I heard this today. Gave me goose bumps...Anybody else heard
anything about this? Ann C
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Rumor: Sony is going to make a Fovean camera... true?
- Thread starter Ann Chaikin
- Start date
Jimmy Chen
Senior Member
While I do not disagree that those 100% crops can give us a good idea of what the sensor can do, but it wont be until the sensor goes thru its paces with a much wider set of test photos in order for us to determine if the sensor can deliver on all different aspects. Point being, many cameras today shows excellent aspect on some areas, but falls short on others. The can happen to a sensor.
--
jc
F707 w/ Nikon 5T/6T
http://www.reefkeepers.org/gallery/f707
http://www.reeftec.com/gallery
The following quoted section comes from computeruser.com:
http://www.computeruser.com/articles/2105,3,1,1,0501,02.html
The Foveon complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) chip emulates the retina of a human eye. The eye contains millions of combinations of three cones, each taking in red, green, or blue with a slight overlap. Foveon cofounder Richard Lyon mined National Semiconductor's rich IP database, mostly created and stashed away by chip giant Richard Merrill, to find a CMOS chip that could be fabricated to emulate the analog human retina in digital silicon. The resulting chip is better, cheaper to manufacture, cooler, and it consumes less power than CCD chips on the market. And Foveon can build all the mechanical components of the camera (F-stop, autofocus, ISO number, etc.) into the silicon. The result is a solid-state camera that can process images as either still or full-motion. It is an artificial eye that can scale up to 300 megapixels--50 times the amount of data the human eye can receive.
The plan is for Foveon to use National Semiconductor's chip fabs to create and sell the chips to such big camera companies as Sony, which is currently the No. 1 photo CCD chip manufacturer. Rumor has it that every camera company is scrambling for the chips, which should be in full production later this year. We should see Foveon-based cameras just in time for the Christmas season (Beth, honey, are you reading this?). But don't expect cheap models until the camera companies can get their Foveon-based models up to full production. Bargain hunters will be able to nab current 6-megapixel field cameras for 4-megapixel point-and-shoot prices once the Foveon-based cameras are widely available.
The prototype chips are already out there. Foveon has had chips in high-end camera backs for some time. Foveon's 16-megapixel X3 image sensor recently won the CeBIT Highlights 2002 Innovation Award--one of the most prestigious technology awards of the year. It is said to produce life-sized images that are eerily lifelike.
Foveon will truly change photography for good. No longer will taking photographs require any skill beyond an understanding of composition and lighting. Digital photography will become the standard by which film-based photography is judged. Film-based photography will still be practiced, just as painting is still practiced. But there will never be a need for film outside the realm of hobbyists. And I'll never again wonder about the color realism of my digital photographs.
http://www.computeruser.com/articles/2105,3,1,1,0501,02.html
The Foveon complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) chip emulates the retina of a human eye. The eye contains millions of combinations of three cones, each taking in red, green, or blue with a slight overlap. Foveon cofounder Richard Lyon mined National Semiconductor's rich IP database, mostly created and stashed away by chip giant Richard Merrill, to find a CMOS chip that could be fabricated to emulate the analog human retina in digital silicon. The resulting chip is better, cheaper to manufacture, cooler, and it consumes less power than CCD chips on the market. And Foveon can build all the mechanical components of the camera (F-stop, autofocus, ISO number, etc.) into the silicon. The result is a solid-state camera that can process images as either still or full-motion. It is an artificial eye that can scale up to 300 megapixels--50 times the amount of data the human eye can receive.
The plan is for Foveon to use National Semiconductor's chip fabs to create and sell the chips to such big camera companies as Sony, which is currently the No. 1 photo CCD chip manufacturer. Rumor has it that every camera company is scrambling for the chips, which should be in full production later this year. We should see Foveon-based cameras just in time for the Christmas season (Beth, honey, are you reading this?). But don't expect cheap models until the camera companies can get their Foveon-based models up to full production. Bargain hunters will be able to nab current 6-megapixel field cameras for 4-megapixel point-and-shoot prices once the Foveon-based cameras are widely available.
