Are we too critical with the Foveon sensor????

motomanDK · Oct 18, 2014

I was reading about the new Nikon D750 and watched some sample pictures - i saw this one where 2500ISO was used (100%):

I know that it is 2500ISO, but still this is claimed to be a high ISO camera - i remembered that i took some shots yesterday in the Disney Store with 400ISO. I KNOW there is a big difference between 400 and 2500 ISO, but still ........

Here is part of my 400ISO Disney shot (100%):

(The purple glow is due to purple light in the figure setup - NOT Foveon error!! :-D

Another example with SPP settings - please note that both pictures are with my SD15 - known for noisy pictures!

Any comments?

--
/Henrik - Denmark
(SD14 and 2 * SD15 ... and about 5 kg glass)

Scottelly · Oct 18, 2014

My comment is that 400 ISO is really different to 1600 ISO . . . on ANY Sigma camera. If you try to shoot color photos with a Sigma camera over 1600 ISO, you will get such bad blotching that you will not want to use the photos. At 3200 ISO the photos from a 24 MP Nikon (any 24 MP Nikon) are usable. That is not the case with a Sigma, unless you're converting the images to B&W.

Do this test. Get an old DSLR of any type that is 12 MP or more, and shoot at ISO 1600. Then do the same with your Sigma. You will see there is a HUGE difference in the low-light performance. The same applies today. Both the Sigma and other brands have improved just as much. In fact, the other brands have probably improved more. You can compare the various brands yourself here:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmasd1/19

Make sure you set the ISO to 1600 or 3200 and then play around with switching the comparison cameras to models like the Nikon D600 and the Canon 7 D.

Check it out:

Sigma SD1 Merrill at ISO 3200 compared to other cameras at the same ISO setting.

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner · Oct 18, 2014

For one thing, only a handful of cameras are substantially better than Foveon at high ISO. Often detractors of Sigma cameras compare any given aspect with the top of the line camera only dealing with that singular aspect...

For another, the higher ISO performance is more variable with the Fovoen. It really depends on what you are shooting with high ISO as to the quality you may get from it... shooting for higher shutter speed, or things that are stage lit are going to give far better results than will subjects shot under, say, fluorescent lighting (where you probably are looking at worst possible performance).

The thing to do is just not worry about it. Take a higher ISO shot with a Foveon camera if that's what you have and that's what you need to do. it may lose some color and detail but it may also surprise you with what a good picture it is.

richard stone · Oct 18, 2014

As I see it, the point of the Sigma/Foveon cameras is to make exquisite images at the ISO settings where the cameras work best. When one does that the images are better than just about every other system, certainly so if one controls for/considers size, cost, and weight, etc. Meanwhile, no camera delivers super high resolution at super high ISO. What you get are "usable" images.

So one trades (limited) superb performance for greater versatility. Which seem simple enough but, as Kendall points out, it's not as if the S/F camera goes to 0 at high ISO and is a complete failure.

Secondly, although I would not propose that wedding images are so unimportant, taking pictures with limited/minimal light is its own niche and not the only, or even the best, criterion of camera performance. Nor is speed of image production. How many truly great images does a truly great photographer make in a year? Or do we expect to produce ten such images in an evening sitting at our computer? How likely is that?

In my view, photography shares a lot with poetry, in which the constraints (length, rhyme, alliteration, cadence, for example) are part of the definition and factors which, in the end, contribute to the significance of the work. I would suggest, for example, that the S/F camera (as exemplified by the DP2M and q...) is perhaps in the nature of Haiku, with a fairly constrained form, etc.

Meanwhile, a Bayer DSLR is closer to free verse, or prose.

No one is forced to write poetry. Or to write haiku, or even sonnets.

Nor is poetry inherently superior to prose. As I write this I was pondering how I would feel about a newspaper article in the form of a poem. Wasted effort.

Reading blather about how Bayer is better because you can take "pictures" in near darkness? Less than trivial.

Richard

xpatUSA · Oct 18, 2014

. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

please view original size to see the EXIF

Comments?

--
Cheers,
Ted

SigmaTog · Oct 18, 2014

xpatUSA said:
. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

Comments?

xpatUSA · Oct 18, 2014

SigmaTog said:
xpatUSA said:

. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

Comments?

Click to expand...

Thanks Ted

Are you saying / showing, 'don't overexpose' ?

No, 'Tog, I'm pointing out that there is a tendency in these fora to mention ISO without due regard to exposure. Like earlier, it was mentioned that any Foveon shot over ISO 1600 will be blotched and useless but there was no mention of exposure at all.

My post showed a usable image taken at ISO 1600, compared to an unusable image taken at ISO 1600. Therefore, it's not the ISO setting that is the sole arbiter of image quality, right?

--
Cheers,
Ted

SigmaTog · Oct 18, 2014

xpatUSA said:
SigmaTog said:

xpatUSA said:

. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

Comments?

Click to expand...

Thanks Ted

Are you saying / showing, 'don't overexpose' ?

Click to expand...

No, 'Tog, I'm pointing out that there is a tendency in these fora to mention ISO without due regard to exposure. Like earlier, it was mentioned that any Foveon shot over ISO 1600 will be blotched and useless but there was no mention of exposure at all.

My post showed a usable image taken at ISO 1600, compared to an unusable image taken at ISO 1600. Therefore, it's not the ISO setting that is the sole arbiter of image quality, right?

Scottelly · Oct 18, 2014

xpatUSA said:
. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

please view original size to see the EXIF

Comments?

Yes. I have a comment. Whaaah?!?!? I didn't know anything like this was possible. Thank you master Ted, for you have opened my eyes once again.

xpatUSA said:
--
Cheers,
Ted

Now . . . I wonder if you would be so kind as to explain how this is possible. It looks like I have a lot of experimenting to do.

