The new FFF has some stiff competition

I was just thinking of the recent crop of 60MP + cameras that will be coming out soon (Leica fpL) alonng with the constant postponement of the FFF and it dawned on me is it possible that FFF will not be able to compete with these new high MP Bayer cameras, hence the reason for the delay and eventual scrapping of the project?

Sigma announced they scrapped the initial attempt at the FFF and restarted from scratch.  They then introduce a 60 MP Bayer camera.   Maybe after some in depth analysis, Sigma concluded that the Foveon advantage is no longer that big an advantage and the much more versatile 60M  Bayer sensors have put the final nail in the coffin.

Let's face it, Foveon cameras are a niche camera in a niche camera market.  In their day they were outstanding and still produce beautiful images under very limited conditions.  I shoot my Fuji XPro2 effortless at very high ISOs with great results, something impossible with my SDQ and SD1.

Sadly, unless there is a huge breakthrough I'm thinking we have seen the end of Foveon.  What do you think?

A 60 Mpix Bayer sensor has 15 Megapixels in the red channel and 15 in the blue. The Merrill already has these (in round figures).

The 60 Mpix Bayer wins only in the green, where it has 30 million pixels.

If Sigma can manage a sensor with the same pixel pitch as the Merrill and twice the area, it will have nearly 30 in all three channels. I don't think a "double Merrill" is impossible.

The problems are the dynamic range and the processing times. A heat sink, as used in the fp, solves the overheating problem (which led to the strange shape of the dp_Q cameras).

Don

OK, even if they can compete with Bayer as far as resolution is concerned, there is still the ISO limitation, the light must pass thru 2 layers of sensors.  Few people these days  these days will put up with the ISO limitations of the earlier Foveons.

Sigmas were never all around cameras in their day and they are even less so today because the other brands have made big improvements in ISO and images per second  performance.

I use my Sigmas for landscapes and macro and my Fujis for everything else.  My Sigmas could never be my only cameras, my Fujis could.

… Find it incredible the main criticism of Sigma cameras is that they are not good general purpose cameras.

… It would be like criticizing Formula One race cars because they are awkward to park, or there is little trunk space.

That's exactly my point.  In their day Sigma was a special purpose camera. Just like F1 cars were built for speed at the expense of everything else, Sigmas were designed for image quality at the expense of everything else.  In their day, their image quality was much better than the competition, but that's no longer true.  The gap between mega pixel Bayer sensors and Foveon has narrowed a lot.

Image going into a Chevrolet dealership and buying a car that could equal the performance of a F1 racer, but got 60 miles to a gallon, could seat 6, had a trunk etc..  The days of building F1 racers for multi millions would end very quickly.  The F1 racer would no long have the superiority it had, neither does the Foveon sensor.

I guess my point is Sigma's image quality is no longer THAT big an advantage, I hope I'm wrong, but Sigma's actions seem to point that way.

… Exactly. The quality of the image (not the technician’s IQ) is everything. I’ll stick to the old Foveon sensor.

dellaaa wrote:

OK, even if they can compete with Bayer as far as resolution is concerned, there is still the ISO limitation, the light must pass thru 2 layers of sensors. Few people these days these days will put up with the ISO limitations of the earlier Foveons.

Those layers of silicon are just colour filters, not essentially different from the ones in front of the pixels in a Bayer sensor. And the top layer has no filter in front of it.

Sigmas were never all around cameras in their day and they are even less so today because the other brands have made big improvements in ISO and images per second performance.

I use my Sigmas for landscapes and macro and my Fujis for everything else. My Sigmas could never be my only cameras, my Fujis could.

Don

Iain G Foulds wrote:

… Find it incredible the main criticism of Sigma cameras is that they are not good general purpose cameras.

Many, perhaps most, customers look for a single camera that will be good at everything. Only a few will buy a second or third camera for its special image quality.

… It would be like criticizing Formula One race cars because they are awkward to park, or there is little trunk space.

Don

Yes I'm not a physicist by any means, but from what I gather, for the Bayer sensor each photon passes thru one filter for Foveon, in order for the photon to reach the lowest layer it must travel thru 2 filters, each with some light loss plus the light loss for the silicon sensors themselves.

joe173 wrote:

dellaaa wrote:

That's exactly my point. In their day Sigma was a special purpose camera. Just like F1 cars were built for speed at the expense of everything else, Sigmas were designed for image quality at the expense of everything else. In their day, their image quality was much better than the competition, but that's no longer true. The gap between mega pixel Bayer sensors and Foveon has narrowed a lot.

For images with a lot of texture, nothing beats the 3 layer sensor. Also, the color information it can capture is still unmatched. Resolution, yes. It lost that war. But resolution is arguably the least important aspect of image quality. Overall image quality, nothing reproduces the special look of the 3 layer sensor. It has a slide film look which I like.

Yes, it probably appeals particularly to those of us who used to shoot slide films. Perhaps we should be selling the Foveon idea to those younger folk who are taking up film.

Don

All arguments are discussed a thousand times.

I asume you are just trolling.

what matters it if it was discussed before? everything has been discussed before, do you propose we cease all discussions?

trolling has no place in my life.

D Cox wrote:

Iain G Foulds wrote:

… Find it incredible the main criticism of Sigma cameras is that they are not good general purpose cameras.

Many, perhaps most, customers look for a single camera that will be good at everything. Only a few will buy a second or third camera for its special image quality.

Quite so!

