What is holding Sigma back with the new Merril(s)?

I think many have come to expect that modern cameras have high ISO abilities and video. If Sigma is concerned about the foveon sensor not working too well with high ISO above 400 in color and 800 in B&W why don’t they just eliminate the ability to go above 800? And why don’t they just eliminate video altogether?
Years ago when I bought a camera you would pick a film to put in the camera and it was generally 50-100 iso sensitivity. Occasionally I would buy a 400 ISO film. And for video which I didn’t buy or use it wasn’t even a thought about a combined camera because it didn’t even exist.
Why aren’t they going retro with a camera with a limited ISO no video but have a incredible full frame or even medium format foveon sensor? Would people buy it?
I certainly would. Although I use video now I have other cameras that I use for that. High ISO doesn’t bother me. I want the highest detail sensor for photography with the foveon look with in body stabilization. To me I think people would enjoy a simplified camera that is a pure photographic experience without the extra complexity.

And finally, my Sigma Merrill’s have video capability that is so poor I am sure nobody has ever used it. I think it is silly to add something to a camera that will not compete with other cameras. To me it just looks bad and a deal breaker for some to buy a camera. I know why they added it for marketing. But with a new Foveon camera it would be nice for them to eliminate any weak spots like this example.

fusoexplorer said:

I think many have come to expect that modern cameras have high ISO abilities and video. If Sigma is concerned about the foveon sensor not working too well with high ISO above 400 in color and 800 in B&W why don’t they just eliminate the ability to go above 800? And why don’t they just eliminate video altogether?
Years ago when I bought a camera you would pick a film to put in the camera and it was generally 50-100 iso sensitivity. Occasionally I would buy a 400 ISO film. And for video which I didn’t buy or use it wasn’t even a thought about a combined camera because it didn’t even exist.
Why aren’t they going retro with a camera with a limited ISO no video but have a incredible full frame or even medium format foveon sensor? Would people buy it?
I certainly would. Although I use video now I have other cameras that I use for that. High ISO doesn’t bother me. I want the highest detail sensor for photography with the foveon look with in body stabilization. To me I think people would enjoy a simplified camera that is a pure photographic experience without the extra complexity.

And finally, my Sigma Merrill’s have video capability that is so poor I am sure nobody has ever used it. I think it is silly to add something to a camera that will not compete with other cameras. To me it just looks bad and a deal breaker for some to buy a camera. I know why they added it for marketing. But with a new Foveon camera it would be nice for them to eliminate any weak spots like this example.

Click to expand...

I think the biggest reason is they don't have sensors. If the FFF had worked out we might have seen compacts too.

I think the Merrill only included video because it could. The Quattro's removed it. I suspect because it was obvious it wasn't worth it.

But I think until they get a new sensor, we aren't going to see anything new. Even if people like myself would be interested in an L mount sdqh.

why should they come up with something “new” if no one has caught up with the “old” yet? they also had to drop the price fivefold even then... to sell the SD1.

what would the fool frame solve here? does it have something so special compared to an aps-c? the main issue with foveon is some funky colours, would that be solved with even larger sensor?

medium format gives quite a different look, but here we have a problem: even now there is no medium format in digital, all are larger or smaller crops. some digital backs are hardly larger than a fool frame - to fool you up. they still don't build large bayers for some reason.. all this “advancement” is a hoax - putting in features no one needs, night vision of all likes but under nooo circumstances making a large sensor! a night is dark, shadows are dark. why would one want to change that? only to get stupid looking pictures!

They are trying to put in a phone, washing machine & stove with oven, before the next release.

fusoexplorer said:

I think many have come to expect that modern cameras have high ISO abilities and video. If Sigma is concerned about the foveon sensor not working too well with high ISO above 400 in color and 800 in B&W why don’t they just eliminate the ability to go above 800? And why don’t they just eliminate video altogether?

Click to expand...

True that all Sigma cameras are not at their best at high ISOs but Merrills are very usable in colour up to 800 ISO and much higher for Mono.

fusoexplorer said:

Years ago when I bought a camera you would pick a film to put in the camera and it was generally 50-100 iso sensitivity. Occasionally I would buy a 400 ISO film. And for video which I didn’t buy or use it wasn’t even a thought about a combined camera because it didn’t even exist.

Click to expand...

That is true also but then we used either one 35mm camera with ASA / ISO 50- 100 or 160 for colour and another with Black & White film often Tri-X or HP5 and often pushed. More likely serious photographers would have used Medium Format cameras with interchangeable backs carrying different film types & ISOs in them.

Digital cameras made that unnecessary with the ability to change ISO as required.

fusoexplorer said:

Why aren’t they going retro with a camera with a limited ISO no video but have a incredible full frame or even medium format foveon sensor? Would people buy it?
I certainly would. Although I use video now I have other cameras that I use for that. High ISO doesn’t bother me. I want the highest detail sensor for photography with the foveon look with in body stabilization. To me I think people would enjoy a simplified camera that is a pure photographic experience without the extra complexity.

And finally, my Sigma Merrill’s have video capability that is so poor I am sure nobody has ever used it. I think it is silly to add something to a camera that will not compete with other cameras. To me it just looks bad and a deal breaker for some to buy a camera. I know why they added it for marketing. But with a new Foveon camera it would be nice for them to eliminate any weak spots like this example.

Click to expand...

I am not aware that any Merrill cameras have video capability. My SD1M does not nor do any of the DP Merrills have video capability either, so your contention that it was added for marketing purposes is not correct.

Neither do the dp or sd Quattros have video capability.

I think the old DP1s of about 12 or 13 years ago was the last Sigma with low level video of 320 x 240 pixels (QVGA) @ 30 fps.

S

Ceistinne said:

I am not aware that any Merrill cameras have video capability. My SD1M does not nor do any of the DP Merrills have video capability either, so your contention that it was added for marketing purposes is not correct.

Neither do the dp or sd Quattros have video capability.

I think the old DP1s of about 12 or 13 years ago was the last Sigma with low level video of 320 x 240 pixels (QVGA) @ 30 fps.

Click to expand...

File Size / MovieVGA:640×480 (30Frames Per Second)

The dp2m had video. It was not worth shooting.

fusoexplorer said:

I think many have come to expect that modern cameras have high ISO abilities and video. If Sigma is concerned about the foveon sensor not working too well with high ISO above 400 in color and 800 in B&W why don’t they just eliminate the ability to go above 800? And why don’t they just eliminate video altogether?

Click to expand...

They did, with the DP Quattros. No new Sigma camera has done video for years, until the fp, and the fp does video beautifully. It does high-ISO beautifully too. It even does still very well, but not as well as the Quattros, until you get to about ISO 800 or 1600 and higher.

The biggest problem with the Merrills in my opinion is their speed of operation. They actually do high-ISO reasonably well, though my Nikon D810 does it better. I do like the images from my Sigmas better than what I can get from my Nikon though, except when I'm shooting portraits with my 85mm f1.4 G. That lens is so good that it helps make up for the sensor's shortcomings. I think the Sigma cameras need great lenses too, of course. Ultimately, I would like a Sigma with a full-frame Quattro, offering me 48 MP images, with the color and detail fidelity I have come to expect from my SD Quattro H. I don't think a 20 MP per layer full-frame camera can do that, but I would give such a camera a try, even if I already have the 60 MP fp-L and a Sony A7r IV by then.

I would probably not step back to 20 MP, if I am already shooting with a 100 MP Fuji GFX100S by the time the full-frame Foveon arrives.

fusoexplorer said:

Years ago when I bought a camera you would pick a film to put in the camera and it was generally 50-100 iso sensitivity. Occasionally I would buy a 400 ISO film. And for video which I didn’t buy or use it wasn’t even a thought about a combined camera because it didn’t even exist.
Why aren’t they going retro with a camera with a limited ISO no video but have a incredible full frame or even medium format foveon sensor?

Click to expand...

I think they are, but it's taking time to make that incredible full-frame sensor.

fusoexplorer said:

Would people buy it?

Click to expand...

Sure, if the price is right.

fusoexplorer said:

I certainly would. Although I use video now I have other cameras that I use for that. High ISO doesn’t bother me. I want the highest detail sensor for photography with the foveon look with in body stabilization. To me I think people would enjoy a simplified camera that is a pure photographic experience without the extra complexity.

