I Actually mention Medium format is the way to Save Foveon sensor.
Except Sigma doesn't make any MF lenses. It seems like they would be stretching themselves too thin to launch yet another line of lenses when they already make their own SA and L mount lenses, Full Frame and APS-C lenses for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and mirrorless, and m4/3 lenses.
Sigma seems to have pretty clearly planted their flag in the Full Frame sand as their flagship line of lenses (Art), and now bodies.
1000 usd for a SDQH is and was a real bargain. It could be 2500 quite easily.
It's a very limited use camera that not many people want. Basic economics.
Except Sigma doesn't make any MF lenses. It seems like they would be stretching themselves too thin to launch yet another line of lenses when they already make their own SA and L mount lenses, Full Frame and APS-C lenses for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and mirrorless, and m4/3 lenses.
Sigma seems to have pretty clearly planted their flag in the Full Frame sand as their flagship line of lenses (Art), and now bodies.
Most of their art series lens could be turned in to MF lens. And Sooner or later they have to invest into MF. Studio photography is was and still where the money is and studio photography is where most of the shortcomings of Foveon sensor doesn't count. For a lens company there can be no stretch thin issue for more lens production its just money over time issue. Once you reach market saturation only way to increase lens sales is to go in to new market segments as their new mirror less lens segment implies.
It's a very limited use camera that not many people want. Basic economics.
Well if your statement correct than a Ferrari should be 1000 USD and a Toyota Corolla should be 3500 USD.
I am coming from age of DSLRs. The nearest experience you get to DSLR Dia-positive exprience is Foveon where you face the limitation of your camera to express your creativity. that was the Age of photography. Now its age of Photoshop. I greatly enjoy Foveon sensor end result where you mostly not need to do any correctional works. or if you fail you fail miserably so there is nothing to save.
You also don't need MF for studio work. You just need megapixels.
OK let me clarify my Statement about studio photography as in back in old days Studio photography meant Product photography and Fashion photography. The way you understand studio photography is what we considered as every neighborhood studio photography for family photo and l etc. I do agree that you don't need a MF for that as historically it was always under coverage by FF cameras and thats the way it is.
I totally disagree that megapixel is the solution to all problems. As such it will put all last decade 6 to 15 megapixel professional cameras meaningless where they provide no different result and provide recognition and awards for thr photographers who used it.
Yes I do enjoy my 42MP Sony A7R2 but it does not offer anything more for the core of my photography in creative sense that the ones I had before. Megapixel is a hype to sell more and more cameras and provide a legends to the cameras that cannot reach that place.
It doesn't mean I would not enjoy more megapixsel but I dont need it for my creativity. And what ever the case I don't thing I will buy a camera with more than 50mp as 90% of a time I cant find any justification from it rather than it will push the price of lower MP cameras to our reach.
You control the lighting so you can saturate the sensor as much as you want by just dialing the strobes a bit higher. You're typically not dealing with huge dynamic range as with landscapes.
Again I would have to disagree product and Fashion photography is about to catch the glamour not the detail. Where is it an interaction with the models and photographer, where models needs to move and know when to stop for His/Her pose and a time for the photographer to catch that holly moments. There comes not just satisfaction of end result there comes the moment of satisfaction of knowing you got it right there right on time and you know it is in the film or SD card without even looking at it.At least back in old days it was like that.
If megapixels is there to save the day it means as professionals or enthusiastic we loosing something not getting something.
I am believer of Foveon not for many reasons but It just reminds me those days where you need to be aware of the limitations rather than saving the day.
What you need is fast & accurate AF, megapixels and speed.
I just need to ask why. Are we or older generations shooting worse photos with primitive cameras back in the day. This is just a urban legend. I have no problem to catch ravens flying in the air with a pentax 300mm M42 lens attached to Sigma SDHQ. and enjoying more. Unfortunately today environment is more about end result than more of the process.
Despite what everyone says - even if you're shooting portraits of someone who's relatively still, you want to have faith in your autofocus system - you don't want to miss that one great shot of a genuine laugh (which often comes with a lot of motion) because your camera didn't AF properly.
As I said try to shoot without auto focus sometime you will feel more satisfied with the results than sharing the results. That is more fun and challenging where you need to focus in empty spot where at right time the face will be.
You want speed for those moments when something interesting happens - or that one time a year you get a dancer in and they're doing all sorts of leaps or spins or whatever and it' shard to capture. This is honestly typically more stressful on your strobes than on your cameras - you need mighty powerful strobes with fast refresh rates to capture more than - say - 1 photo per second without any strobe misfires.
Sorry but for sure opinions and personal understanding is different I just cant advice you. But stress is part of the fun not vice versa in my opinion.
And finally megapixels - not that you'll need them for 90% of use cases but here's a few where you do.
- We love that photo, can we we get one printed to 8 foot tall? We want to hang it in our shop window.
- I know a photog who specializes in child and animal photography. He always shoots wide & with a small aperture. As long as the kid is in a specific region of the studio, he knows they'll be in focus. Then he gets out from behind the camera and triggers the camera with a remote so he can interact with the kids. He always crops the frame afterwards & if parents want a close up of the face from a full body landscape orientation shot - he can give that to them.
- You know that one photo you took of the back of the packaging accidentally as an outtake? Our lawyer is asking for that blown up to 8.5x11 and can you sign an affidavit that you took that photo, and on what date, and that you didn't edit the text?
If you want to print 8 foot tall photo be my guest but you will get better results with a MF camera with 20MP foveon sensor without any post processing than any FF 60MP monster.
I am not against cropping by any means commercial photography is not something I am interested although it was my family business. A commercial photographers has other limitations which I am not going to argue but its completely different story than what I am trying to explain myself.
Unfortunately we are living in a age where all your points are justified. Too many camera too many photographers and need for speed and MP and etc. This area might cover the 90% of the commercial photography realities but it is actually 10% of artistic photography reality.
I hope you do not find me too argumentative but but I do enjoy being argumentative
Cheers