The prototype chips are already out there. Foveon has had chips in high-end camera backs for some time. Foveon's 16-megapixel X3 image sensor recently won the CeBIT Highlights 2002 Innovation Award--one of the most prestigious technology awards of the year. It is said to produce life-sized images that are eerily lifelike.
Foveon will truly change photography for good. No longer will taking photographs require any skill beyond an understanding of composition and lighting. Digital photography will become the standard by which film-based photography is judged. Film-based photography will still be practiced, just as painting is still practiced. But there will never be a need for film outside the realm of hobbyists. And I'll never again wonder about the color realism of my digital photographs.
The Fovean test samples I've seen are far superior to any other CCD I've seen in color reproduction, sharpness, resolution, and noise, even with image size reduction with jpeg compression. These test shots cover landscapes, portraits, close-ups, vivid colors and B&W. So I'm curious: what other sensor aspect are you thinking of that the Fovean test photos don't cover?
Jim
Jim
P
phlewt
Guest
Well no wonder you found something and I didn't -- I was looking in clarinet magazines (e.g., http://www.windplayer.com/ ) and not "computer" magazines. Silly me.
phlewt
phlewt
David_S85
Senior Member
Really? I guess this will drastically reduce the space needed in libraries for photography books and magazines. Camera stores could reduce their floor space by 70%.
Community colleges might as well fire but one teacher for the photographic arts, since only one or two classes will need to be taught. Most everybody will be able to be a pro photographer, just by understanding the basics. Or is Foveon going to work on those aspects too?
Maybe Phil should get another job as well, since Foveon will just take care of everything eventually.
Geez. I hope you, or whoever was quoted on the above, were only kidding.
- David
Surely you jest! Why would reducing skill reduce space in libraries? That doesn't even make sense.
I see nothing unreasonable about that quote at all. Digital photography has already reduced the skill level.
However, skill does not equal art and regardless of how good a sensor is, people will still take boring and uninteresting photos. Understanding lighting and composition will always be important. It appears to me that by making photography easier through better sensors, electronics and software, it might actually spur more people to take photos. This should actually increase the demand for books, and photography courses.
Jim
I see nothing unreasonable about that quote at all. Digital photography has already reduced the skill level.
However, skill does not equal art and regardless of how good a sensor is, people will still take boring and uninteresting photos. Understanding lighting and composition will always be important. It appears to me that by making photography easier through better sensors, electronics and software, it might actually spur more people to take photos. This should actually increase the demand for books, and photography courses.
Jim
Jimmy Chen
Senior Member
A good observation based on those limited sample set.
Have you seen a full range of samples based on the full ISO range the CCD is able to produce? Why did Simga asked Phil to remove the ISO 800 from the spec? Why did the camera limited the ISO to 400 when the spec says it can do 800?
Contax did the same thing with the N1, and look at what kind of shots it produces at higher ISOs.
--
jc
F707 w/ Nikon 5T/6T
http://www.reefkeepers.org/gallery/f707
http://www.reeftec.com/gallery
Limited in what sense?
I haven't seen photos of the full ISO range of any camera, including the F707. What does that have to do with anything? Are you suggesting that the Fovean CCD will be inferior in this respect to any of the present CCDs? What evidence do you present?
Maybe because Sigma made engineering mistakes in incorporating the Fovean sensor? Perhaps because it doesn't need to go to ISO 800 to get better quality than other CCDs at ISO 800? Maybe because shooting at ISO 800 only equals the best CCDs at present and Sigma wants to show its superior shots? Maybe for the same reason that other camera manufacturers don't advertise photos with their grainiest ISO settings? Maybe because the inferior Simga lens makes shooting at ISO 800 impracticable? Who knows.
What in the world does that have to do with the Fovean sensor?
Daniel Jackson
Senior Member
No, that would be the 1st Michael Jackson concert on Mars!I heard this today. Gave me goose bumps...
anything about this? Ann C
--
also known as PT Kitty > ^..^
http://www.pbase.com/ptkitty/galleries
--
Scotty, I need more power! I'm givin it all she's got Jim!
http://www.pbase.com/daniel_jackson/root
Jimmy Chen
Senior Member
You just answered your own question. Btw, Phil does test for noise levels at different ISO setting.
Lots of maybes, and not one test result to show any of it to be true or false.
