Reading mode: Light Dark

These new Sigma samples are AMAZING

Go to last post
Brian Slater said:
Dan Frederiksen said:
I suspect the microlenses are not the problem here.
The SD10 images have noticable lower resolution than the SD9.
Click to expand...
You have made this claim repeatedly. Others have looked carefully
and remained unconvinced.
Click to expand...
people have looked at the earth and remained unconviced it is round
Brian Slater said:
In the small number of samples shown so
far, I see a number of improvements in the SD10 images, and very
little, if any evidence of consistently less sharpness.
Click to expand...
now you have looked as well
Brian Slater said:
And there
is no reliable comparison yet between the SD9 and SD10 or with
other cameras, done at the same time, from the same vantage point,
with the same lenses, and with good technique (such as proper
focussing).
Click to expand...
Phil takes many pictures. focusing might be within his grasp I would think.
Brian Slater said:
I'm sure that once production SD10 cameras are in users' hands,
careful comparisons will be made that will settle this. I'm also
confident that Sigma and Foveon have not thrown the baby out with
the bathwater.
Click to expand...
compare sd9 and sd10 pictures (and for god's sake not moronic macro shots) look for the high frequency fine noise. present in sd9. gone in sd10. coarse noise is still there and we have a reduction in sharpness. fits very well with a noise reduction algorithm.

corps make "compromises" like that all the time. unfortunately it is profitable because most people don't have the qualifications to know better and are attracted to fools gold.
 
adh said:
I am definitely considering the 300D as my next camera.

I would love to see any sample images you might have which show
similar detail that the SD9/10 displays.

Macros are fine.
Click to expand...
Here are some images re-sized to approx the size of the SD-9/SD-10

http://www.pbase.com/timothyo/resized

I still think that from what I have seen, the 3.4MP X3 Sensor has a slight advantage in terms of resolution, but the rebel gives it a real run for the money at least. (and the rebel is a great little camera too)
--

 
you need to wake up if you think a SD9/10 is far better than a S2
noa said:
noa
jacques said:
Here is an example of a bad Bayer camera.

Made with Nikon 70-200 VR AFS at 1/500s, F=4.8 ISO 400 on a S2,
hand held.

It's the original JPEG straight out of the camera, resized down to
2268 for the largest side, just to make it alike the SD9/SD10 Not
resharpened afher resizing.

It ain't a macro, it ain't made under special conditions, it's not
made using a tripod.

Small version:



and open the next for 100%, but it's over 2 MB,

http://www.pbase.com/image/22751285/original

So I didn't add the'.jpg' for all with a analog or ISDN interface
to the web.

IMHO it will only be blown away by Canon's 1Ds, when looked at at
100% of the original, hardly possible to see differeance in prints.

jacques.

wrote:
noa said:
If this photo is nothing special,
Please show me your work :-)
Lev Brylin said:
noa said:
This sample at http://www.pbase.com/image/22626268/original beats
any non-1DS image I have seen.

I have been comparing images for several months trying to determine
what camera to buy.

Nothing beats the SD9/10 for detail in my opinion.

adh
=====================
Tim O'Connor said:
Joao Sobral said:
I have a Fuji S2 that I love, but....
every time I see these samples from a feveon camera I wonder "
Imagine what you could do if the Foveon on a Nikon F100 Body"
Click to expand...
Can you point out one that is 'amazing'? Havent seen one yet that
has really impressed me that much.

--

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Jacques,

You know I like your work. I have written that to you personally. So don't get into one of your ugly-comment moods.

However, this shot is not the greatest demonstration of sharpness. It is soft all around.

That does not make it a bad shot. I like the expression, the composition, and the execution. For my taste, I prefer some of your more unusual angles when I look at your body of work.

This is a nice shot, but it does not blow away many SD9s in terms of quality. The hair is unsharp, there is a lack of fine detail that has been blurred away, etc. It is a good example of hand-held photography.

Facit: Good shot but not a demonstration of strength vs. the SD9.

--
Laurence Φ€ 08 LL

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/sd9_images
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com (eternal test site)
 
Laurence Matson said:
Sam,

You've personally sent me better than that. The latest addition
(mummelsee) is washed out all over the place giving a very soft
overall impression.
You can do better than that.
Click to expand...
Guess the point is that these images show as much detail as the SD9/SD10, but have much better colour IMHO.