And finally, my Sigma Merrill’s have video capability that is so poor I am sure nobody has ever used it. I think it is silly to add something to a camera that will not compete with other cameras. To me it just looks bad and a deal breaker for some to buy a camera. I know why they added it for marketing. But with a new Foveon camera it would be nice for them to eliminate any weak spots like this example.

Click to expand...

"But with a new Foveon camera it would be nice for them to eliminate any weak spots like this example."

With that sentence are you still talking about the video feature in the DP Merrill series?

Obviously you didn't know that no Quattro camera could do video. BTW, the SD1 Merrill couldn't do video either. Besides, I don't think video capability is what's holding up the development of the full-frame Foveon.

> What is holding Sigma back with the new Merril(s)?

It's

not

me!

:-D

They want to make $$. I think it's clear that most of the folks here are willing to forgive the quirks and use these strange cameras. But it's equally clear that they aren't for mass consumption. Sigma, for all of their clear love of photography, is a company looking to make a profit. They probably aren't all that interested in investing time and money in yet another "too quirky" sensor.

Unfortunately, their die-hard Foveon fan base probably isn't big enough to be worth catering to. (checks forum activity - nope) They want something that's going to justify all of the R&D they've put into Foveon. Full-frame, even though it's not even that useful in many cases, is what people want. Reliable AF, video, high ISO, etc, is what people want. Sigma's trying to give people what they want because they want to make $$, not cater to weirdos like us who don't mind the drawbacks

--
https://www.human-element.me/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/humanelement2/

fusoexplorer said:

I think many have come to expect that modern cameras have high ISO abilities and video. If Sigma is concerned about the foveon sensor not working too well with high ISO above 400 in color and 800 in B&W why don’t they just eliminate the ability to go above 800? And why don’t they just eliminate video altogether?

Click to expand...

The sdQH, and I presume also the other Quattro cameras, do not have video. I haven't missed it.

Greater dynamic range, with which comes usable results at higher ISO settings, would be a welcome improvement. It's one of the best things about the fp. I am sure Sigma are working hard on it.

Don Cox

Human Elements said:

They want to make $$. I think it's clear that most of the folks here are willing to forgive the quirks and use these strange cameras. But it's equally clear that they aren't for mass consumption. Sigma, for all of their clear love of photography, is a company looking to make a profit. They probably aren't all that interested in investing time and money in yet another "too quirky" sensor.

Unfortunately, their die-hard Foveon fan base probably isn't big enough to be worth catering to. (checks forum activity - nope) They want something that's going to justify all of the R&D they've put into Foveon. Full-frame, even though it's not even that useful in many cases, is what people want. Reliable AF, video, high ISO, etc, is what people want. Sigma's trying to give people what they want because they want to make $$, not cater to weirdos like us who don't mind the drawbacks

Click to expand...

But the folks at Sigma are fellow weirdos. :-D

Don

fusoexplorer & Pranza + Human Elements,

Re. my earlier note, I did not realise that the DP Merrills had 640 x 480 (30 fps) video since I've never had nor seen one.

My SD1 Merrill does not have video for sure.

Anyway the Merrills both DP & SD have proved themselves as excellent cameras and I see no need for posts from relatively new posters denigrating them. They have been used by many of us to make amazing pictures over the last nine years and are still doing so.

I look forward with great hope to the coming Full Frame Foveon and have no interest in video.

Sigma's fp & fp L are their video tools.

S

fusoexplorer said:

I think many have come to expect that modern cameras have high ISO abilities and video. If Sigma is concerned about the foveon sensor not working too well with high ISO above 400 in color and 800 in B&W why don’t they just eliminate the ability to go above 800? And why don’t they just eliminate video altogether?

Click to expand...

Agree...being more of a "specialist" camera sets Sigma Foveon apart anyway. Might as well emphasize this and show the best of the best IQ. Only IQ, nothing else.

fusoexplorer said:

Years ago when I bought a camera you would pick a film to put in the camera and it was generally 50-100 iso sensitivity. Occasionally I would buy a 400 ISO film. And for video which I didn’t buy or use it wasn’t even a thought about a combined camera because it didn’t even exist.
Why aren’t they going retro with a camera with a limited ISO no video but have a incredible full frame or even medium format foveon sensor? Would people buy it?

Click to expand...