Grovel, grovel, grovel . . .

motomanDK · Oct 19, 2014

richard stone said:
As I see it, the point of the Sigma/Foveon cameras is to make exquisite images at the ISO settings where the cameras work best. When one does that the images are better than just about every other system, certainly so if one controls for/considers size, cost, and weight, etc. Meanwhile, no camera delivers super high resolution at super high ISO. What you get are "usable" images.

So one trades (limited) superb performance for greater versatility. Which seem simple enough but, as Kendall points out, it's not as if the S/F camera goes to 0 at high ISO and is a complete failure.

I am not complaining about the capabilities of my cameras - i know the pro's and con's of the Sigmas i have (SD14+SD15*2) and i really enjoy to work with them and i love the results i make.

But i tend to use 100ISO for 90% of the time and 200ISO for the last 10% .... simply because i don't like the 'noise' i get on 400+ ISO. But from the Nikon sample above, my 400ISO is MUCH better compared to that sample shot. So if people are satisfied with that shot, i can easily use 800ISO on my SD15!

That was the point i was trying to make here.

motomanDK · Oct 19, 2014

xpatUSA said:
SigmaTog said:

xpatUSA said:

. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

Comments?

Click to expand...

Thanks Ted

Are you saying / showing, 'don't overexpose' ?

Click to expand...

No, 'Tog, I'm pointing out that there is a tendency in these fora to mention ISO without due regard to exposure. Like earlier, it was mentioned that any Foveon shot over ISO 1600 will be blotched and useless but there was no mention of exposure at all.

My post showed a usable image taken at ISO 1600, compared to an unusable image taken at ISO 1600. Therefore, it's not the ISO setting that is the sole arbiter of image quality, right?

motomanDK · Oct 19, 2014

Just as an experiment, i just made 3 shots with 1600ISO - not something to be proud of, but they are definately useable. And at least as good as the Nikon sample.

--
/Henrik - Denmark
(SD14 and 2 * SD15 ... and about 5 kg glass)

D Cox · Oct 19, 2014

motomanDK said:
Hi Ted

i pardon my ignorance, but i don't understand the example you give here. The picture to the left is exposed for 1 sec. and the right on for 16 sec. Why isn't the right one overexposed? Or do i miss the point?? IF the left picture is underexposed, the noise would be MUCH worse when you try to pull out the light.

SigmaTog · Oct 19, 2014

D Cox said:
motomanDK said:

Hi Ted

i pardon my ignorance, but i don't understand the example you give here. The picture to the left is exposed for 1 sec. and the right on for 16 sec. Why isn't the right one overexposed? Or do i miss the point?? IF the left picture is underexposed, the noise would be MUCH worse when you try to pull out the light.

Click to expand...

xpatUSA · Oct 19, 2014

. . . I was wondering what difference the long exposure would make to the image. Should have made that clear :-(

Today, after using RawDigger on the original X3Fs, I found that the exposures weren't the same - so, although it illustrated my point, it was a pretty poor test anyway.

I'm going to do a similar test, probably tomorrow (Sunday).

xpatUSA · Oct 19, 2014

Scottelly said:
xpatUSA said:

. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

please view original size to see the EXIF

Comments?

Click to expand...

Yes. I have a comment. Whaaah?!?!? I didn't know anything like this was possible.

Hi Scott. It wasn't a truly valid test and was done long ago, but for the blotchy shot I had turned off the light. In the better shot, the actual raw exposure was somewhat above the dreaded blotching level. Remember that the SD10 is ISO-less, so such a shot is possible. In fact, a shot made at +1 or +2 EV should be perfectly recoverable in SPP because the raw image data will most certainly not be blown.

Scottelly said:
Now . . . I wonder if you would be so kind as to explain how this is possible.

My penultimate post tells more.

No need to grovel, young man, I'm not used to folks doing that in this forum ;-)

--
Cheers,
Ted

Roland Karlsson · Oct 19, 2014

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
For one thing, only a handful of cameras are substantially better than Foveon at high ISO.

I would say that you have a lot of fingers on your hand - you from Jupiter?

As far as I know, every camera, except small sensor ones (substantially less than 1") have better high ISO support than Sigma. "Substantially" is a matter of opinion. But, I assume at least from FourThirds and up it is "substantial", maybe even from BSI 1".

Lets take a rough guess - 50 fingers?

The number is uninteresting. What is interesting is that all enthusiast cameras out there have better high ISO performance, many of them substantially better. This makes Sigma a no choice if you are interested in good high ISO.

Roland Karlsson · Oct 19, 2014

xpatUSA said:
. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

Comments?

The SD10 has no AFE. What ISO you set on the camera is uninteresting.

You can set it to 1600, over expose and recover highlights.

BTW - the image is rather flat, which makes it even more uninteresting as there are no highlights to recover.

xpatUSA · Oct 19, 2014

Roland Karlsson said:
xpatUSA said:

. . . and not enough on sensor exposure?

Two shots with a SD10 at ISO 1600:

Comments?

Click to expand...

The SD10 has no AFE. What ISO you set on the camera is [irrelevant]. You can set it to 1600, over expose and recover highlights.

I've already mentioned all of that:

Roland Karlsson said:
Roland Karlsson said:

Roland Karlsson said:

Remember that the SD10 is ISO-less, so such a shot is possible. In fact, a shot made at +1 or +2 EV should be perfectly recoverable in SPP because the raw image data will most certainly not be blown.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Scottelly · Oct 19, 2014

I'll have to remember when I get another Sigma that I should overexpose a little, when I shoot at high ISO settings . . . unless it's a Quattro, huh?

Are we too critical with the Foveon sensor????

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts