Reading mode: Light Dark

The PetaPixel View of the "Failure" of the Foveon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Go to last post
Iain G Foulds said:
(snip) major international company like Sigma..... is a massive failure.
Click to expand...
??????????

Before Thomas Edison discovered tungsten for use as a filament for light bulbs a lot of people thought he was a failure also.

Creativity, innovation, and curiosity are the things that motivate some people, and Mr Yamaki's father always wanted to be a quality camera maker, and his son has made a commitment to carry on the dream. Sigma supposedly takes good care of its employees (unlike like a lot of american corporations) and spends what it can on camera development without sacrificing its overall financial success.

Greed may be the most prevalent motivator, in the U.S. and around the world, but creativity and innovation are the things that really made this country great...greed is actually destroying economies around the world, including the U.S.

You apparently think that greed/profit are the reasons to pursue a dream; you have my sympathies.

P.S. tried to find an early interview with Mr. Yamaki in this forum about his fathers dream, without success. Maybe others who are a little more aware of the history/background/dream of Mr. Yamaki's father can chime in/provide a link in so you have a better appreciation for the motivations behind Sigma camera development (image quality being the ultimate goal), but even with that info I'm guessing you still won't get it. :-(

--
“The one who plants trees, knowing that they will never sit in their shade, has at least started to understand the meaning of life.” (Rabindranath Tagore)
https://www.pbase.com/nidoba
 
Last edited:
J. Michael said:
Iain G Foulds said:
(snip) major international company like Sigma..... is a massive failure.
Click to expand...
??????????
Click to expand...
Your ellipsis is pretty dishonest, and your resulting puzzlement even moreso.
J. Michael said:
Before Thomas Edison discovered tungsten for use as a filament for light bulbs a lot of people thought he was a failure also.

Creativity, innovation, and curiosity are the things that motivate some people, and Mr Yamaki's father always wanted to be a quality camera maker, and his son has made a commitment to carry on the dream. Sigma supposedly takes good care of its employees (unlike like a lot of american corporations) and spends what it can on camera development without sacrificing its overall financial success.

Greed may be the most prevalent motivator, in the U.S. and around the world, but creativity and innovation are the things that really made this country great...greed is actually destroying economies around the world, including the U.S.

You apparently think that greed/profit are the reasons to pursue a dream; you have my sympathies.

P.S. tried to find an early interview with Mr. Yamaki in this forum about his fathers dream, without success. Maybe others who are a little more aware of the history/background/dream of Mr. Yamaki's father can chime in/provide a link in so you have a better appreciation for the motivations behind Sigma camera development (image quality being the ultimate goal), but even with that info I'm guessing you still won't get it. :-(
Click to expand...
Edison, electrocuted dogs in public squares, calling it “Westinghousing” them, to try to gain a competitive edge.

Nikolai Tesla quit as Edison’s apprentice not only because Edison cheated him out of $50,000, but Tesla felt “soiled ” by Edison’s greed.

If you look a little more objectively, you will likely see that innovation and the profit motive are inextricably linked. Innovation without commercialization changes nothing - or do you have counter-examples?
 
Last edited:
Doppler9000 said:
Jeffry7 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Jeffry7 said:
I have several problems with this article.

The first, and easiest, is the dismissal of Sigma as a camera company. To do this, you have to ignore the fp line. These are cameras. People are buying them. Sigma is a camera company.

The second is resolution BS. Canon's most recent camera aimed at Pros is the R3. It has a sensor pitch of 6 microns for a 24 megapixels FF sensor.
Click to expand...
Some market segments require speed. The full frame Foveon, if it is ever made, will not be even in the same galaxy as the R3 speed-wise, which is the key reason the resolution is 24 MP.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Still there are high end cameras with ~20mp sensors and not everyone who wants one is a sports or BiF photographer.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
The R5, the high rez sibling to the R6, has a pitch of 4.4. The big dog here is actually the R7, with a pitch of 3.2, but an APS-C sensor size. It is aimed squarly at enthusiasts.
Click to expand...
The chip in the fp L and Sony A7R4 has a 3.76 micron pitch.
Doppler9000 said:
The sd Quattro cameras have a top layer pitch of 4.3.