Depending on price....I would....Merrill full frame or Merrill Medium format.

fusoexplorer said:

I certainly would. Although I use video now I have other cameras that I use for that. High ISO doesn’t bother me. I want the highest detail sensor for photography with the foveon look with in body stabilization. To me I think people would enjoy a simplified camera that is a pure photographic experience without the extra complexity.

And finally, my Sigma Merrill’s have video capability that is so poor I am sure nobody has ever used it. I think it is silly to add something to a camera that will not compete with other cameras. To me it just looks bad and a deal breaker for some to buy a camera. I know why they added it for marketing.

Click to expand...

Bad marketing if quality is like it is (video)

fusoexplorer said:

But with a new Foveon camera it would be nice for them to eliminate any weak spots like this example.

Click to expand...

Agree

The SD1M doesn't have video because it doesn't have live view.

I read in this forum a long time ago that video/live view capability could have been added to the SD1M, but obviously that never happened.

Video on the DP Merrill series cameras is certainly a side effect of live view.

Scottelly said:

fusoexplorer said:

I think many have come to expect that modern cameras have high ISO abilities and video. If Sigma is concerned about the foveon sensor not working too well with high ISO above 400 in color and 800 in B&W why don’t they just eliminate the ability to go above 800? And why don’t they just eliminate video altogether?

Click to expand...

They did, with the DP Quattros. No new Sigma camera has done video for years, until the fp, and the fp does video beautifully. It does high-ISO beautifully too. It even does still very well, but not as well as the Quattros, until you get to about ISO 800 or 1600 and higher.

The biggest problem with the Merrills in my opinion is their speed of operation. They actually do high-ISO reasonably well, though my Nikon D810 does it better. I do like the images from my Sigmas better than what I can get from my Nikon though, except when I'm shooting portraits with my 85mm f1.4 G. That lens is so good that it helps make up for the sensor's shortcomings. I think the Sigma cameras need great lenses too, of course. Ultimately, I would like a Sigma with a full-frame Quattro, offering me 48 MP images, with the color and detail fidelity I have come to expect from my SD Quattro H. I don't think a 20 MP per layer full-frame camera can do that, but I would give such a camera a try, even if I already have the 60 MP fp-L and a Sony A7r IV by then.

I would probably not step back to 20 MP, if I am already shooting with a 100 MP Fuji GFX100S by the time the full-frame Foveon arrives.

Scottelly said:

Years ago when I bought a camera you would pick a film to put in the camera and it was generally 50-100 iso sensitivity. Occasionally I would buy a 400 ISO film. And for video which I didn’t buy or use it wasn’t even a thought about a combined camera because it didn’t even exist.
Why aren’t they going retro with a camera with a limited ISO no video but have a incredible full frame or even medium format foveon sensor?

Click to expand...

I think they are, but it's taking time to make that incredible full-frame sensor.

Scottelly said:

Would people buy it?

Click to expand...

Sure, if the price is right.

Scottelly said:

I certainly would. Although I use video now I have other cameras that I use for that. High ISO doesn’t bother me. I want the highest detail sensor for photography with the foveon look with in body stabilization. To me I think people would enjoy a simplified camera that is a pure photographic experience without the extra complexity.

And finally, my Sigma Merrill’s have video capability that is so poor I am sure nobody has ever used it. I think it is silly to add something to a camera that will not compete with other cameras. To me it just looks bad and a deal breaker for some to buy a camera. I know why they added it for marketing. But with a new Foveon camera it would be nice for them to eliminate any weak spots like this example.

Click to expand...

"But with a new Foveon camera it would be nice for them to eliminate any weak spots like this example."

With that sentence are you still talking about the video feature in the DP Merrill series?

Click to expand...

yes I was still talking about the video

Scottelly said:

Obviously you didn't know that no Quattro camera could do video. BTW, the SD1 Merrill couldn't do video either. Besides, I don't think video capability is what's holding up the development of the full-frame Foveon.

Click to expand...

You are correct. I did not know that they eliminated video in these cameras.

Human Elements said:

They want to make $$. I think it's clear that most of the folks here are willing to forgive the quirks and use these strange cameras. But it's equally clear that they aren't for mass consumption. Sigma, for all of their clear love of photography, is a company looking to make a profit. They probably aren't all that interested in investing time and money in yet another "too quirky" sensor.

