Reading mode: Light Dark

If this is not false advertisement, what is?

Go to last post
A

Andy61557

Senior Member
Messages
1,348
Reaction score
0
Location
ZW
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red, green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4 elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that sweet.

The next step will be counting hard drive capacities in bits, not bytes. It's 8 times more space!

Yes, you can call this post wahtever you want. I'm just sick and tired of this 'marketing'. I just baught a DVD, capable of wrighting 4.7G of data. And guess what, I can only take 4.5 Gigabytes of data. Oh, I didn't know that 1G is not 1 Gigabyte, it's just G, which means nothing.

If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX. People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
 
Gees, Here we go again!!!

Wheres SG10 when you need him.
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
The next step will be counting hard drive capacities in bits, not
bytes. It's 8 times more space!
Yes, you can call this post wahtever you want. I'm just sick and
tired of this 'marketing'. I just baught a DVD, capable of
wrighting 4.7G of data. And guess what, I can only take 4.5
Gigabytes of data. Oh, I didn't know that 1G is not 1 Gigabyte,
it's just G, which means nothing.
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
 
Personally, I think it's the 6MP that have false advertising. 1 pixel only captures 1/3 the data! Then you interpolate to figure out what is should be? i.e if its not blue then its nothing.
 
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
Click to expand...
Sorry to be first to pass bad news to you. Cannon already is using this method of counting and their grand total for 10D = 6 M (3 M G, 1.5 M R/B each)

W
 
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is?
Click to expand...
Your post.
Andy61557 said:
They make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
Click to expand...
Actual Foveon quote:

"The Foveon X3 PRO 10M direct image sensor has a total of 10.2 million red, green, and blue pixels that are organized into three layers (2268 x 1512 x 3 layers)"
Where do they make any dishonest claim about the "final image's pixels"?
Andy61557 said:
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
Click to expand...
It's called marketing. It is arguably no different from the regular claims of resolution from Bayer sensor cameras. Sigma did not start this.
Andy61557 said:
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
Your post is a scam.
 
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
Click to expand...
You better read some theory behind different sensors :)

As a early news for you I'll say that you'll find out that Canon 6mpix mean, terrible news for you, actually 1.5m red, 1.5m blue and 3m green pixels. Actual 6mpix RGB (!) picture is calculated from those and gives us nice and blurry image if you look 1 pixel width line (human hair are nice example).

Sigma just gave same well-known background information for customers. (I don't like it personally but ppl like you wouldn't even think about it if it was 3mpix camera). And those 3m pixels are real RGB pixels.

And at the end: look at samples what this 3mpix foveon can do!

Ahti - waiting for some other camera producer to pick a foveon as well ...
 
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
Click to expand...
And false, Isn't it also pathetic to count Bayerpixels? After all a complete colored Pixel has R,G and B value and Bayerpixels don't have this! Still they count every single pixel position as ONE pixel.
Andy61557 said:
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
People beware of idiots like Andy who have no clue and tend to wrongly simplify things...

--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross
 
Andy,

It's called following the pack. If you don't get the general gist from reading the other posts on this thread - you'll never get it. Nothng personal - just be prepared to sue the others who started this advertising trend too.

Cliff.
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
The next step will be counting hard drive capacities in bits, not
bytes. It's 8 times more space!
Yes, you can call this post wahtever you want. I'm just sick and
tired of this 'marketing'. I just baught a DVD, capable of
wrighting 4.7G of data. And guess what, I can only take 4.5
Gigabytes of data. Oh, I didn't know that 1G is not 1 Gigabyte,
it's just G, which means nothing.
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
--
Cliff. Johnston
 
I agree with most of your post. But what can they do. A $1000+ 3.3 mp dSLR doesn't look good beside a 6 mp 300D. Besides, most people going for the SD10 already know what its about...now, if they put this sensor in the 300D and called it a 10mp sensor that would be another story.
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
The next step will be counting hard drive capacities in bits, not
bytes. It's 8 times more space!
Yes, you can call this post wahtever you want. I'm just sick and
tired of this 'marketing'. I just baught a DVD, capable of
wrighting 4.7G of data. And guess what, I can only take 4.5
Gigabytes of data. Oh, I didn't know that 1G is not 1 Gigabyte,
it's just G, which means nothing.
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
 
While risky it's not UNTRUE and I certainly wouldn't call it pathetic. Your reasoning is incorrect, the 10D has 6 million photodetectors, it can only detect green, red or blue at anyone position and then interpolates the color neighbouring pixels to produce a 'best guess' of the actual color.