If you really want hi rez, get a Nikon 1 camera. The V3 has a pitch of 2.8. It is also a discontinued line.
Click to expand...
Hopefully the Nikon 1 isn’t the business model Sigma is emulating here. Interestingly, the Nikon 1 forum has roughly the same amount of traffic as this one.
Click to expand...
I have a V3. It is a fun if imperfect camera.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
If Sigma just makes a full frame camera with the same rez as the top layer of the sd Quattro, then they will have higher resolution than the pro cameras and be quite competitive with the consumer and enthusiast cameras.
Click to expand...
The recently-announced Fuji X-H2 is 40 MP on APS-C. The Foveon will likely be competing against circa 100 MP resolution full frame sensors. Not sure if the Sigma will be “quite competitive” on resolution. It would seem that it will be well behind in noise/low light performance and autofocus speed.
Click to expand...
I doubt that will happen. Canon, Nikon, and Sony can make these sensors now if they want, and haven't. Meanwhile, sensor pitch has remained very stable. The Canon 550d, released in 2010, has a 4.3 pitch.
Click to expand...
Do you think the parent sensor tech used in the Fuji won’t be be used in a full frame camera? This is not how the sensor business works, outside a few corner cases. The same wafer is the source sensors for a range of cameras. For example, the 26 MP sensor tech used in the Fuji X-T3 is also found in the 61 MP Sony A7RIV and fp L, the 100 MP Fuji GFX 100x, and the 150 MP Phase IQ4.

The full frame variant of the X-H2 sensor will be ~100 MP. I would bet, barring further Covid supply issues, you will see announcements in the next several months of larger sensors from the same source wafers.
Click to expand...
This does nothing to explain the slow adoption of higher rez sensors by camera manufacturers to date.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
There is a lower limit to a lens systems ability to resolve detail. Sometimes this is referred to as diffraction limited. One measure of this is the Rayleigh Criteria. This gives the angular resolution possible with an idea lens given the diameter of the lens and the wavelength of light. To convert this to spatial resolution, you include the flange distance. Well none of these factors change for a given camera system. Throwing a smaller pitch at a given system eventually gets to diminishing returns.
Click to expand...
Using the Sparrow criterion, how about 1.4 gigapixels at f/1.4? Or 357 MP at f/2.8?
Click to expand...
Do you have a better link than this? When I tried to search for the Sparrow distance I got a thousand pages on the bird.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Smart phones have ridiculously small flange distances and can benefit from smaller pitch. I would imagine mirrorless systems will have smaller pitches because that have smaller flange distances. But not to the degree of smart phones.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution#The_Rayleigh_criterion
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
And that is before the advantage the 3 layer sensor brings.

Finally there is the idea that Sigma is trying to compete with Nikon, Sony and Canon. They aren't. The Sigma FP should have made that clear.

All the other camera manufacturers make 'weird' cameras.
Click to expand...
”Weird” compared to what?
Click to expand...
Compared to Canon, Nikon, or Sony.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
They differ in some way from the idealized camera Canon, Nikon, and Sony are pursuing. We buy them partly despite that, and partly because of it.
Click to expand...
Can Sigma sell enough, profitably, to not lose their shirts on the FFF R&D?
Click to expand...
I have no idea.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
Doppler9000 said:
Since they have done so previously, I would assume yes.
Click to expand...
This really isn’t a very compelling argument. The new sensor is clearly presenting significant new challenges.
Click to expand...
I don't really disagree with this. I also don't know why you are bringing it up.
 
Jeffry7 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Jeffry7 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Jeffry7 said:
I have several problems with this article.

The first, and easiest, is the dismissal of Sigma as a camera company. To do this, you have to ignore the fp line. These are cameras. People are buying them. Sigma is a camera company.

The second is resolution BS. Canon's most recent camera aimed at Pros is the R3. It has a sensor pitch of 6 microns for a 24 megapixels FF sensor.
Click to expand...
Some market segments require speed. The full frame Foveon, if it is ever made, will not be even in the same galaxy as the R3 speed-wise, which is the key reason the resolution is 24 MP.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Still there are high end cameras with ~20mp sensors and not everyone who wants one is a sports or BiF photographer.
Jeffry7 said:
Jeffry7 said:
The R5, the high rez sibling to the R6, has a pitch of 4.4. The big dog here is actually the R7, with a pitch of 3.2, but an APS-C sensor size. It is aimed squarly at enthusiasts.
Click to expand...
The chip in the fp L and Sony A7R4 has a 3.76 micron pitch.
Jeffry7 said:
The sd Quattro cameras have a top layer pitch of 4.3.

If you really want hi rez, get a Nikon 1 camera. The V3 has a pitch of 2.8. It is also a discontinued line.
Click to expand...
Hopefully the Nikon 1 isn’t the business model Sigma is emulating here. Interestingly, the Nikon 1 forum has roughly the same amount of traffic as this one.
Click to expand...
I have a V3. It is a fun if imperfect camera.
Jeffry7 said:
Jeffry7 said:
If Sigma just makes a full frame camera with the same rez as the top layer of the sd Quattro, then they will have higher resolution than the pro cameras and be quite competitive with the consumer and enthusiast cameras.
Click to expand...
The recently-announced Fuji X-H2 is 40 MP on APS-C. The Foveon will likely be competing against circa 100 MP resolution full frame sensors. Not sure if the Sigma will be “quite competitive” on resolution. It would seem that it will be well behind in noise/low light performance and autofocus speed.
Click to expand...
I doubt that will happen. Canon, Nikon, and Sony can make these sensors now if they want, and haven't. Meanwhile, sensor pitch has remained very stable. The Canon 550d, released in 2010, has a 4.3 pitch.
Click to expand...
Do you think the parent sensor tech used in the Fuji won’t be be used in a full frame camera? This is not how the sensor business works, outside a few corner cases. The same wafer is the source sensors for a range of cameras. For example, the 26 MP sensor tech used in the Fuji X-T3 is also found in the 61 MP Sony A7RIV and fp L, the 100 MP Fuji GFX 100x, and the 150 MP Phase IQ4.

The full frame variant of the X-H2 sensor will be ~100 MP. I would bet, barring further Covid supply issues, you will see announcements in the next several months of larger sensors from the same source wafers.
Click to expand...
This does nothing to explain the slow adoption of higher rez sensors by camera manufacturers to date.
Click to expand...
I am addressing the competitive landscape the Foveon will face if it ever comes out. It will be against circa 100 MP Bayer cameras, unless you believe the Fuji is a custom chip run? The A7R4 is less than three years old. The sensor is only one part of the chain that includes the supporting electronics, thermal management, etc. If you think we have plateaued on full frame resolution, that is your right, but the evidence suggests otherwise.
Jeffry7 said:
Jeffry7 said:
Jeffry7 said:
There is a lower limit to a lens systems ability to resolve detail. Sometimes this is referred to as diffraction limited. One measure of this is the Rayleigh Criteria. This gives the angular resolution possible with an idea lens given the diameter of the lens and the wavelength of light. To convert this to spatial resolution, you include the flange distance. Well none of these factors change for a given camera system. Throwing a smaller pitch at a given system eventually gets to diminishing returns.
Click to expand...
Using the Sparrow criterion, how about 1.4 gigapixels at f/1.4? Or 357 MP at f/2.8?
Click to expand...
Do you have a better link than this? When I tried to search for the Sparrow distance I got a thousand pages on the bird.
Click to expand...
Try Sparrow criterion, not sparrow distance. Jim Kasson has written about the issue elsewhere, as well.
Jeffry7 said:
Jeffry7 said:
Jeffry7 said:
Smart phones have ridiculously small flange distances and can benefit from smaller pitch. I would imagine mirrorless systems will have smaller pitches because that have smaller flange distances. But not to the degree of smart phones.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution#The_Rayleigh_criterion
Jeffry7 said:
Jeffry7 said:
And that is before the advantage the 3 layer sensor brings.

Finally there is the idea that Sigma is trying to compete with Nikon, Sony and Canon. They aren't. The Sigma FP should have made that clear.

All the other camera manufacturers make 'weird' cameras.
Click to expand...
”Weird” compared to what?
Click to expand...
Compared to Canon, Nikon, or Sony.
Jeffry7 said:
Jeffry7 said:
They differ in some way from the idealized camera Canon, Nikon, and Sony are pursuing. We buy them partly despite that, and partly because of it.
Click to expand...
Can Sigma sell enough, profitably, to not lose their shirts on the FFF R&D?
Click to expand...
I have no idea.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
Jeffry7 said:
Since they have done so previously, I would assume yes.
Click to expand...
This really isn’t a very compelling argument. The new sensor is clearly presenting significant new challenges.
Click to expand...
I don't really disagree with this. I also don't know why you are bringing it up.
Click to expand...
Whether or not a full frame Foveon is commercially viable seems a relevant question. You have simply assumed that it is viable. Presumably you would agree that above some level of investment, the whole project will either severely damage the financial viability of Sigma, or should be abandoned.
 