Unfortunately, their die-hard Foveon fan base probably isn't big enough to be worth catering to. (checks forum activity - nope) They want something that's going to justify all of the R&D they've put into Foveon. Full-frame, even though it's not even that useful in many cases, is what people want. Reliable AF, video, high ISO, etc, is what people want. Sigma's trying to give people what they want because they want to make $$, not cater to weirdos like us who don't mind the drawbacks

Click to expand...

If they sold a l mount Merrill they would sell us their L mount lenses though.

Ceistinne said:

fusoexplorer & Pranza + Human Elements,

Re. my earlier note, I did not realise that the DP Merrills had 640 x 480 (30 fps) video since I've never had nor seen one.

My SD1 Merrill does not have video for sure.

Anyway the Merrills both DP & SD have proved themselves as excellent cameras and I see no need for posts from relatively new posters denigrating them. They have been used by many of us to make amazing pictures over the last nine years and are still doing so.

I look forward with great hope to the coming Full Frame Foveon and have no interest in video.

Sigma's fp & fp L are their video tools.

S

Click to expand...

Hi. If you mean me. I am not a relatively new poster although I don’t post much. I have had my Merrill’s for 3-4 years. and love them and like Sigma the company as well.

fusoexplorer said:

Ceistinne said:

fusoexplorer & Pranza + Human Elements,

Re. my earlier note, I did not realise that the DP Merrills had 640 x 480 (30 fps) video since I've never had nor seen one.

My SD1 Merrill does not have video for sure.

Anyway the Merrills both DP & SD have proved themselves as excellent cameras and I see no need for posts from relatively new posters denigrating them. They have been used by many of us to make amazing pictures over the last nine years and are still doing so.

I look forward with great hope to the coming Full Frame Foveon and have no interest in video.

Sigma's fp & fp L are their video tools.

S

Click to expand...

Hi. If you mean me. I am not a relatively new poster although I don’t post much. I have had my Merrill’s for 3-4 years. and love them and like Sigma the company as well.

Click to expand...

fusoexplorer,

Happy to know that you love your Merrills and the Sigma company.

S

A camera with a very limited iso range and lack of video capability isn't competitive. It wouldn't make any difference.

High resolution sensors are making Foveon technology obsolete. You can buy an A7RII in quite affordable price, with better IQ at any ISO than SDQH. Of course moiré is problem even with high resolution bayer, so I can't argue that Foveon has sitll advantages in few cases.

However I still like DP series. I bought the A7III and sold all DP Merrills, but I can't part from my DP2Q. 400g light, small body, and I have some attraction to design. And it still owns 24MP Bayer at iso100 in some cases. I like the portability paired with high IQ. Thera are'nt huge competition, Ricoh GR3, Fuji X100T/V, Sony RX1R, Leica Q, for landscape DP series are still the best bang of buck.

Lukacs85 said:

A camera with a very limited iso range and lack of video capability isn't competitive. It wouldn't make any difference.

Click to expand...

What do you mean by "competitive" ? Do you mean that a Sigma camera won't sell more than a Canon camera ? If so, I don't think they want to be competitive.

But they might sell more than a German-made Leica.

I think the aim for each model is to sell enough to cover the costs and maybe make a small profit. The cameras serve to demonstrate the quality of their lenses.

Lukacs85 said:

High resolution sensors are making Foveon technology obsolete. You can buy an A7RII in quite affordable price, with better IQ at any ISO than SDQH. Of course moiré is problem even with high resolution bayer, so I can't argue that Foveon has sitll advantages in few cases.

Click to expand...

I agree that they have to go up to about 30 Megapixels (two Merrills side by side) to be equal to the fp L. A 20 Mpix Foveon is not enough for 24x36mm.

Lukacs85 said:

However I still like DP series. I bought the A7III and sold all DP Merrills, but I can't part from my DP2Q. 400g light, small body, and I have some attraction to design. And it still owns 24MP Bayer at iso100 in some cases. I like the portability paired with high IQ. Thera are'nt huge competition, Ricoh GR3, Fuji X100T/V, Sony RX1R, Leica Q, for landscape DP series are still the best bang of buck.

Click to expand...