The X3 sensor has 10 million photodetectors, stacked in 3 layers. It reads red, green and blue for each pixel location and hence doesn't interpolate at all.
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
The next step will be counting hard drive capacities in bits, not
bytes. It's 8 times more space!
Yes, you can call this post wahtever you want. I'm just sick and
tired of this 'marketing'. I just baught a DVD, capable of
wrighting 4.7G of data. And guess what, I can only take 4.5
Gigabytes of data. Oh, I didn't know that 1G is not 1 Gigabyte,
it's just G, which means nothing.
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
 
I do think the Sigma people are correct here......they have more (and better) data in color....if not in density.....

Question I have is .....is emulating traditional film...in layers as the Sigma does, or emulating the human eye ....with adjacent color receptors ...as the Bayer system does .....the better plan? As a rule....biological designs have proven their superiority to human engineer solutions in most cases so far.

I really like the theory of the Sigma.....if it would take Canon or Nikon lenses I would have bought it. I handled the camera, and it was clunky(awkward and boxy in my hands), slow (AF), and noisy(shutter and AF)....all factors in my usage. The viewfinder is also....different.

Also most importantly.... I couldn't get an f= 1.8 or 1.4 portrait lens for it as no lenses that yield an 75--100mm equivalent focal length in a fast prime are available in the Sigma mount, and that is my primary use, and a 50 1.4 works as a great portrait lens on the 1.6x of the Camon system......

I still think the Foveon, even on the SD9, takes the sharpest photos of all the 6mp+ cameras out there.......usability, and feature set with high ISO, and long exposure, and lens selection and usability still made me favor the Canon, and the 11.1 mp Canon and the 13.8 mp n14, I think still yield a better photo than the 10mp Foveon in totall quality at the 100 iso we have heretofore seen with the Sigma.

I applaud the update Sigma has done, and the improvements they continue to make....now if they could get their act together and bring out a 50 1.4.........I might be tempted to buy one......

Other improvements I would like:

brighter screen
faster more accurate AF (if possible HSM)
100% viewfinder....not "sports finder"
fast primes with HSM
quieter shutter

glad to see they are continuing to support their users with the SW upgrade...looks like a good one! --I really wish it took Canon or Nikon lenses!

Richard Katris aka Chanan
 
....the Foveon sensor......I for one WOULD buy it!!!!

Jogger wrote:
now, if they put
Jogger said:
this sensor in the 300D and called it a 10mp sensor that would be
another story.
Click to expand...
Richard Katris aka Chanan
 
It's not really TRUE either.

The pixels of a bayer sensor (sensor pixels, that is) contain less information than the foveon sensor because each pixel (again, sensor pixel) has 3 photodetectors to one for a bayer sensor.

Output pixels are different...

Each output pixel from the bayer sensor was interpolated (calculated) from several (# dependent on the algorithm) photodetector values.

Each output pixel from the foveon sensor was created from several (three) photodetector values

So, foveon images are created from existing data, while bayer images are calculated using existing data. A bayer image will have less collected data per native output pixel than a foveon image.
Phil Askey said:
While risky it's not UNTRUE and I certainly wouldn't call it
pathetic. Your reasoning is incorrect, the 10D has 6 million
photodetectors, it can only detect green, red or blue at anyone
position and then interpolates the color neighbouring pixels to
produce a 'best guess' of the actual color.

The X3 sensor has 10 million photodetectors, stacked in 3 layers.
It reads red, green and blue for each pixel location and hence
doesn't interpolate at all.
Click to expand...
--
Jeremy Kindy
 
Richard,

To paraphrase Sigmund Freud, one could call that "lens envy". I think most of us who shoot with the SD-9 have that lens envy on occasion, but we do manage quite nicely "as is".

Cliff.
Richard Katris said:
I do think the Sigma people are correct here......they have more
(and better) data in color....if not in density.....

Question I have is .....is emulating traditional film...in layers
as the Sigma does, or emulating the human eye ....with adjacent
color receptors ...as the Bayer system does .....the better plan?
As a rule....biological designs have proven their superiority to
human engineer solutions in most cases so far.

I really like the theory of the Sigma.....if it would take Canon or
Nikon lenses I would have bought it. I handled the camera, and it
was clunky(awkward and boxy in my hands), slow (AF), and
noisy(shutter and AF)....all factors in my usage. The viewfinder
is also....different.

Also most importantly.... I couldn't get an f= 1.8 or 1.4 portrait
lens for it as no lenses that yield an 75--100mm equivalent focal
length in a fast prime are available in the Sigma mount, and that
is my primary use, and a 50 1.4 works as a great portrait lens on
the 1.6x of the Camon system......

I still think the Foveon, even on the SD9, takes the sharpest
photos of all the 6mp+ cameras out there.......usability, and
feature set with high ISO, and long exposure, and lens selection
and usability still made me favor the Canon, and the 11.1 mp Canon
and the 13.8 mp n14, I think still yield a better photo than the
10mp Foveon in totall quality at the 100 iso we have heretofore
seen with the Sigma.

I applaud the update Sigma has done, and the improvements they
continue to make....now if they could get their act together and
bring out a 50 1.4.........I might be tempted to buy one......

Other improvements I would like:

brighter screen
faster more accurate AF (if possible HSM)
100% viewfinder....not "sports finder"
fast primes with HSM
quieter shutter

glad to see they are continuing to support their users with the SW
upgrade...looks like a good one! --I really wish it took Canon or
Nikon lenses!

Richard Katris aka Chanan
Click to expand...
--
Cliff. Johnston
 
that on the SD10/SD9 only 3 mega pixels are active out of 9 megapixels at any given time while the 6 mega pixels on the 10D are fully activated ? We need to have some sort of standard in counting active pixels here. I think Sigma and Fuji are "deceiving" the general public don't you think ? I do.
Phil Askey said:
The X3 sensor has 10 million photodetectors, stacked in 3 layers.
It reads red, green and blue for each pixel location and hence
doesn't interpolate at all.
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
The next step will be counting hard drive capacities in bits, not
bytes. It's 8 times more space!
Yes, you can call this post wahtever you want. I'm just sick and
tired of this 'marketing'. I just baught a DVD, capable of
wrighting 4.7G of data. And guess what, I can only take 4.5
Gigabytes of data. Oh, I didn't know that 1G is not 1 Gigabyte,
it's just G, which means nothing.
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
 
Dear Andy,
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel.
Click to expand...
Unfortunetly, Canon need 6+MP to produce Sigma 3.4M detail and probably need much more to match the sharpness. As result, I agree that Sigma is pathetic.
Andy61557 said:
Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
Click to expand...
I think u are providing some false information...
Andy61557 said:
The next step will be counting hard drive capacities in bits, not
bytes. It's 8 times more space!
Click to expand...
As long as they label the unit is in "Bit" not in "Byte".
Andy61557 said:
Yes, you can call this post wahtever you want. I'm just sick and
tired of this 'marketing'. I just baught a DVD, capable of
wrighting 4.7G of data. And guess what, I can only take 4.5
Gigabytes of data. Oh, I didn't know that 1G is not 1 Gigabyte,
it's just G, which means nothing.
Click to expand...
1G = 1024x1024x1024 bytes. or 2^30 bytes.
Andy61557 said:
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
I think u just don't understand the technologe behind. Please do more study before u type those "scam" words.

--
Thomas the C.Wolf 8^)
Gallery:
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/c_wolf
http://www.pbase.com/c_wolf
 
Charles Nguyen said:
that on the SD10/SD9 only 3 mega pixels are active out of 9
megapixels at any given time while the 6 mega pixels on the 10D are
fully activated ? We need to have some sort of standard in counting
active pixels here. I think Sigma and Fuji are "deceiving" the
general public don't you think ? I do.
Click to expand...
No. All pixels are active on the SD9/10 sensors.

