Please Sigma: focus on what is increasing your sales!

[sniper5]

Hi,

since now the first wish-lists of some users are published for Photokina 2012, I also would like to add my 2 cents...

Dear Sigma,

please focus on what brings you fast more sales. This will be NOT a new model or new features. Just read what Sigma users complain about.

In 99% of the cases, it has to do with the image editing of the RAW files. So PLEASE do not try to reinvent the wheel. Just work more closely with Adobe!

As soon as LR4 is able to handle the Sigma files better, you will sell immediately more cameras. And this without investing huge $$

This will kill the Sigma colour problems, high ISO problems, speed problems in SPP image editing and it will open a huge market of photographers for you, who will never buy a camera, if it is not supported by Adobe.

You are not loosing your face, if you cooperate with Adobe. You will win in all areas you could hope for. And you will make a lot more money while making Sigma customers happy

So pleeeeeeaaaaase. You can sure do better than Canon and Nikon, do you?

 

[pixtorial]

Because, of course, the entire world uses Lightroom and only Lightroom.

i guess I better delete AfterShot, RawDeveloper, and Aperture from my Mac right away.

Your argument starts off great, pointing out that the post-processing experience is a crucial part of any professional photog workflow. Then you sink it by making it sound like Adobe would be the one and only savior.

How about publishing an SDK that allows any RAW processing publisher to effectively integrate Sigma's RAW format into their product and workflow? That would indeed be a win-win.

Adobe, for the record, will never invest any meaningful R&D into solving Sigma's post processing challenges, there is simply no return available on that investment at the scale they would consider as relevant. One of the smaller publishers is actually more likely to tackle those problems as they would gain more from adoption by the Sigma community (as a potentially larger percentage of their user base).

Also, I would be curious how many professional and serious amateur photographers have ever chosen a camera based on whether or not Adobe supports it.

Hi,

since now the first wish-lists of some users are published for Photokina 2012, I also would like to add my 2 cents...

Dear Sigma,

please focus on what brings you fast more sales. This will be NOT a new model or new features. Just read what Sigma users complain about.

In 99% of the cases, it has to do with the image editing of the RAW files. So PLEASE do not try to reinvent the wheel. Just work more closely with Adobe!

As soon as LR4 is able to handle the Sigma files better, you will sell immediately more cameras. And this without investing huge $$

This will kill the Sigma colour problems, high ISO problems, speed problems in SPP image editing and it will open a huge market of photographers for you, who will never buy a camera, if it is not supported by Adobe.

You are not loosing your face, if you cooperate with Adobe. You will win in all areas you could hope for. And you will make a lot more money while making Sigma customers happy

So pleeeeeeaaaaase. You can sure do better than Canon and Nikon, do you?

 

[JLK]

Every time I bring this up with my friend at Foveon, he's very tight-lipped about the whole situation.

I'm pretty sure that Foveon/Sigma is more than happy to collaborate and share code with Adobe.

I'm also remembering that there was an issue with licensing and the True signal processors (I can't remember if that's a hitachi part).

My impression is that this is not strictly a Sigma/Foveon issue. It would be great if they could get more general support for the raw (for example, in Mac OSX), but I'm not holding my breath.

--
Jim

 

[jrdigitalart]

Also, I would be curious how many professional and serious amateur photographers have ever chosen a camera based on whether or not Adobe supports it.

I'll be the first to put my hand up.

--
Sincere regards, Jim Roelofs

Cherish your privacy? Avoid (sp)iPhones.

 

[SandyF]

I agree that the editing ... and batteries... are the two greatest issues at present with the DP2M cameras (and probably forthcoming DP1M as well as SD1(M).

've spent HOURS today, all day, and much of this past weekend, working through my megaGBs of photos from California... and I haven't gotten very far.