Why did Contax downgraded their ISO? Why is Sigma doing the same? Maybe, LOL, another one here, that the sensor just cannot produce the same "limited quality samples" you have seen at a higher ISO.
--
jc
F707 w/ Nikon 5T/6T
http://www.reefkeepers.org/gallery/f707
http://www.reeftec.com/gallery
I purchased the F707 based on Phil's review. Where does he show examples of the F707 at ISO 800?
Bingo. Precisely my point. You have not given any evidence that the Fovean is worse at ISO 800 than other sensors.
I have evidence that the Fovean is superior to other sensors, yet you give me nothing but maybes.
Jiim
Erik Stiegler
Forum Enthusiast
The sky will be bluer, the grass greener, birds will sing again, children will laugh again and a new era of peace and prosperity for the entire human race will dawn.
Nah, but the Fovean sensor (or perhaps an even better technology) will eventually arrive so we can take pictures of blue skies, green grass, singing birds, laughing children, and a new era of war and destruction brought on by the pessimists. ;-)
Jim
Jim
U
Ulysses
Guest
Heheheh... with an example like, I honestly can't fault you. Seriously.
However, I trust Phil. He's not the hypster type at all.
--
Ulysses
U
Ulysses
Guest
I hate to say this about my once beloved Contax (sniff), but they were dead before they got out of the gate. They're using tech that is years old. Shame on them.
This is not the same thing as what Foveon is demonstrating. I'd continue to submit that the samples we see, at 100% crop are fairly representative of the leaps that this sensor is going to make.
The fact that we just want to see full-size and complete images doesn't change the observations and what we've seen in the cropped images ourselves.
Ulysses
This is not the same thing as what Foveon is demonstrating. I'd continue to submit that the samples we see, at 100% crop are fairly representative of the leaps that this sensor is going to make.
The fact that we just want to see full-size and complete images doesn't change the observations and what we've seen in the cropped images ourselves.
--
Ulysses
U
Ulysses
Guest
Hahahahahahahah....
Man, I had that one marked the day that Phil and others announced it. I couldn't for the life of me figure out the reason for its existence. --g--
Ulysses
Man, I had that one marked the day that Phil and others announced it. I couldn't for the life of me figure out the reason for its existence. --g--
--
Ulysses
U
Ulysses
Guest
Foveon = Paradise = Utopia = Shangrila = Oz = Never-Neverland = Home.
hahahahahahahahahahahah....
I wonder if they'll build a Solarize mode into it? :-]
Ulysses
hahahahahahahahahahahah....
I wonder if they'll build a Solarize mode into it? :-]
--
Ulysses
Jimmy Chen
Senior Member
LOL, since when did the F707 ever claimed they can do ISO 800? In the case of Sigma, they have. So to expect the F707 to be able to do ISO 800 is nonsense, but to allow Sigma to back down their own claims because they just cannot produce quality images using it is bogus.
Hahahaa, and they arent my points? You claim the X3 is better based on a lot of maybes. Please show me one crop of an ISO 800 shot of the X3. Guess what, you never saw one, so your conclusion is based on what you saw of the lower ISOs. You and I both know what a sensor or camera can do at ISO 100 does not automatically mean it is just as good at higher ISOs.
What evidence? Where are the ISO 800 shots? I would like to see some of them, any of them. How can you even claim the X3 is out right superior, when you have mfg'ers like Canon, Fuji, and Nikon that can do ISO 1000, 1200, and 1600? Maybe in the ISO 100 department, but the X3 cannot even take any photos at any of the higher ISOs. If that in itself is not telling you the sensor may have some light sensitivity issues, I dont know what else it can mean.
--
jc
F707 w/ Nikon 5T/6T
http://www.reefkeepers.org/gallery/f707
http://www.reeftec.com/gallery
You're the one who brought up ISO 800. I haven't the slightest interest in shooting at ISO 800, but you seem to think it's some kind of benchmark. You also seem to be hung up with Sigma for some reason. This topic is about Fovean and the possibility of Sony using their sensor.
But I'm curious. Where did you find that Sigma claims that their X3 camera can do ISO 800??
Jim
But I'm curious. Where did you find that Sigma claims that their X3 camera can do ISO 800??
Jim
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum