Should Sigma make a 30 MP per layer full-frame Foveon instead of 20 MP per layer?

Tom Schum wrote:

Just weighing in here.

I read the posts so far, but I also remember my SD15.

Fewer pixels means better image quality.

Some of these old SD15 images are upsized in legends, and they look great. I don't remember who was the upsizing guru back then.

The problem with Quattro is the noise. And, the pixel density is hardly more than it was in the SD15, in the lower layers.

Turning the sd Quattro down to lo-res doesn't help the image quality. Still too much of something that you just don't have in the SD15.

So, for me, 20mp in a Foveon FF sensor is more than I'd like to see. Not to mention 30mp, and please no Quattro innovation!

Could Sigma take a fp and imbue it with Sigma Foveon color science? If so, it might be a viable successor to Foveon.

SD15

I think I understand what you are saying in your post, that the SD15 is as good as it got before, and the best ever, probably, and the Q is trash. Or useless.

I am a relatively happy user of the sdQ. I remember seeing posted images from your sdQ, (or at least I think it was one of your images) particularly one with canoes in the woods, and seriously, the low res image looked indistinguishable from the full/hi res shot, at least at normal size of image. I can only imagine that if one wanted to make a really big image that the high res one would work out slightly better. Is it enough "better" to make it important to shoot everything at high res? For me, maybe not.

And I have seen plenty of my own images from the SD10, and sdQ, both high and low resolution, and the winner is? Well, it kind of depends. The sdQ is a slightly better camera, a slightly better product, in the end. And the "detail" in the images from the cameras is slightly better in the sdQ, at any resolution. Does it even matter? Particularly if you cannot even see the difference?

The question is whether a FF Foveon at 20-30 MP is worth doing. I would say yes, at 20MP or 30MP, and with or without the Qx4 top layer.

The issue for me is that manufacturing and production knowledge and design has changed and improved a lot in the last few years, leading me to figure that an actual 20-30MP FF Foveon camera now should work out reasonably well. Secondly, there is no more big market for the SD15 (size) sensor.

So I have to to take issue with your statement that "Fewer pixels means better image quality."

No, fewer pixels sometimes produces a more appealing, or nicer, image... sometimes, not always. And it's nice to have the choice. Really, a 20 MP FF Foveon ought to compete reasonably well with Bayer FF.