How can Sigma make sure the FFF is the best success it can be? Locked

knoxphoto wrote:

IMO .x3f and SPP have to go, DNG with 3rd party software is the only way forward. It also makes the alliance with Panasonic/Leica make more sense for L mount users.

I've owned/used every version of the layered Foveon X3 sensor since the SD-14. Unpopular opinion, but the magic of those sensors exists more on the computer screen than in actual prints. And yes, I've printed Foveon-captured images from post-card size to billboard size. They look great, no complaints, however, clients/galleries are just as happy with prints made for similar resolution Bayer sensors with good glass.

To be honest, the Sony-made sensors in the FP/L bodies are so good, I don't really care if they release another Foveon X3 sensor camera. I'd prefer to have the FP/L sensors in an SL2/S style body with a Sigma badge for half the price of the Leica-branded versions. I think that would be the game changer the brand needs if they want to sell camera bodies and not just lenses.

Otherwise, it sounds like we'll be getting another obscure sensor in a modular body that half the user base will love, and half will hate.

Flame away.

LOL

I won't flame you, but I will say that you have some good points and a bad idea. Only Sigma will know, once they have made their FFF, if all the work was worth it, but I believe that if they continue with the FFF sensor, and upgrade it, they will indeed eventually have a medium format competitor, like they did with the SD1.

I know some will argue that the SD1 was not a medium format competitor, but it WAS indeed a medium format competitor, just as the Nikon D3X was. In fact I saw videos of several high-end photographers shooting with Nikon D3X cameras back then, and that's because their medium format cameras were slow and heavy. The Nikon D3x was quick and nimble. The Sigma SD1 was even faster though (at shooting . . . to a limit), and it had the advantage of having an APS-C size sensor. Unfortunately it didn't have a big enough raw shooting buffer (unfortunately Sigma did not realize they needed to make the buffer hold lots of raw files, like the SD 15 could . . . I don't know why . . . I just couldn't fathom why they would step back to the SD 14 level of buffer memory capacity). Other than its fast shooting speed, which was faster than the Nikon D3X, the Sigma SD1 was king of resolution in the affordable DSLR world . . . but without the range of lenses Nikon had, and without the large buffer or fast image processing the Nikon had, the SD1 could not break into the market the medium format users inhabited, and Nikon got the lion's share of business from those customers. In time, when Sigma lowered the price, and rebadged the SD1 to SD1 Merrill, people started to buy them, but it took quite a long time for Sigma to sell them all. That may have actually been a good thing in some ways, because it meant Sigma had cameras in both the DSLR and mirrorless categories at one point, when the SD Quattro was on the market, and the SD1 Merrill was still on the market too.

I can see a Quattro version of the FFF with 80 MP on the top layer and 20 MP on each of the middle and bottom layers. That's what Sigma would call a 120 MP sensor, but it would perform close to how a 160 MP CFA would, in my opinion. This is why I keep talking about Sigma "Quattrifying" the FFF eventually . . . maybe right after they make the 20 MP per layer FFF or maybe after they upgrade that to a 30 MP per layer sensor. I see a long, quite possibly prosperous future for Sigma with the three-layer sensors. I think they will add something to L mount that no other competitor will have to offer, and I believe that ultimately that will play a part in L mount becoming the dominant system in the world of interchangeable lens cameras. I do think Panasonic needs to hurry up and introduce some new cameras though. I also hope Sigma will hurry up too, because I'd really like to see the FFF.