The next Foveon camera?

Doppler9000 wrote:

tarmov wrote:

The market has not dictated anything within the Foveon market niche. None of the Bayer cameras produce satisfactory outcomes for Foveon fans.

On what do you base your assertion? I find the output I get from Bayer-sensor cameras has taken away any need for Foveon-sensor cameras and their manifold downsides.

You have yet to give evidence that you are or have ever been a Foveon fan.

And if you were and have stopped being a fan, then I suggest you have your eyes checked. Eyesight usually gets worse with age, mine has got worse but I still discern subjective Foveon superiority in image quality just as I did 10 years ago. 2nd suggestion would be checking your screen quality. I have a 30-inch 2560x1600 VA screen with 3000:1 contrast and a 32-inch 2560x1440 IPS screen. I also have a 4k TV, a 3-year old Samsung VA (QLED).

And as I wrote earlier my conclusions were based on the condition that IF Sigma manages to market a new Foveon camera comparable to what it did with Merrill and with Quattro.

I am an amateur photographer and have so far invested 1000 EUR to my Sigma DP2 Merrill + 100-200 EUR for batteries and lense and flash. And have made 2 large prints (one 165x103cm on aluminum) and maybe 10-20 medium size prints between A2-A3, mostly for myself.

If there ever were a public attempt at group decision making on the viability of a new Foveon Full Frame camera, then I have already suggested that the decision models from professionals and from amateurs should be sampled separately. There should also be separate subsamples for active Foveon camera gear users and former users and non-users. I don't know which group would suit you best.

If you want some irrefutable objective evidence, then the best I can give is what I have already given - the observation that horizontal pixel level jpeg compression ratio is much lower in Foveon cameras and still much higher in Bayer cameras (even at full frame and medium format). Up to half of the difference of jpeg compression ratios is likely due to higher Foveon noise. Some is due to subjectively excessive (?) microsharpening with the SPP Fill parameter. Some additional difference in jpeg compression ratios can be produced in SPP with excessive saturation and with some deliberate (artistic) shifting of white balance.

An interesting comparison might be shooting black images with the lens cap on and then saving it as jpeg and then comparing pixel level jpeg compression ratios.

Given all of the things you don’t know, how, as an expert in decision analysis, can you make declarative statements like this?

If Sigma manages an 8k Merrill or a 10k Quattro in a full frame format, then either of those would be a success within its existing niche market segment.

For someone who claims rigorous decision analysis skills, you certainly make a lot of declarative assertions with no evidence and no logical support.

My "assertion" was conditional.

-Tarmo