What would the FFF have to do in order to be competative?

dellaaa wrote:

Reading a recent post that included a 60M pixel Bayer sensor shot, the the discussion turned into a debate as to whether the FFF would ever arrive.

Looking at the Bayer photo what do you believe the FFF sensor would have to do better than the current generation of Bayer sensors? What are the design criteria the FFF design team have?

I don't know but given the physics of the design and the past Foveons, low light performance would most likely not be on par with the Bayer, agreed?

Historically, Sigmas have required extensive image processing both while taking the shot and afterwords (SPP). Will the FFF shoot at the frame rates of the current Bayers? Again, given the history, this seems doubtful.

So with low light and speed out of the equation, whats left, detail and color rendition.

As for detail, how would the specs of the proposed FFF stack up against the 60M plus Bayer sensors? Would the advantage in detail make up for the shortcoming?

Depends on what is meant by "detail", for which there are many definitions - mpstly subjective and vague.

Some time ago I compared my SD9 versus my G9. Based on MTF at Nyquist, the Foveon was quite superior ...

The remaining design [criterion], is color. Would Sigma's color rendition be enough for people to buy it?

I don't know and would like rational, opinions as just what will the FFF bring to the table, and why any non L mount people in 2023 would buy it when 100M pixel Bayers are on the horizon that take great low light picture at high frame rates.

At this point, fanboys aside, the fact that we are still discussing this seems a bit absurd to me, so why did I start this thread lol?.