Doppler9000 said:
Jeffry7 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Jeffry7 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Jeffry7 said:
I have several problems with this article.

The first, and easiest, is the dismissal of Sigma as a camera company. To do this, you have to ignore the fp line. These are cameras. People are buying them. Sigma is a camera company.

The second is resolution BS. Canon's most recent camera aimed at Pros is the R3. It has a sensor pitch of 6 microns for a 24 megapixels FF sensor.
Click to expand...
Some market segments require speed. The full frame Foveon, if it is ever made, will not be even in the same galaxy as the R3 speed-wise, which is the key reason the resolution is 24 MP.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Still there are high end cameras with ~20mp sensors and not everyone who wants one is a sports or BiF photographer.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
The R5, the high rez sibling to the R6, has a pitch of 4.4. The big dog here is actually the R7, with a pitch of 3.2, but an APS-C sensor size. It is aimed squarly at enthusiasts.
Click to expand...
The chip in the fp L and Sony A7R4 has a 3.76 micron pitch.
Doppler9000 said:
The sd Quattro cameras have a top layer pitch of 4.3.

If you really want hi rez, get a Nikon 1 camera. The V3 has a pitch of 2.8. It is also a discontinued line.
Click to expand...
Hopefully the Nikon 1 isn’t the business model Sigma is emulating here. Interestingly, the Nikon 1 forum has roughly the same amount of traffic as this one.
Click to expand...
I have a V3. It is a fun if imperfect camera.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
If Sigma just makes a full frame camera with the same rez as the top layer of the sd Quattro, then they will have higher resolution than the pro cameras and be quite competitive with the consumer and enthusiast cameras.
Click to expand...
The recently-announced Fuji X-H2 is 40 MP on APS-C. The Foveon will likely be competing against circa 100 MP resolution full frame sensors. Not sure if the Sigma will be “quite competitive” on resolution. It would seem that it will be well behind in noise/low light performance and autofocus speed.
Click to expand...
I doubt that will happen. Canon, Nikon, and Sony can make these sensors now if they want, and haven't. Meanwhile, sensor pitch has remained very stable. The Canon 550d, released in 2010, has a 4.3 pitch.
Click to expand...
Do you think the parent sensor tech used in the Fuji won’t be be used in a full frame camera? This is not how the sensor business works, outside a few corner cases. The same wafer is the source sensors for a range of cameras. For example, the 26 MP sensor tech used in the Fuji X-T3 is also found in the 61 MP Sony A7RIV and fp L, the 100 MP Fuji GFX 100x, and the 150 MP Phase IQ4.

The full frame variant of the X-H2 sensor will be ~100 MP. I would bet, barring further Covid supply issues, you will see announcements in the next several months of larger sensors from the same source wafers.
Click to expand...
This does nothing to explain the slow adoption of higher rez sensors by camera manufacturers to date.
Click to expand...
I am addressing the competitive landscape the Foveon will face if it ever comes out. It will be against circa 100 MP Bayer cameras, unless you believe the Fuji is a custom chip run? The A7R4 is less than three years old. The sensor is only one part of the chain that includes the supporting electronics, thermal management, etc. If you think we have plateaued on full frame resolution, that is your right, but the evidence suggests otherwise.
Click to expand...
I am not saying they can't make higher resolution cameras. I am pointing out that they haven't despite the sensor technology being available for quite some time.

Why not? I presume there is a reason since punters always want more resolution.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
There is a lower limit to a lens systems ability to resolve detail. Sometimes this is referred to as diffraction limited. One measure of this is the Rayleigh Criteria. This gives the angular resolution possible with an idea lens given the diameter of the lens and the wavelength of light. To convert this to spatial resolution, you include the flange distance. Well none of these factors change for a given camera system. Throwing a smaller pitch at a given system eventually gets to diminishing returns.
Click to expand...
Using the Sparrow criterion, how about 1.4 gigapixels at f/1.4? Or 357 MP at f/2.8?
Click to expand...
Do you have a better link than this? When I tried to search for the Sparrow distance I got a thousand pages on the bird.
Click to expand...
Try Sparrow criterion, not sparrow distance. Jim Kasson has written about the issue elsewhere, as well.
Click to expand...
That worked.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
Smart phones have ridiculously small flange distances and can benefit from smaller pitch. I would imagine mirrorless systems will have smaller pitches because that have smaller flange distances. But not to the degree of smart phones.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution#The_Rayleigh_criterion
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
And that is before the advantage the 3 layer sensor brings.

