What's the Rush?

[Leo FP6800 (USA)]

I'm extremely excited about the X3 technology, but this is only the first camera with it. And from what I have gathered, buying the Sigma with the X3 chips is like buying a Ford Escort with a Rolls Royce Engine. The X3 Chip is the thing people want, not the Sigma camera. Why did they do this?

I would be in line to get the first X3 camera if the chip was in a Sony, Kodak, Canon, Nikkon or Fuji, but a Sigma? I've never even heard of a Sigma until now.

Yes, I'm usually the guy who wants the first new hip toy to hit the shelves, but I also shop for quality and reputation. Therefore I see no value in the Signma/X3 package.

I'll wait for the X3 to hit historically more capable manufacturers.

Just my 2cents,
Leo

--

Leo, UVA E-School Class of 2002

 

[jdavis37]

People are excited about the foveon chip.. they have been waiting for quite a while and now the inital images from the SD9 is impressive as is the price tag.

Regarding Sigma, the company has been around for a long time, and ahve made decent even if unspectacular film SLRs for a while. How many Sony SLR cameras are int he market place? Your list had included Sony and I think they would be in even worse position than Sigma. Sigma makes a decent 3d party lens line and also a few 35 mm SLR bodies. Fuji is not a big player in the SLR world to my knowledge either.

All in all Sigma has positioned themselves well on this one. The foveon chip appears to be promising, and the price point is also seductive to many who have no major Nikon or Canon lens committments.

If this were a Nikon body or a Nikon lens mount, it would be even more seductive, new technology or not, and ISO 400 limitations or not. But for someone who enjoys taking pictures as a hobby only and has no major lens committments, the SD9 could easily be what the Dr called for.. somewhat affordable, seems ot require somewhat less post processing time than the Bayer sensors, and may actually be on the shelves in time for Christmas! Now get the 2nd rev Foveon in a Nikon body ( say goodbye to out of camera softness ) along with noise fre ISO 1600 and watch the sells skyrocket )) But in the mean time the SD9 and Foveon sensor truly are exciting! I've been struggling with which DSLR to buy all summer, trying to decide which camera had the least amount of shortcomings, etc and could not easily decide. The SD9 may in end win out even wiht it's shortcomings and given I can later convert my Sigma lenses to a Nikon or Canon mount it gets even better I've heard many times you are buying more than a body that you are buying inot a system and this is true. Least Sigma gives you the option to redo the mounts later if you decided on a Canon or Nikon body!

I'm extremely excited about the X3 technology, but this is only the
first camera with it. And from what I have gathered, buying the
Sigma with the X3 chips is like buying a Ford Escort with a Rolls
Royce Engine. The X3 Chip is the thing people want, not the Sigma
camera. Why did they do this?

I would be in line to get the first X3 camera if the chip was in a
Sony, Kodak, Canon, Nikkon or Fuji, but a Sigma? I've never even
heard of a Sigma until now.

Yes, I'm usually the guy who wants the first new hip toy to hit the
shelves, but I also shop for quality and reputation. Therefore I
see no value in the Signma/X3 package.

I'll wait for the X3 to hit historically more capable manufacturers.

Just my 2cents,
Leo

--

Leo, UVA E-School Class of 2002

 

[Patrick S Pilkenton]

Sigma sa9, their film camera, has IOS of 25 to 5000 so if they only have a setting of IOS 100 to 400 it has to be the chip limitation put into the camera. I'm sure that they have chips thay can handel less light as to the fact that Intel has faster chips than those on the market.

Has for Sigma using their own mount I do see them doing anything different than Canon or Nikon... why doesn't Canon make a lens for Sigma.

I love this chip and I'm going to buy, period. I will of course keep my eos glass in the hope than Canon will adoped this chip in the future.

 

[lilharley]

Sigma has been making affordable lenses for awhile now. Lately, they have a few lenses that are even comparable to the big names. The Foveon is an unknown chip right now. The big SLR players are already committed on the Bayer chip for the time being.

So a seemingly smaller player picks up a new technology and enters the market. They have lenses of their own, which is a plus for me, experience in making SLR cameras and are affordably priced. Maybe not all of the lenses are real good, but the few I need are very respectable. The cost of the Sigma looks promising. Sure the ISO 400 is limiting, but it can be worked around.

If the camera itself performs (like I mentioned in another post) with the AF, battery consumption, write speeds FPS, and all, it is definitely aimed at me, an amateur that would like to move up. I am not into names, but in price per performance. My other choice has been the D100, but it has its own draw backs at a higher cost.

If I were to wait until 3 or 4 generation of the Foveon chips to come out, I would be missing a heck of lot of shots! My E-10 has done well, but is showing signs of age and has its own limitations!Sigma has been making affordable lenses for awhile now. Lately, they have a few lenses that are even comperable to the big names. The Foveon is an unknown chip right now. The big SLR players are already commited on the Bayer chip for the time being.

So a seemingly smaller player picks up a new technology and enters the market. They have lenses of their own, which is a plus for me. Maybe not all of them real good, but the few I need are very respectable. The cost of the Sigma looks promising. Sure the ISO 400 is limiting, but it can be worked around.