By the same token, long ago I sought a raw converter which could also do "everything". Back then, there were several contenders for the original Foveon F7 sensor, even including the mighty Adobe elephant-in-the-room's ACR. None of them bettered SPP, which I use as my primary X3F converter to this very day.

D Cox wrote:

Iain G Foulds wrote:

… Find it incredible the main criticism of Sigma cameras is that they are not good general purpose cameras.

Many, perhaps most, customers look for a single camera that will be good at everything. Only a few will buy a second or third camera for its special image quality.

… It would be like criticizing Formula One race cars because they are awkward to park, or there is little trunk space.

Don

Hey Don, how many photographers who have bought a Sigma camera had no other camera when they bought their Sigma camera? I would guess it was less than 1% of the Sigma buyers . . . and knowing that, we can finally realize that Sigma cameras are for collectors, connoisseurs, or photographers who just like to try cameras. I would bet it's the same for the fp line of cameras. I bet that the vast majority of people who buy a Sigma fp or fp L already have a camera.

What does THAT mean?

Will Sigma ever make an entry level digital camera?

well, I think that for some photographers, who may be still using film, the coming FFF will be their entry level digitalcamera, gettingthem into the world of L mount, so they can eventually have and use Leica glass, and with various options in the L mount world, such as fp, Panasonic S1 and S1R, various Leicas, and possibly even more at some future time.

As far as resolution is concerned, I think the FFF will just be the first of many future Foveon sensors made for full-frame mirrorless cameras. It will be 20 MP per layer, but it will be the fastest and best camera ever built with a Foveon sensor in it. Eventually Sigma will make a faster camera, with a 30 MP per layer sensor, which will offer approximately equivalent resolution performance to today's 60 MP cameras, or a Quattrified version of the first full-frame Foveon sensor, which will blow away all the competition.

If you take the long view,, Sigma is just getting started in the world of digital photography, just like Nikon, Leica, and many others. Companies like Sony, Panasonic, and Canon have been in it much longer, making digital video cameras, which recorded to MiniDV tapes.

Scottelly wrote:

As far as resolution is concerned, I think the FFF will just be the first of many future Foveon sensors made for full-frame mirrorless cameras. It will be 20 MP per layer, but it will be the fastest and best camera ever built with a Foveon sensor in it. Eventually Sigma will make a faster camera, with a 30 MP per layer sensor, which will offer approximately equivalent resolution performance to today's 60 MP cameras, or a Quattrified version of the first full-frame Foveon sensor, which will blow away all the competition.

I too gazed into my crystal ball, Scott, but all I could see was darkness ...

dellaaa wrote:

I was just thinking of the recent crop of 60MP + cameras that will be coming out soon (Leica fpL) alonng with the constant postponement of the FFF and it dawned on me is it possible that FFF will not be able to compete with these new high MP Bayer cameras, hence the reason for the delay and eventual scrapping of the project?

Sigma announced they scrapped the initial attempt at the FFF and restarted from scratch. They then introduce a 60 MP Bayer camera. Maybe after some in depth analysis, Sigma concluded that the Foveon advantage is no longer that big an advantage and the much more versatile 60M Bayer sensors have put the final nail in the coffin.

Let's face it, Foveon cameras are a niche camera in a niche camera market. In their day they were outstanding and still produce beautiful images under very limited conditions. I shoot my Fuji XPro2 effortless at very high ISOs with great results, something impossible with my SDQ and SD1.

Sadly, unless there is a huge breakthrough I'm thinking we have seen the end of Foveon. What do you think?

I think not. Sigma is just getting started with Foveon technology. At 20 MP per layer it will have more than four times the pixels vs. the first Foveon sensors, and those offered enough pixels to print pretty large (bigger than most people print the vast majority of their photos).

Until the Merrills, the cameras with Foveon sensors were never the resolution leaders, but people still bought them and loved them. Now that the megapixel race is basically over, and those who really want more pixels are just a small group, I think the 60 MP sensors will remain the top performers in the full-frame world. At 20 MP per layer, Sigma's FFF sensor will be close in its ability to capture detail, which may actually establish Foveon as a real competitor, when it comes to all but low light photography. Then, when Sigma finally introduces a full-frame Quattro, Foveon will really step out into its own, and offer L mount photographers something they just couldn't get before, and I think Sigma will sell a lot of FFF Quattro cameras.

xpatUSA wrote:

Scottelly wrote:

As far as resolution is concerned, I think the FFF will just be the first of many future Foveon sensors made for full-frame mirrorless cameras. It will be 20 MP per layer, but it will be the fastest and best camera ever built with a Foveon sensor in it. Eventually Sigma will make a faster camera, with a 30 MP per layer sensor, which will offer approximately equivalent resolution performance to today's 60 MP cameras, or a Quattrified version of the first full-frame Foveon sensor, which will blow away all the competition.

I too gazed into my crystal ball, Scott, but all I could see was darkness ...

Well, my point is that the first full-frame Foveon sensor will just be that . . . the first . . . of many.

-- hide signature --

Just interested in the technology.

dellaaa wrote:

Yes I'm not a physicist by any means, but from what I gather, for the Bayer sensor each photon passes thru one filter [but,] for Foveon, in order for the photon to reach the lowest layer it must travel thru 2 filters, each with some light loss plus the light loss for the silicon sensors themselves.

A popular view - but some red photons pass through silicon almost unimpeded - as in with virtually no loss.

And silicon is transparent to IR, no matter how many "layers" it passes through ...