'mummelsee' doesnt really strike me as washed out - perhaps slightly flat, but it does contain a nice tonal range I think, esp round the large tree stump, and huge amounts of fine detail.

wrt to the higher (> 200) ISO images on 'steves-digicams' - eek, the SD10 is not in the same ball park as Canon here. The biggest worry was the longer exposure image - What is the yellow blochy noise from?
Laurence Matson said:
--
Laurence Φ€ 08 LL

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/sd9_images
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com (eternal test site)
Click to expand...
--

 
Could not agree more with you
Laurence Matson said:
Jacques,

You know I like your work. I have written that to you personally.
So don't get into one of your ugly-comment moods.

However, this shot is not the greatest demonstration of sharpness.
It is soft all around.

That does not make it a bad shot. I like the expression, the
composition, and the execution. For my taste, I prefer some of your
more unusual angles when I look at your body of work.

This is a nice shot, but it does not blow away many SD9s in terms
of quality. The hair is unsharp, there is a lack of fine detail
that has been blurred away, etc. It is a good example of hand-held
photography.

Facit: Good shot but not a demonstration of strength vs. the SD9.

--
Laurence Φ€ 08 LL

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/sd9_images
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com (eternal test site)
Click to expand...
 
I'm not saying that the Foveon is perfect. I did buy the S2 and not the SD9.

But you have to admt that in low iso the quality is really amazing.

I'm a Sport photografer so the low noise of my s2 at hi iso is the most important feature of the camera.
Dan Wajnman said:
Has anybody here looked at the samples at Steeve's?
The high-ISO samples show scary noise???



Regards, Dan
Click to expand...
 
How's this shot for comparison? It's from a Canon 10D with the 70-200L IS, though you'll have to exclude the dust blobs...LOL It's also more of a far-field type shot, unlike the macros we've been seeing. I've down-sized it to match the Sigma file size.


Laurence Matson said:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=6500950

--
Laurence Φ€ 08 LL

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/sd9_images
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com (eternal test site)
Click to expand...
 
Dan Frederiksen said:
Brian Slater said:
Dan Frederiksen said:
I suspect the microlenses are not the problem here.
The SD10 images have noticable lower resolution than the SD9.
Click to expand...
You have made this claim repeatedly. Others have looked carefully
and remained unconvinced.
Click to expand...
people have looked at the earth and remained unconviced it is round
Click to expand...
Perhaps you should read the latest update to the Imaging Resource report on the SD10. The claim that the new camera has compromised sharpness has been retracted: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SSD10/SD10A12.HTM

May I suggest that you are a better candidate for Flat Earth Society membership?
Dan Frederiksen said:
Dan Frederiksen said:
In the small number of samples shown so
far, I see a number of improvements in the SD10 images, and very
little, if any evidence of consistently less sharpness.
Click to expand...
now you have looked as well
Click to expand...
Dan Frederiksen said:
Dan Frederiksen said:
And there
is no reliable comparison yet between the SD9 and SD10 or with
other cameras, done at the same time, from the same vantage point,
with the same lenses, and with good technique (such as proper
focussing).
Click to expand...
Dan Frederiksen said:
I'm sure that once production SD10 cameras are in users' hands,
careful comparisons will be made that will settle this. I'm also
confident that Sigma and Foveon have not thrown the baby out with
the bathwater.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Dan Frederiksen said:
compare sd9 and sd10 pictures (and for god's sake not moronic macro
shots) look for the high frequency fine noise. present in sd9. gone
in sd10. coarse noise is still there and we have a reduction in
sharpness. fits very well with a noise reduction algorithm.
corps make "compromises" like that all the time. unfortunately it
is profitable because most people don't have the qualifications to
know better and are attracted to fools gold.
Click to expand...
The bigger fool is one who looks at real gold and sees only pyrite.
 
CJ NYC said:
How's this shot for comparison? It's from a Canon 10D with the
70-200L IS, though you'll have to exclude the dust blobs...LOL
It's also more of a far-field type shot, unlike the macros we've
been seeing. I've down-sized it to match the Sigma file size.

Click to expand...
Again, indicates to me that the 10D/300D can produce images that contain just as much detail as the SD9/10, so if Im a prospective buyer, Im not sure exactly what the attraction of the SD9/10 is.

Please dont think Im a Canon worshiper. Yes I do own a 300D, but if I was seeing images that were blowing my cam out of the water, I would say so.

Honest :-)

Perhaps I will take the advice of a few people here, and actually print out a few images from both cameras, and see the results. Not tonight though.

--

 
Below is the original and 4X enlargement of an unsharpened SD9 image using experimental fractal (IFS) interpolation. I have applied the same interpolation to both sharpened and unsharpened SD10 samples from Phil. The SD10 images do not interpolate as well as the SD9 image. Unfortunately, I can't show you because of Phil's copyright.