The key thing is that X3 is sampling luminance at 3.5M spatially distinct points, while a 6MP Bayer pattern sensor is sampling luminance at 3M spatially distinct points.

In most cases (but not all), chroma resolution doesn't matter much.

--
Ron Parr
FAQ: http://www.cs.duke.edu/~parr/photography/faq.html
Gallery: http://www.pbase.com/parr/
 
Well the point is what matters most is luminace data (read what Ron Parr wrote on that). Now I can imagine situations in which Chrominace resolution gets also very important (I saw images in the Canon forum with very fuzzy edges between green gras background and a red flower for example). The more the chrominace resolution matters the better the Foveon approach gets compared to a Bayer Sensor. But also the interpolation free luminace data helps a lot to get a better picture.
Charles Nguyen said:
Phil Askey said:
The X3 sensor has 10 million photodetectors, stacked in 3 layers.
It reads red, green and blue for each pixel location and hence
doesn't interpolate at all.
Andy said:
I think Sigma is pathetic. If this is not deceiving, what is? They
make 3.3 MP sensor to look like 10 MP by counting 3 pixels (red,
green, blue) for each final image's pixel. Since Canon uses 4
elements for each pixel (2 greens, red, blue), here are the true
pixel counts: 10D = 24 MP (6x4), 1D = 16MP, 1Ds = 44 MP. Is'n that
sweet.
The next step will be counting hard drive capacities in bits, not
bytes. It's 8 times more space!
Yes, you can call this post wahtever you want. I'm just sick and
tired of this 'marketing'. I just baught a DVD, capable of
wrighting 4.7G of data. And guess what, I can only take 4.5
Gigabytes of data. Oh, I didn't know that 1G is not 1 Gigabyte,
it's just G, which means nothing.
If I had more time and cared more I'd sue Sigma. It plain SUX.
People will turn away from very good cameras only to find out that
they get only a third of image data in the end.
People!!! Beware of Sigma!!! It's a scam!!!
Click to expand...
--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Regards from Old Europe,

Dominic

http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/dominic_gross
 
I have shot portraiture for 27 years with an 85mm 1.8 lens. This allows me to see more accurately for both composition, and focus confirmation as I have a much brighter image given the same camera viewfinder. If the fastest lens I can get in a comparable focal length for the Sigma mount is 2.8--I believe the 50 macro is the fastest I could get currently, I have less than 50% of the light in the viewfinder to use. That will result in slower composition, and less certainty in focus confirmation. That will slow down the speed and accuracy as I work. As I work with moving subjects that is all important....to me. I would not get by as well under those circumstances, and so it is a valid factor in deciding which camera I CAN use effectively.....and it is a pity as I do like a lot about the Sigma's concepts.

For me using a camera is not just about the image, but about the other things the camera can do...among them work....quietly. Canon usm AF, and the extreme quiet shutter release of the 10D are....to me ....very important factors, and outweigh the faster AF of the Nikon, and greater focus accuracy and even the brighter viewfinder....my old Nikon 8008 bodies put every new camera I have tried, to shame in terms of the amount of light through the viewfinder.....but the AF is noisy, (not terribly accurate on the 8008s), the shutter has a huge "click" noise, and it has no diopter correction built in (I find I have been focussing from blurry to less blurry, not blurry to sharp of late). While the S2/S1/D100/n14/n80/n70 bodies are much better on AF it is still noisy, and so is the shutter click....neither of which endears me to my subjects.....(I shoot cats).

I could shoot with a 1D, or a D1x, but the weight would kill my shoulder since I had a rotator cuff injury....so weight is also an important consideration.....that extra full pound would not be welcome.

I recently changed from Nikon to Canon purely as a result of the above stated issues....absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the camera, image, or lenses. Had the Sigma had a fast portrait option....I would have been tempted despite it's other shortcomings...it is also noisy, and has AF issues.
--
Richard Katris aka Chanan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top