Finally there is the idea that Sigma is trying to compete with Nikon, Sony and Canon. They aren't. The Sigma FP should have made that clear.

All the other camera manufacturers make 'weird' cameras.
Click to expand...
”Weird” compared to what?
Click to expand...
Compared to Canon, Nikon, or Sony.
Doppler9000 said:
Doppler9000 said:
They differ in some way from the idealized camera Canon, Nikon, and Sony are pursuing. We buy them partly despite that, and partly because of it.
Click to expand...
Can Sigma sell enough, profitably, to not lose their shirts on the FFF R&D?
Click to expand...
I have no idea.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
Doppler9000 said:
Since they have done so previously, I would assume yes.
Click to expand...
This really isn’t a very compelling argument. The new sensor is clearly presenting significant new challenges.
Click to expand...
I don't really disagree with this. I also don't know why you are bringing it up.
Click to expand...
Whether or not a full frame Foveon is commercially viable seems a relevant question. You have simply assumed that it is viable. Presumably you would agree that above some level of investment, the whole project will either severely damage the financial viability of Sigma, or should be abandoned.
Click to expand...
My initial post was simply to take issue with things posed in the article the OP linked to.

There are valid reasons to be concerned that Sigma will not succeed. I just don't think the three I took issue with are valid.
 
rick decker said:
Well certainly a full-size 20mp 3-layer camera would hold more appeal than the Quattro. That said, my feeling is that if they can't do (really do) high iso and not just ISO400, they won't get great sales. There is are good reasons why the FP line is so successful and if it didn't have high ISO (12500) it wouldn't have the numbers it has now. That is the main reason I got an FP and that is the reason I got one.
Click to expand...
 
Tom Schum said:
D Cox said:
I bought the fp mainly because the L mount allows me to use all my classic lenses from film SLRs (except a few that I foolishly sold), and because Sigma's controls and menus are easy to use.

Don
Click to expand...
If Sigma offers an L-mount three-layer product it will be a lot easier for existing L-mount users to buy one, since their investment in L-mount lenses and adapters is not going to be lost.

I think in the past the SA mount was a dis-incentive to potential users, since it invalidated practically any previous lens investments they might have made.

L-mount is such a great step forward that even a Sigma APS-C body ought to sell well. Numerous Leica users are lamenting the end of the Leica L-mount APS-C bodies, so the market might be ripe for one. I wouldn't be surprised to see Sigma jump into this.

Meanwhile, can a 20mp full frame Foveon be any better than a fp L image downsized to 1/3 of original pixels? My guess is no, it can't.
Click to expand...
That doesn't matter. The first full-frame "Foveon" camera will be an experiment, as I believe Sigma's SD cameras have all been. Once Sigma has sold most of the full-frame SD bodies, they can likely produce a new body with a Quattro sensor, improved performance (i.e. faster and more accurate focusing), and additional functionality/features.
Tom Schum said:
Colors might be better (in terms of art, not quantitative accuracy) from the Foveon though.
Click to expand...
 
Doppler9000 said:
Ceistinne said:
Doppler9000 said:
Can Sigma sell enough, profitably, to not lose their shirts on the FFF R&D?
Click to expand...
Doppler9000,

I have no doubt that they will have that figured out. They have 60 odd years of experience behind them & getting better and better as they go along.

S
Click to expand...
I would agree that Sigma has a great track record designing and manufacturing lenses.

Your optimism with regard to their track record when applied to sensor design seems ill-founded, however. Designing sensors has essentially nothing to do with designing lenses. After years of trying and who-knows-how-much money invested, Sigma has had to go back to the drawing board, starting over and prototyping a small version of the full size sensor. If this seems to work, they will begin to prototype a full size version, and develop the associated electronics. How much money has been sunk so far? So it doesn’t seem that they are really getting “better and better” at designing larger, updated sensors, does it?

In the meantime, the camera market continues to contract, with most of the new releases targeted largely toward the video market. Bayer sensors continue to improve, as Sigma stumbles along. I am a Sigma fan and own four of their cameras. I worry they are going to do themselves significant financial harm by chasing a white whale.

And keep in mind that successful companies, with long track records of success, make mistakes and go out of business all the time.
Click to expand...
Kodak?

I don't think Sigma is like Kodak. Sigma is small and nimble. They have one smart photographer in charge. He will not spend too much on sensor development.
 