If the camera itself performs (like I mentioned in another post) with the AF, battery consumtoin, wri5te speeds FPS, and all, it is definitely aimed at me, an amatuer that would like to move up. I am not into names, but in price per performance. My other choice has been the D100, but it has its own draw backs at a higher cost.

If I were to wait until 3 or 4 generation of the Fovian chips to come out, I would be missing a heck of lot of shots! My E-10 has done well, but is showing signs of age and has its own limitations!

--
Mike

 

[nvn007]

Regarding Sigma, the company has been around for a long time, and
ahve made decent even if unspectacular film SLRs for a while. How
many Sony SLR cameras are int he market place? Your list had
included Sony and I think they would be in even worse position than
Sigma. Sigma makes a decent 3d party lens line and also a few 35 mm
SLR bodies. Fuji is not a big player in the SLR world to my
knowledge either.

All in all Sigma has positioned themselves well on this one. The
foveon chip appears to be promising, and the price point is also
seductive to many who have no major Nikon or Canon lens
committments.

If this were a Nikon body or a Nikon lens mount, it would be even
more seductive, new technology or not, and ISO 400 limitations or
not. But for someone who enjoys taking pictures as a hobby only and
has no major lens committments, the SD9 could easily be what the Dr
called for.. somewhat affordable, seems ot require somewhat less
post processing time than the Bayer sensors, and may actually be on
the shelves in time for Christmas! Now get the 2nd rev Foveon in a
Nikon body ( say goodbye to out of camera softness ) along with
noise fre ISO 1600 and watch the sells skyrocket )) But in the
mean time the SD9 and Foveon sensor truly are exciting! I've been
struggling with which DSLR to buy all summer, trying to decide
which camera had the least amount of shortcomings, etc and could
not easily decide. The SD9 may in end win out even wiht it's
shortcomings and given I can later convert my Sigma lenses to a
Nikon or Canon mount it gets even better I've heard many times
you are buying more than a body that you are buying inot a system
and this is true. Least Sigma gives you the option to redo the
mounts later if you decided on a Canon or Nikon body!

I'm extremely excited about the X3 technology, but this is only the
first camera with it. And from what I have gathered, buying the
Sigma with the X3 chips is like buying a Ford Escort with a Rolls
Royce Engine. The X3 Chip is the thing people want, not the Sigma
camera. Why did they do this?

I would be in line to get the first X3 camera if the chip was in a
Sony, Kodak, Canon, Nikkon or Fuji, but a Sigma? I've never even
heard of a Sigma until now.

Yes, I'm usually the guy who wants the first new hip toy to hit the
shelves, but I also shop for quality and reputation. Therefore I
see no value in the Signma/X3 package.

I'll wait for the X3 to hit historically more capable manufacturers.

Just my 2cents,
Leo

--

Leo, UVA E-School Class of 2002

Just Curious, How do you convert Sigma mount to other mount. Who does it and how much ? Thanks.

See my other post
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1014&message=3471316

 

[Garrett Adams]

Just Curious, How do you convert Sigma mount to other mount. Who
does it and how much ? Thanks.

So there's no misunderstanding the changing is on each individual lens not the camera body mount. You send the lens to Sigma and they do the conversion. It's been reported by others here that the cost is $70.00 for the first lens, and $10.00 each for additional lenses. By design third-party lenses are easier to change mounts. In fact years ago Tamron sold lens fronts and camera mount adapters separately. One could use Tamron 80-200mm on a Canon one minute on a Nikon the following minute.

 

[jdavis37]

The markets are different.. Sigma will target the upper end prosumer who wants a DSLR but does not wish to spend a fortune to have it, and will be able to live with certain obvious limitations such as the ISO400 speed. Time will tell how long i takes for foveon to overcome this limitation which in end will be an achilles heal to the pro mrket, along with the 1.7X crop factor. Full sized sensors with 11-14MP resolution on pro and semi pro bodies are coming out in near affordable prices. yes the CMOS chips are Bayer in interppolation but existing workflows in software and the pro body coupled with the needed resolution for large sized prints will keep the pros happy for a while. Again is just a different market.

Had SIgma left the price near $2400 the SD9 would take a pounding IMHO.

I think the SD9 will find a nice niche in the market and am happy to see it's arrival. if the reviews tell a positive story it may work well for me though originally I was wanting to jump inot a semi pro system and really commit to it. And still may The new Kodak will be interesting to see how it does given it is based on the same/similar body as is the S2 and D100, not a pro body.

Has for Sigma using their own mount I do see them doing anything
different than Canon or Nikon... why doesn't Canon make a lens for
Sigma.

There is a huge difference here. WHY would Canon make lenses for a Sigma body? Same for Nikon. or why would Nikon make alens for a Canon body? Nikon and Canon make a camera system, not a camera. Sigma is entering the "system" market now and should do ok, thouhg they desparately NEED to make a plain jane 50mm f1.8 solution similar to Canon and Nikon. GREAT lenses , sharp and cheap! One has to remmeber that Sigma began as a lens maker, 3rd party, not as a camera body maker! Now if only Tokina and Tamron would also make glass for the Sigma body it would be nice!

Still is good news to know the lenses can be remounted by Sigma later on should one buy either a Nikon, Canon or other body. Least it means you wont have to buy ALL new glass.

I doubt many will drop thier Canon oir Nikon gear to switch to Sigma. The SA9 film body is without question less "pro " like than the Nikon N80 and one would assume the SD9 will follow suit. Still appears to be a great solution for the amateur who wants a DSLR and the fun that goes along with it and doesn't want a divorce over buying it or the time to process pictures later! Now just need to see if the camera does wel under reviews....

PS on camera.... the S2 has been beaten up over batteries.. wait til the SD9 battery situation comes into play!

Sigma sa9, their film camera, has IOS of 25 to 5000 so if they only
have a setting of IOS 100 to 400 it has to be the chip limitation
put into the camera. I'm sure that they have chips thay can handel
less light as to the fact that Intel has faster chips than those on
the market.

Has for Sigma using their own mount I do see them doing anything
different than Canon or Nikon... why doesn't Canon make a lens for
Sigma.

I love this chip and I'm going to buy, period. I will of course
keep my eos glass in the hope than Canon will adoped this chip in
the future.

 

[nvn007]

Just Curious, How do you convert Sigma mount to other mount. Who
does it and how much ? Thanks.

So there's no misunderstanding the changing is on each individual
lens not the camera body mount. You send the lens to Sigma and they
do the conversion. It's been reported by others here that the cost
is $70.00 for the first lens, and $10.00 each for additional
lenses. By design third-party lenses are easier to change mounts.
In fact years ago Tamron sold lens fronts and camera mount adapters
separately. One could use Tamron 80-200mm on a Canon one minute on
a Nikon the following minute.

Cool !! Thnaks.

 

[Stephen Waits]

is $70.00 for the first lens, and $10.00 each for additional

How about all the Sigma SD-9 early-adopters ("beta testers") who hang out here just put all of their lens remounts into one order then?

--Steve

 

[Garrett Adams]

How about all the Sigma SD-9 early-adopters ("beta testers") who
hang out here just put all of their lens remounts into one order
then?

Since posting my message I found another message where the person said a Sigma rep at the Photokina booth told him that Sigma did not convert mounts or recommend doing so. The info I quoted, as well as others in these forums was based on a message in one of the forums 3-4 days ago where the poster said he a received an e-mail confirmation from Sigma stating the procedure was offered and quoted the prices. Since there is a conflict here I sent an e-mail Sunday afternoon to Sigma for a clarification. When they respond I'll post the results here. Obviously I'm hoping for a yay rather than a nay.

 

[fusionid]

I doubt many will drop thier Canon oir Nikon gear to switch to
Sigma. The SA9 film body is without question less "pro " like than
the Nikon N80 and one would assume the SD9 will follow suit.

where did you get that information from? I've been trying to find reviews on the SA9. I own a N80 and it is the reason why I dont own a S2 or a D100. It is certanly not too pro of a model. I feel like I want to move up. Anyhow I can't wait to see reviews on the sigma

 

[Group Idiot]

I doubt many will drop thier Canon oir Nikon gear to switch to
Sigma. The SA9 film body is without question less "pro " like than
the Nikon N80 and one would assume the SD9 will follow suit.

where did you get that information from? I've been trying to find
reviews on the SA9. I own a N80 and it is the reason why I dont own
a S2 or a D100. It is certanly not too pro of a model. I feel like
I want to move up. Anyhow I can't wait to see reviews on the sigma

I think he's saying that the N80 is still more of a body--truely pro or not--than the SA9. Looking at the camera specs--image quality aside--the D100 trounces the SD9 in prettymuch every category.

He's not comparing it to an F5-based D1-series or an EOS-1D(s).

Brendan

 

[Cory Waltz]

Looking at the camera specs--image quality aside--the D100 trounces the > SD9 in prettymuch every category.

"Ignore the man behind the curtain!!" --Wizard of Oz.

Yes my camera is way better than your camera... so long as we don't look at the pictures that the cameras produce ;]

 

[Group Idiot]

I wasn't talking about images, rather "defending" the man's position about the differences in the body.

The images are quite similar, even for a 3MP camera.

Brendan

Looking at the camera specs--image quality aside--the D100 trounces the > SD9 in prettymuch every category.

"Ignore the man behind the curtain!!" --Wizard of Oz.

Yes my camera is way better than your camera... so long as we don't
look at the pictures that the cameras produce ;]

 

[Cory Waltz]

Oh come on. Lighten up.

I didn't miss any point. I was just pokin' a little fun. Can't you see the irony in your previous statement?

 

[Group Idiot]

Sorry. I'm usually not so sensitive. I need coffee ;-)

Brendan

Oh come on. Lighten up.

I didn't miss any point. I was just pokin' a little fun. Can't
you see the irony in your previous statement?