How can Sigma make sure the FFF is the best success it can be? Locked

After reading some of the comments in an old thread . . . and seeing how people seem to view the newer Sigma cameras with CFA sensors in them . . . I wonder how Sigma could design, manufacture, and support the new camera that will have the three-layer sensor, in a way (ways actually) that will ensure it is seen as a home run in the camera world. Maybe the sensor technology is such that it could never be a home run, because it will never be able to do low-noise high-ISO photography . . . but that doesn't mean the camera can't be very close to a home run, right? Maybe it can be like a third base hit, if Sigma can't hit it out of the park. I'm thinking that including DNG mode for recording (with JPEG included, so a DNG+JPG mode) would be part of it. I'm not sure they should include video, but if they do, I think they should only do it if they can make the camera do really good quality 4Kp30 video at a minimum. I could make a features list, which might include everything one would find in another mirrorless full-frame camera, like a Panasonic or a Sony or even a Canon or Nikon, but I won't do that here. I really don't think it's necessary.

Frankly I think speed of operation is going to be key, as will image quality, of course. I think Sigma knows how to make a very high-quality camera, so that too would be essential. Here's another thing I think they might be able to do, which I'm not sure other companies do, which might help. I think they should get together with two or three popular software makers, and get them to support the new camera's raw files . . . not just the DNG files, which will probably be automatically working already. CaptureOne COULD work with Sigma's .x3f files from the new camera (if it makes those . . . and I hope it does). I think that all Sigma would have to do is go to the makers of CaptureOne, and ask them to help make the launch of their new camera even more successful, by putting support for the new files into CaptureOne. Currently CaptureOne does not support any of the .x3f raw files from Sigma. I think that if Sigma offers to help in any way necessary, the people who make CaptureOne just might be willing to add high-quality support for those .x3f raw files before Sigma launches the camera.

I think Sigma could do this with two or three other companies too, such as making sure that Affinity Photo supports their files, and Bibble too. No doubt they could help in the open source world too, by just getting their software people to code the support into the open-source software. (i.e. to make sure RawTherapee and DarkTable both support the new .x3f files)

… Respectfully, the biggest mistake that Sigma can make (and will likely make) is trying for a home run in the camera world- ie covering all the bases.

… All that matters is that the camera can produce an image that is clearly separate and above the pack. Failing this is failure for the company and continued obscurity and irrelevance.

They could show side-by-side photos taken with Bayer and FFF, one showing severe moire colours and the other not.

Don

Hulyss Bowman wrote:

As we all can see, since some times now, the whole Foveon universe became invisible on internet. The DP website is down, the links to the brochures of old SD/DP is down (I still host some on my server for historical purpose), the marvelous mini musical sites are impossible to find or summonable anymore. links are dead or rerouted to GLOBAL... Bear in mind that all of this cleaning is done by SIgma and Sigma only and I find it kind of sad/alarming.

Well, websites come and go, it's normal. The old Fuji websites (e.g. for X100) also don't exist any more.

However, they are still there on the Internet archive:

Here are the old sites for the DP Merrills:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210825004341/http://www.sigma-dp.com/

And here is the old site for the DP2:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210804070631/http://www.sigma-dp.com/DP2/main.html

Sigma list all the discontinued cameras on their modern website, too:

https://www.sigma-global.com/en/cameras/discontinued/

Iain G Foulds wrote:

… Respectfully, the biggest mistake that Sigma can make (and will likely make) is trying for a home run in the camera world- ie covering all the bases.

… All that matters is that the camera can produce an image that is clearly separate and above the pack. Failing this is failure for the company and continued obscurity and irrelevance.

I agree wholeheartedly. Scottelly wrote, "Frankly I think speed of operation is going to be key, as will image quality, of course."

Image quality is key.  The rest of it might be nice but is not essential.  Phase focus is usually accomplished by dedicating some pixels exclusively, and then interpolating over them so they aren't visible in the final image.  I think this is a bad idea too, personally.

It ought to be all about image quality.  If Foveon perfection is not good enough, there are plenty of other cameras out there, including the fp and fp L.

If the full frame Foveon is not feasible, let's have an APS-C implementation, but let it be Foveon.

The big advantage of DNG files is that you can use a custom input profile made with a Color Checker when processing them on Adobe software (and also, I think, on Raw Therapee).