As some of you might know, it is possible to produce more detail than predicted by Nyquist theory by incorporating statistical a priori knowledge of natural images. In this case, it is that natural images contain self similarity, particularly sharp edges. In the case of the SD10, the Sigma people seem to have thwarted this.

Original Crop from SD9 Digicam Photo (48 bit Losslessly Compressed):



IFS 4X Enlargement:



--
Author of SAR Image Processor
http://www.general-cathexis.com
 
Dear Laurence,

Please open the 2 MB full JPEG and just look at the little hairs on the girls upper lip, right side of her face just below her nose.

And be sure it's a straight out of the camera JPEG only resized to SD9 pixels, none USM in th eoriginal nor in the resized one.

I couldn't post the 4.x MB original as for many it just will be to much, but incase you would like to have it I post it.

I do have some amazing B/W's, but B/W's all pixels are used and 6 MP native isn't comparable to 3 MP in B/W mode.

Please also notice this is a 400 ISO image,

jacques,

and yes I know I easily can explode some times.
 
Hi adh,

Just open the 2MB JPEG and look at the hairs at the girl's upper lip, right of her face just below her nose. I think it's amazing resolution for a native 6Mpixel CCD with Bayer interpolation.

I myself still waiting for the next Fuji as I would like to have a second body.

The S2 should be available for less than USD 2000,

jacques.

And yes I sometimes can become nasty if I see resolution charts, interpretated the wrong way, well I mean trying to see, what's not in the chart.
 
Who started with sh** ?

not me,

jacques.
noa said:
noa
jacques said:
Here is an example of a bad Bayer camera.

Made with Nikon 70-200 VR AFS at 1/500s, F=4.8 ISO 400 on a S2,
hand held.

It's the original JPEG straight out of the camera, resized down to
2268 for the largest side, just to make it alike the SD9/SD10 Not
resharpened afher resizing.

It ain't a macro, it ain't made under special conditions, it's not
made using a tripod.

Small version:



and open the next for 100%, but it's over 2 MB,

http://www.pbase.com/image/22751285/original

So I didn't add the'.jpg' for all with a analog or ISDN interface
to the web.

IMHO it will only be blown away by Canon's 1Ds, when looked at at
100% of the original, hardly possible to see differeance in prints.

jacques.

wrote:
noa said:
If this photo is nothing special,
Please show me your work :-)
Lev Brylin said:
noa said:
This sample at http://www.pbase.com/image/22626268/original beats
any non-1DS image I have seen.

I have been comparing images for several months trying to determine
what camera to buy.

Nothing beats the SD9/10 for detail in my opinion.

adh
=====================
Tim O'Connor said:
Joao Sobral said:
I have a Fuji S2 that I love, but....
every time I see these samples from a feveon camera I wonder "
Imagine what you could do if the Foveon on a Nikon F100 Body"
Click to expand...
Can you point out one that is 'amazing'? Havent seen one yet that
has really impressed me that much.

--

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Obviously, you don't understand the expression "deep sh* ".

F.ex., when you have a task that is almost impossible to accomplish, then you are in deep sh* .

Do you understand?

noa
jacques said:
not me,

jacques.
noa said:
noa
jacques said:
Here is an example of a bad Bayer camera.

Made with Nikon 70-200 VR AFS at 1/500s, F=4.8 ISO 400 on a S2,
hand held.

It's the original JPEG straight out of the camera, resized down to
2268 for the largest side, just to make it alike the SD9/SD10 Not
resharpened afher resizing.

It ain't a macro, it ain't made under special conditions, it's not
made using a tripod.

Small version:



and open the next for 100%, but it's over 2 MB,

http://www.pbase.com/image/22751285/original

So I didn't add the'.jpg' for all with a analog or ISDN interface
to the web.

IMHO it will only be blown away by Canon's 1Ds, when looked at at
100% of the original, hardly possible to see differeance in prints.

jacques.

wrote:
Member said:
If this photo is nothing special,
Please show me your work :-)
Lev Brylin said:
Member said:
This sample at http://www.pbase.com/image/22626268/original beats
any non-1DS image I have seen.

I have been comparing images for several months trying to determine
what camera to buy.

Nothing beats the SD9/10 for detail in my opinion.

adh
=====================
Tim O'Connor said:
Joao Sobral said:
I have a Fuji S2 that I love, but....
every time I see these samples from a feveon camera I wonder "
Imagine what you could do if the Foveon on a Nikon F100 Body"
Click to expand...
Can you point out one that is 'amazing'? Havent seen one yet that
has really impressed me that much.

--

Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
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