Scottelly said:
rick decker said:
Well certainly a full-size 20mp 3-layer camera would hold more appeal than the Quattro. That said, my feeling is that if they can't do (really do) high iso and not just ISO400, they won't get great sales. There is are good reasons why the FP line is so successful and if it didn't have high ISO (12500) it wouldn't have the numbers it has now. That is the main reason I got an FP and that is the reason I got one.
Click to expand...
Low-ISO image quality is the most important thing, and Sigma's cameras with Foveon sensors offer that. That is the main reason I got an SD 14, then an SD 1 Merrill, ". . . and that is the reason I got one."
Click to expand...
As motion blur is the biggest problem for image quality, I think ISO 800 image quality is the most important thing, especially if you want to avoid moving parts in the camera as much as possible.

Don
 
Scottelly said:
Doppler9000 said:
Ceistinne said:
Doppler9000 said:
Can Sigma sell enough, profitably, to not lose their shirts on the FFF R&D?
Click to expand...
Doppler9000,

I have no doubt that they will have that figured out. They have 60 odd years of experience behind them & getting better and better as they go along.

S
Click to expand...
I would agree that Sigma has a great track record designing and manufacturing lenses.

Your optimism with regard to their track record when applied to sensor design seems ill-founded, however. Designing sensors has essentially nothing to do with designing lenses. After years of trying and who-knows-how-much money invested, Sigma has had to go back to the drawing board, starting over and prototyping a small version of the full size sensor. If this seems to work, they will begin to prototype a full size version, and develop the associated electronics. How much money has been sunk so far? So it doesn’t seem that they are really getting “better and better” at designing larger, updated sensors, does it?

In the meantime, the camera market continues to contract, with most of the new releases targeted largely toward the video market. Bayer sensors continue to improve, as Sigma stumbles along. I am a Sigma fan and own four of their cameras. I worry they are going to do themselves significant financial harm by chasing a white whale.

And keep in mind that successful companies, with long track records of success, make mistakes and go out of business all the time.
Click to expand...
Kodak?

I don't think Sigma is like Kodak. Sigma is small and nimble. They have one smart photographer in charge. He will not spend too much on sensor development.
Click to expand...
If you want to understand the history of Kodak, I strongly recommend reading "From Dry Plates To Ektachrome Film" (1961) by Mees, who was Kodak's chief scientist for many years.

Don
 
Scottelly said:
Doppler9000 said:
Ceistinne said:
Doppler9000 said:
Can Sigma sell enough, profitably, to not lose their shirts on the FFF R&D?
Click to expand...
Doppler9000,

I have no doubt that they will have that figured out. They have 60 odd years of experience behind them & getting better and better as they go along.

S
Click to expand...
I would agree that Sigma has a great track record designing and manufacturing lenses.

Your optimism with regard to their track record when applied to sensor design seems ill-founded, however. Designing sensors has essentially nothing to do with designing lenses. After years of trying and who-knows-how-much money invested, Sigma has had to go back to the drawing board, starting over and prototyping a small version of the full size sensor. If this seems to work, they will begin to prototype a full size version, and develop the associated electronics. How much money has been sunk so far? So it doesn’t seem that they are really getting “better and better” at designing larger, updated sensors, does it?

In the meantime, the camera market continues to contract, with most of the new releases targeted largely toward the video market. Bayer sensors continue to improve, as Sigma stumbles along. I am a Sigma fan and own four of their cameras. I worry they are going to do themselves significant financial harm by chasing a white whale.

And keep in mind that successful companies, with long track records of success, make mistakes and go out of business all the time.
Click to expand...
Kodak?
Click to expand...
The only thing Kodak has in common with Sigma is photography. Its stock peaked in 1976, and it made error after error.

Sigma is a small company that does a really good job with lenses in a highly competitive space.
Scottelly said:
I don't think Sigma is like Kodak. Sigma is small and nimble. They have one smart photographer in charge.
Click to expand...
Scottelly said:
He will not spend too much on sensor development.
Click to expand...
I hope this is true.
 
D Cox said:
Scottelly said:
rick decker said:
.... high ISO [] is the main reason I got an FP ....
Click to expand...
Low-ISO image quality is the most important thing ....
Click to expand...
As motion blur is the biggest problem for image quality ...

... I think that ISO 800 image quality is the most important thing ...
Click to expand...
Interesting variations of opinion. Pardon the snipping of their context!

