO if you are happy with SD14 and can live with its hardware shortcomings stick to it. for SD15 you will have to completely change your workflow and shooting habbits.

Pawel
--
http://nopixels.net
http://photo.polas.net

Click to expand...

When was the last time you updated ACR? The SD15 raws are fully supported now.

where Adobe is showing the support of the SD15.
I provide you one where the SD15 is NOT supported
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/extend.html

--

This review is from: Nikon F6 Professional SLR 35mm Film Camera Body (Electronics)

Camera will not work with CompactFlash or other digital media cards. You must buy a cartridge of tape, which allows for just 24 shots. No LCD screen for image playback. Extremely frustrated and returned item.

You can load SD15 files in ACR but it doesn't mean they are supported. The results are inconsistent, white balance can be only used in "auto" mode and so on. It is crippled to the point of being completely unusable. I have found workaround by converting sd15 RAW files to DP1s (which has the same hardware and IS supported) but it is a lot of work for raw workflow.
Here is detailed explanation of the process if you are interested:
http://nopixels.net/sd15-lightroom-workflow

If you check the list of supported cameras on Adobe website neither SD15 nor SD1 is there. Shame.

Pawel
--
http://nopixels.net
http://photo.polas.net

It correctly copies equipment info into the DNG file.
--
William Wilgus

Mostly Lurking said:

It correctly copies equipment info into the DNG file.
--
William Wilgus

Click to expand...

it doesn't.
white ballance is ignored, the colors are incorrect.
have you tried changing white balance in such DNG file? it breaks.
highlights are clipped, even if they are correct in the X3F.

once again - SD15 is not supported. DNG converter can read SD15 files but reads them incorrectly and it kind of seems to work if you accept default settings and auto white balance and underexpose your shots.

Pawel

--
http://nopixels.net
http://photo.polas.net