While each photo doesn't take that horribly long to edit, the aggregate of many photos really adds up in time spent. I feel that each needs to be edited, not batch edited, as the 'color' and settings do seem to vary a lot photo to photo (as does previous Sigma/Foveon cameras' output). I would hate to have to edit hundreds of these photos professionally, on a daily basis, say from weddings, product or architectural shots, or other mass output.
Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (current, DP2Merrill new photos)

PS: I don't care WHO or what company makes the software... but it needs to work on PC.. I don't do Apple ;-)

Also note I've found that Canon software/RAW processor Digital Photo Pro works nicely on SDIM JPEGs or TIFFs to straighten and crop those crooked horizons. I have a lot of wild horizons both Canon and Sigma from my holding cameras non-level or on my monopod... I used mostly monopod in CA rather than lightweight tripod which I also brought along.. It wasn't steady enough in the wind plus it's not a nice walking stick as is my mono- !

 

[pixtorial]

Fair enough, count one as "aye", and me (certainly not a pro but since I posed the question I get to answer LOL) as a "nay"

Also, I would be curious how many professional and serious amateur photographers have ever chosen a camera based on whether or not Adobe supports it.

I'll be the first to put my hand up.

--
Sincere regards, Jim Roelofs

Cherish your privacy? Avoid (sp)iPhones.

 

[sniper5]

I guess we can agree on the fact that LR / PS has the biggest market share in the photo editing industry. So it would make sense to have as priority #1 the focus on a cooperation with them.

Read the review at LL about the DP2M. michael sais there clearly that it is up to Sigma for SD support in LR. Adobe would be interested in....

And yes, except for my Sigma cameras, I would never buy a camera which is not supported by Adobe.

Too much time is wasted in editing pictures. Either a camera is supporting my way of workflow and preferred editing software, or I simply do not buy it. There are too many good alternatives in DSLRs out there nowadays. A camera shall make my life easier, not worse

Would you buy a PC, which is not able to use MS Word?

i guess I better delete AfterShot, RawDeveloper, and Aperture from my Mac right away.

Your argument starts off great, pointing out that the post-processing experience is a crucial part of any professional photog workflow. Then you sink it by making it sound like Adobe would be the one and only savior.

How about publishing an SDK that allows any RAW processing publisher to effectively integrate Sigma's RAW format into their product and workflow? That would indeed be a win-win.

Adobe, for the record, will never invest any meaningful R&D into solving Sigma's post processing challenges, there is simply no return available on that investment at the scale they would consider as relevant. One of the smaller publishers is actually more likely to tackle those problems as they would gain more from adoption by the Sigma community (as a potentially larger percentage of their user base).

Also, I would be curious how many professional and serious amateur photographers have ever chosen a camera based on whether or not Adobe supports it.

Hi,

since now the first wish-lists of some users are published for Photokina 2012, I also would like to add my 2 cents...

Dear Sigma,

please focus on what brings you fast more sales. This will be NOT a new model or new features. Just read what Sigma users complain about.

In 99% of the cases, it has to do with the image editing of the RAW files. So PLEASE do not try to reinvent the wheel. Just work more closely with Adobe!

As soon as LR4 is able to handle the Sigma files better, you will sell immediately more cameras. And this without investing huge $$

This will kill the Sigma colour problems, high ISO problems, speed problems in SPP image editing and it will open a huge market of photographers for you, who will never buy a camera, if it is not supported by Adobe.

You are not loosing your face, if you cooperate with Adobe. You will win in all areas you could hope for. And you will make a lot more money while making Sigma customers happy

So pleeeeeeaaaaase. You can sure do better than Canon and Nikon, do you?

 

[pixtorial]

Yes we can certainly agree on that, and in honesty my post was aimed at making counterpoint more than any religious statement (thus the fact that Lightroom is my primary DAM platform on Windows 7). I do find use for other RAW converters though, often for specific features that don't exist in the CameraRAW engine (examples would be the very detailed collection of individual adjustments found in RAW Developer that can be used for fine tuning or correcting gross problems that Lightroom cannot handle as easily).

The rest of this thread hints at some interesting ideas though, such as perhaps Sigma is limited by patent licensing or other agreements that prevent it from disclosing specific technical details that a software company would need to improve upon the interpretation of Foveon data.

Finally, as for the "would you buy a camera that Lightroom didn't support", I personally would, but a professional invested in a specific workflow? Probably not and for good reason.

Thanks for the thoughtful debate!

I guess we can agree on the fact that LR / PS has the biggest market share in the photo editing industry. So it would make sense to have as priority #1 the focus on a cooperation with them.

Read the review at LL about the DP2M. michael sais there clearly that it is up to Sigma for SD support in LR. Adobe would be interested in....

And yes, except for my Sigma cameras, I would never buy a camera which is not supported by Adobe.

Too much time is wasted in editing pictures. Either a camera is supporting my way of workflow and preferred editing software, or I simply do not buy it. There are too many good alternatives in DSLRs out there nowadays. A camera shall make my life easier, not worse

Would you buy a PC, which is not able to use MS Word?

i guess I better delete AfterShot, RawDeveloper, and Aperture from my Mac right away.

Your argument starts off great, pointing out that the post-processing experience is a crucial part of any professional photog workflow. Then you sink it by making it sound like Adobe would be the one and only savior.

How about publishing an SDK that allows any RAW processing publisher to effectively integrate Sigma's RAW format into their product and workflow? That would indeed be a win-win.

Adobe, for the record, will never invest any meaningful R&D into solving Sigma's post processing challenges, there is simply no return available on that investment at the scale they would consider as relevant. One of the smaller publishers is actually more likely to tackle those problems as they would gain more from adoption by the Sigma community (as a potentially larger percentage of their user base).

Also, I would be curious how many professional and serious amateur photographers have ever chosen a camera based on whether or not Adobe supports it.

Hi,

since now the first wish-lists of some users are published for Photokina 2012, I also would like to add my 2 cents...

Dear Sigma,

please focus on what brings you fast more sales. This will be NOT a new model or new features. Just read what Sigma users complain about.

In 99% of the cases, it has to do with the image editing of the RAW files. So PLEASE do not try to reinvent the wheel. Just work more closely with Adobe!

As soon as LR4 is able to handle the Sigma files better, you will sell immediately more cameras. And this without investing huge $$

This will kill the Sigma colour problems, high ISO problems, speed problems in SPP image editing and it will open a huge market of photographers for you, who will never buy a camera, if it is not supported by Adobe.

You are not loosing your face, if you cooperate with Adobe. You will win in all areas you could hope for. And you will make a lot more money while making Sigma customers happy

So pleeeeeeaaaaase. You can sure do better than Canon and Nikon, do you?

 

[Pete Stavrakoglou]

I guess we can agree on the fact that LR / PS has the biggest market share in the photo editing industry. So it would make sense to have as priority #1 the focus on a cooperation with them.

Read the review at LL about the DP2M. michael sais there clearly that it is up to Sigma for SD support in LR. Adobe would be interested in....

And yes, except for my Sigma cameras, I would never buy a camera which is not supported by Adobe.

Too much time is wasted in editing pictures. Either a camera is supporting my way of workflow and preferred editing software, or I simply do not buy it. There are too many good alternatives in DSLRs out there nowadays. A camera shall make my life easier, not worse

Would you buy a PC, which is not able to use MS Word?

As long as it WordPerfect can run on it, why not?
--
My humble photo gallery: http://www.pete-the-greek.com

 

[SandyF]

I've had it, it's past midnight ET. My final photo for tonight is online at http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann
see the detail in largest (original) size on flickr



also note the comparative detail of sea lions at Bird Rock photo (SDIM0366) vis-a-vis the Canon shots...

Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (current, new DP2Merrill photos)

 

[Hornbrille]

I don't agree with you. Sigma doesn't make cameras to sell Adobe software and this is good.

I would prefer a standalone in-camera solution for Raw developing. Why buying a new computer and software when the camera already has it built in?

 

[sniper5]

I don't agree with you. Sigma doesn't make cameras to sell Adobe software and this is good.

I would prefer a standalone in-camera solution for Raw developing. Why buying a new computer and software when the camera already has it built in?

Sorry, but history showed us, that you are wrong. Sigma will never be able to develop a software as poswerful as LR4 or Aperture or xyz. As long as Sigma does not accept that, they are dreaming. Same dream as the price tag of over 9000 USD for teh SD1...

We saw this in the past already with Contax. Kyocera (producer of Contax DSLRs) was a dreamer and thought they need to do everything themselves. Kind of arrogant´behaviour. So they added a horrible RAW software with the Contax ND (the first fullframe DSLR in the world by the way), and the results have been so bad, that nobody wanted to have that camera.