As a shooter mostly of static stuff in reasonable light, I prefer not to under-expose the sensor by 3EV or more.

My Sigma remains set permanently to 100 ISO and, should I ever need more, the DC-G9 awaits ...

--
what you got is not what you saw ...
 
Last edited:
Scottelly said:
xpatUSA said:
Link posted for what it's worth!

PetaPixel is known for occasional (!) plagiarism but an interesting read nonetheless, at least for me:

https://petapixel.com/foveon-x3-image-sensor-explained/
Click to expand...
"Sigma even had to create a plugin for Adobe Photoshop in order to get Foveon files opened."

Balderdash! Lies. Is this really a hit piece on Sigma?

"At best, from this calendar, it seems unrealistic to expect a mass-produced sensor before 2024."

What calendar?
Click to expand...
Gregorian.

Sigma isn’t even working on the full-size prototype. They have to get the reduced resolution, trial working, then, if it goes well, design and fabricate a full size prototype, develop the associated electronics, write the firmware, spec everything for production, then schedule production with the chip maker, with what is surely a fairly small run, during an ongoing pandemic with various supply issues.

What is your time estimate, given where they are in the development process and all of the uncertainties?
Scottelly said:
"While it isn’t impossible that Sigma releases a new camera with a full-frame Foveon sensor, there is still a long way to go in selling the technology outside of the existing Foveon community, let alone making it an industry standard."

I don't think Sigma has any interest in making their sensors the industry standard, and competing with Sony for the imaging sensor market.

Sorry Ted, I couldn't read the whole thing after reading that garbage.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Doppler9000 said:
J. Michael said:
Iain G Foulds said:
(snip) major international company like Sigma..... is a massive failure.
Click to expand...
??????????
Click to expand...
Your ellipsis is pretty dishonest, and your resulting puzzlement even moreso.
Doppler9000 said:
Before Thomas Edison discovered tungsten for use as a filament for light bulbs a lot of people thought he was a failure also.

Creativity, innovation, and curiosity are the things that motivate some people, and Mr Yamaki's father always wanted to be a quality camera maker, and his son has made a commitment to carry on the dream. Sigma supposedly takes good care of its employees (unlike like a lot of american corporations) and spends what it can on camera development without sacrificing its overall financial success.

Greed may be the most prevalent motivator, in the U.S. and around the world, but creativity and innovation are the things that really made this country great...greed is actually destroying economies around the world, including the U.S.

You apparently think that greed/profit are the reasons to pursue a dream; you have my sympathies.

P.S. tried to find an early interview with Mr. Yamaki in this forum about his fathers dream, without success. Maybe others who are a little more aware of the history/background/dream of Mr. Yamaki's father can chime in/provide a link in so you have a better appreciation for the motivations behind Sigma camera development (image quality being the ultimate goal), but even with that info I'm guessing you still won't get it. :-(
Click to expand...
Edison, electrocuted dogs in public squares, calling it “Westinghousing” them, to try to gain a competitive edge.
Click to expand...
A Little more to that story:

"Hastings found a willing ally in Harold P. Brown. A consulting engineer who had somehow been double-crossed by Westinghouse Electric, Brown was eager for revenge. With the blessing of the Edison managers, Brown organized demonstrations for reporters at Edison’s laboratory in West Orange, New Jersey, in which stray dogs were electrocuted using Westinghouse Electric AC equipment."

Scroll down to "battle of the currents"

Battle of the Currents

And another link with the same info:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_currents
Doppler9000 said:
Nikolai Tesla quit as Edison’s apprentice not only because Edison cheated him out of $50,000, but Tesla felt “soiled ” by Edison’s greed.

If you look a little more objectively, you will likely see that innovation and the profit motive are inextricably linked. Innovation without commercialization changes nothing - or do you have counter-examples?
Click to expand...
DaVinci Perhaps.

This might be an interesting read, but if its not in your DNA to be able to appreciate it, nothing anyone can say will change your thinking.

https://eightysixfourhundred.com/motivated-by-money/

Bon Chance, Mike
 
… J. Michael: The issue is not about greed, or how well a company treats it’s employees.

… It is about influence and advancing photographic technology. The truth is that, aside from a very small circle of quite technical photographers, Sigma has failed on both these accounts.

… Tragic really. A brilliant and unique innovation insufficiently developed and poorly marketed.
 
J. Michael said:
Doppler9000 said:
J. Michael said:
Iain G Foulds said:
(snip) major international company like Sigma..... is a massive failure.
Click to expand...
??????????
Click to expand...
Your ellipsis is pretty dishonest, and your resulting puzzlement even moreso.
J. Michael said:
Before Thomas Edison discovered tungsten for use as a filament for light bulbs a lot of people thought he was a failure also.

Creativity, innovation, and curiosity are the things that motivate some people, and Mr Yamaki's father always wanted to be a quality camera maker, and his son has made a commitment to carry on the dream. Sigma supposedly takes good care of its employees (unlike like a lot of american corporations) and spends what it can on camera development without sacrificing its overall financial success.

Greed may be the most prevalent motivator, in the U.S. and around the world, but creativity and innovation are the things that really made this country great...greed is actually destroying economies around the world, including the U.S.

You apparently think that greed/profit are the reasons to pursue a dream; you have my sympathies.

P.S. tried to find an early interview with Mr. Yamaki in this forum about his fathers dream, without success. Maybe others who are a little more aware of the history/background/dream of Mr. Yamaki's father can chime in/provide a link in so you have a better appreciation for the motivations behind Sigma camera development (image quality being the ultimate goal), but even with that info I'm guessing you still won't get it. :-(
Click to expand...
Edison, electrocuted dogs in public squares, calling it “Westinghousing” them, to try to gain a competitive edge.
Click to expand...
A Little more to that story:

"Hastings found a willing ally in Harold P. Brown. A consulting engineer who had somehow been double-crossed by Westinghouse Electric, Brown was eager for revenge. With the blessing of the Edison managers, Brown organized demonstrations for reporters at Edison’s laboratory in West Orange, New Jersey, in which stray dogs were electrocuted using Westinghouse Electric AC equipment."

Scroll down to "battle of the currents"

Battle of the Currents

And another link with the same info:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_currents
Click to expand...
Is this intended to show that Edison was driven by something other than profit?
J. Michael said:
J. Michael said:
Nikolai Tesla quit as Edison’s apprentice not only because Edison cheated him out of $50,000, but Tesla felt “soiled ” by Edison’s greed.

If you look a little more objectively, you will likely see that innovation and the profit motive are inextricably linked. Innovation without commercialization changes nothing - or do you have counter-examples?
Click to expand...
DaVinci Perhaps.
Click to expand...
I can certainly appreciate DaVinci. Not sure there was a lot of commercialization of his designs, however. Where do you suppose the money that funded DaVinci came from?
J. Michael said:
This might be an interesting read, but if its not in your DNA to be able to appreciate it, nothing anyone can say will change your thinking.

https://eightysixfourhundred.com/motivated-by-money/

Bon Chance, Mike
Click to expand...
How about some actual examples? You know, evidence, that supports your position, instead of the snide morally-superior dismissal and a link to a fluff piece on true happiness.
 
xpatUSA said:
D Cox said:
Scottelly said:
rick decker said:
.... high ISO [] is the main reason I got an FP ....
Click to expand...
Low-ISO image quality is the most important thing ....
Click to expand...
As motion blur is the biggest problem for image quality ...

... I think that ISO 800 image quality is the most important thing ...
Click to expand...
Interesting variations of opinion. Pardon the snipping of their context!

As a shooter mostly of static stuff in reasonable light, I prefer not to under-expose the sensor by 3EV or more.

My Sigma remains set permanently to 100 ISO and, should I ever need more, the DC-G9 awaits ...
Click to expand...
The DP3M gives its best results at ISO 200. At 100, clipped highlights are much too common. This is for outdoor scenes: in controlled studio lighting, 100 is OK and of course has slightly less noise.

Even 200 isn't always high enough to avoid unrecoverable highlights on cars and PVC window frames.

Don
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
Petapixel article on the current state of the FFF.
Replies
18
Views
5K
Ceistinne
Ceistinne
xpatUSA
A Foveon-bash from PetaPixel ...
2
Replies
23
Views
186
xpatUSA
xpatUSA
xpatUSA
Buy a Sigma Camera? ...
Replies
16
Views
17
Scottelly
Scottelly
M
Convert Sigma X3F raws to Leica Monochrome S-DNGs with C1 & LightRoom support?
Replies
12
Views
322
Miriquidi
M
jtr27
Nikon’s Hybrid Sensor Patent Describes a Selective Global Shutter (Petapixel)
Replies
12
Views
1K
Krummj
Krummj

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