BUT as soon as Adobe offered support for the Contax ND (Ithink around 2 years later), sales increased, because the people saw, what this camera was able to deliver, if used with the better RAW converter. But it was already too late at thet time for Contax...

So Sigma should look what other Japanese companies did wrong and try not to repeat the same mistakes.

 

[abarth]

I absolutely agree about the lightroom support - it's vital.

Anyway, I'm such a sucker, that I'm going to buy the DP1m regardless. Ever since my DP1 broke, I looked at every possible camera as a replacement, but nothing could convince me IQ-wise.

 

[Hornbrille]

You are simplifying. Even Leica isn't in the ownership of it's founders anymore as Contax wasn't at the time of the Contax ND. Sigma still is and there is a reason for that. Staying in business is never achieved by maximizing profit but by finding balance.

Concerning Sigma software (SPP) I'm still not convinced that better image quality from properly exposed x3f can be yielded with any other program.

 

[sniper5]

Hornbrille wrote:
...

Concerning Sigma software (SPP) I'm still not convinced that better image quality from properly exposed x3f can be yielded with any other program.

This is why I think that Sigma should cooperate with Adobe.

If Sigma would exchange their know-how of developing the SD RAW files with i.e. Adobe and Adobe in exchange opens all Sigma users the power of the most powerful photo-editing softwares, then this would be a win-win situation.

It is a waste of money and time, if Sigma tries stubbern to do all by themselves.

This helps nobody. neither Sigma, because SPP is real so basic and slow, that you only can use it for converting the RAW files into TIFF, if you need a serious workflow for more than 10 images a day, nor does it help the Sigma users.

Let's be honest, we would all die for editing capabilities of LR4 within SPP. But reality is, that it only can happen the other way around: SPP RAW conversion capabilities within LR.

Sigma is not a software developer. Adobe is. Sigma is first of all a lens producer and then has a tiny almost non-existent market share with their Sigma mount system.

So it is time to sit down, take a deep breath and think twice, what the best is to do to have longterm success for Sigma SA mount.

 

[Erik Magnuson]

So pleeeeeeaaaaase. You can sure do better than Canon and Nikon, do you?

Hmm, do Canon and Nikon cooperate with Adobe? If they did, you'd think that Adobe updates would ship at the same time as the new cameras. But it takes a while -- almost as if Adobe has to acquire the cameras and do the work themselves. Sometimes there is a beta that suggests Adobe may have gotten a pre-production camera to profile, but full support always seems to lag.

--
Erik

 

[sniper5]

So pleeeeeeaaaaase. You can sure do better than Canon and Nikon, do you?

Hmm, do Canon and Nikon cooperate with Adobe? If they did, you'd think that Adobe updates would ship at the same time as the new cameras. But it takes a while -- almost as if Adobe has to acquire the cameras and do the work themselves. Sometimes there is a beta that suggests Adobe may have gotten a pre-production camera to profile, but full support always seems to lag.

--
Erik

Yes, that is why I wrote Sigma could do it better than these two. Additionally Nikon tries to hold back some information of their RAW information, so that tjier own software has an advantage...

 

[boothrp]

Dear Sigma,

please focus on what brings you fast more sales. This will be NOT a new model or new features. Just read what Sigma users complain about.

In 99% of the cases, it has to do with the image editing of the RAW files. So PLEASE do not try to reinvent the wheel. Just work more closely with Adobe!

As soon as LR4 is able to handle the Sigma files better, you will sell immediately more cameras. And this without investing huge $$

Post processing is the last thing on my mind when choosing a camera. If the DP1M had an EVF and better high ISO performance, I would be more likely to buy one than a Fujifilm X100.

I have a DP1 and SD14 and have only ever used SPP, shooting raw and batch processing in auto mode as the results from SPP are better than in camera JPEG.

Sometimes when one person has a really strong opinion on something, it makes so much sense to them that they believe everybody else has the same opinion, a bit like a politician.

My photography is pretty much done when I've pressed the shutter, not after I've tweaked the hell out of the image.
--

A well taken picture matters most, gear that's capable of great image quality is nice to have, but it amounts to nothing if you haven't got it with you.