Recently I've reprocessed a number of raw files that I shot with a Sony NEX-5N around ten years ago, again using a Color Checker profile. The results are much better than with the default ACR profile or with whatever Sony used to make the JPGs.

Of course we all have to find our own preferred methods.

Don

Tom Schum wrote:

If the full frame Foveon is not feasible, let's have an APS-C implementation, but let it be Foveon.

… Exactly. The FF venture is a great waste of time and capital. No one can tell the difference in a FF image vs an APC. FF is a microscopic advantage at much greater expense to the consumer for basically no reason.

Tom Schum wrote:

Iain G Foulds wrote:

… Respectfully, the biggest mistake that Sigma can make (and will likely make) is trying for a home run in the camera world- ie covering all the bases.

… All that matters is that the camera can produce an image that is clearly separate and above the pack. Failing this is failure for the company and continued obscurity and irrelevance.

I agree wholeheartedly. Scottelly wrote, "Frankly I think speed of operation is going to be key, as will image quality, of course."

Image quality is key. The rest of it might be nice but is not essential. Phase focus is usually accomplished by dedicating some pixels exclusively, and then interpolating over them so they aren't visible in the final image. I think this is a bad idea too, personally.

It seems to be OK on the sdQH. I haven't seen any sign of visible interpolated pixels.

It ought to be all about image quality. If Foveon perfection is not good enough, there are plenty of other cameras out there, including the fp and fp L.

The Panasonic FF cameras give nice Bayer images too.

If the full frame Foveon is not feasible, let's have an APS-C implementation, but let it be Foveon.

The current problem is how to make a three-layer sensor at all, since Sigma dumped the Foveon company. (I suspect all the good people there were gone, anyway.) If Sigma can make an APS-C sensor, they can make an APS-H or a FF.

I think a Sigma FFF will look very different as one option among the various L mount cameras as opposed to one with a unique lens mount. If the price is right, people may well buy it as a second camera, as they might buy a Leica monochrom.

Don

Hulyss Bowman wrote:

allineedislight wrote:

Hulyss Bowman wrote:

As we all can see, since some times now, the whole Foveon universe became invisible on internet. The DP website is down, the links to the brochures of old SD/DP is down (I still host some on my server for historical purpose), the marvelous mini musical sites are impossible to find or summonable anymore. links are dead or rerouted to GLOBAL... Bear in mind that all of this cleaning is done by SIgma and Sigma only and I find it kind of sad/alarming.

Well, websites come and go, it's normal. The old Fuji websites (e.g. for X100) also don't exist any more.

However, they are still there on the Internet archive:

Here are the old sites for the DP Merrills:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210825004341/http://www.sigma-dp.com/

And here is the old site for the DP2:

https://web.archive.org/web/20210804070631/http://www.sigma-dp.com/DP2/main.html

Sigma list all the discontinued cameras on their modern website, too:

https://www.sigma-global.com/en/cameras/discontinued/

Ho yes I understand but the invisible part is the commercial brochures. Manual and tech specs are ok but the brochures where very beautiful and inspiring.

The brochures are here

https://web.archive.org/web/20210804070839/http://www.sigma-dp.com/DP2/brochure.html

The Sigma DP2 website is amputated of the most beautiful material : the flash intro ...

yes, I remember.. If you are looking for the music from the intro, it is by Erik Satie, a French composer (1866-1925):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FS6o3qFimsc

applemax wrote:

Hello!

Difficult question and I can only speak for myself: What would make me buy a full frame Foveon camera?

1. Faster and easier processing. I hesitate more and more to use my SD1 because I know that every picture I take will cost me five to ten minutes to process and adjust, no matter what software I use. This is more time than I spent processing analog photos in my chemical lab 30+ years ago. I will not continue to do this, life is too short. So decent out of the camera jpgs, and/or a variant of SPP that creates decent jpgs from decent raws without any user intervention in batch mode, is an absolute must. Special pictures will always require special treatment, but the average ones must come out of the process automatically.

2. Some way to continue to use my existing SA mount lenses at no extra (or little extra) cost. I will not buy all my lenses again, no way. I rather buy another camera instead. An adapter for SA mount lenses for the new camera will either have to come free with the camera, or very cheap, or as part with an offer that one can't refuse (e.g. a very good SA mount kit lens plus adapter that can be purchased with the camera - I'm sure they have some unsold SA mount Art lenses that qualify).

Sigma sell an adapter to use SA lenses on L mount. The two SA lenses that I have work fine on the fp. It's not cheap -- it costs about a hundred dollars -- but bearable.

How well SA lenses will work on a Panasonic or Leica camera I don't know.

3. Price of the camera. My SD1 takes very good pictures in the right conditions. After all these years I know it's strengths and weaknesses. A FFF camera must allow me to take much better pictures and/or be very competitively priced to lure me away from what I have. The competition now have full frame cameras for three figure amounts of Euros or Dollars. I do not expect a Sigma full frame camera at this price level. But at much over 2000 it will be very difficult to sell to me...

Regards

Max

Iain G Foulds wrote:

Tom Schum wrote:

If the full frame Foveon is not feasible, let's have an APS-C implementation, but let it be Foveon.

… Exactly. The FF venture is a great waste of time and capital. No one can tell the difference in a FF image vs an APC. FF is a microscopic advantage at much greater expense to the consumer for basically no reason.

We don't know this. I don't agree, frankly. I believe that at ISO 100 a full-frame sensor will offer lower noise levels, and more pliable raw files, that will be superior to what the Merrills and Quattros can produce . . . even the SD Quattro H. At least I hope that is what the full-frame sensor will provide. Of course that can't be assumed. I think it can be expected though. Why else make a full-frame sensor?

D Cox wrote:

Tom Schum wrote:

Iain G Foulds wrote:

… Respectfully, the biggest mistake that Sigma can make (and will likely make) is trying for a home run in the camera world- ie covering all the bases.

… All that matters is that the camera can produce an image that is clearly separate and above the pack. Failing this is failure for the company and continued obscurity and irrelevance.

I agree wholeheartedly. Scottelly wrote, "Frankly I think speed of operation is going to be key, as will image quality, of course."

Image quality is key. The rest of it might be nice but is not essential. Phase focus is usually accomplished by dedicating some pixels exclusively, and then interpolating over them so they aren't visible in the final image. I think this is a bad idea too, personally.

It seems to be OK on the sdQH. I haven't seen any sign of visible interpolated pixels.

It ought to be all about image quality. If Foveon perfection is not good enough, there are plenty of other cameras out there, including the fp and fp L.

The Panasonic FF cameras give nice Bayer images too.

If the full frame Foveon is not feasible, let's have an APS-C implementation, but let it be Foveon.

The current problem is how to make a three-layer sensor at all, since Sigma dumped the Foveon company. (I suspect all the good people there were gone, anyway.) If Sigma can make an APS-C sensor, they can make an APS-H or a FF.

I think a Sigma FFF will look very different as one option among the various L mount cameras as opposed to one with a unique lens mount. If the price is right, people may well buy it as a second camera, as they might buy a Leica monochrom.

I think so too, but they won't buy it if the camera just can't focus well, or it operates too slowly . . . or there is some other major flaw.

Don

I believe they can make a sensor. We will have to see . . . but I get the feeling that Mr. Yamaki (and others at Sigma) have a sense of pride in the fact that they have a unique technology, and I believe they realize that unique technology can (and does) set Sigma cameras apart. I believe that one day it may lead to greatness at Sigma. It has already influenced their success in the lens business. It could be that greatness has already been realized. What might a really good full-frame Foveon sensor lead to though?

I'm just hoping the first of the full-frame Foveon sensors is a really good one, and it plus a really good leads to a bright future for full-frame Foveon sensors. I'd like to see Sigma Quattrify the sensor (sooner rather than later), and make a more expensive version of the same or an even better, newer camera, which can compete against the likes of the Fuji GFX100S. I don't believe a camera that makes 20 MP files will do that. I don't think it will be seen as being in the same league. In fact, I doubt it will be seen as being in the same league as cameras like the Sony A7r V either, purely because of the fact that, while it captures 60 MP of information, the files it produces will be 20 MP images (or at least that's how it will be seen). Frankly I don't think 20 MP is enough, but there are still many cameras out there that have 24 MP sensors, and the 20 MP files from the Sigma will be so good, hopefully, that they'll "beat" the 24 MP files from those other cameras (such as the fp, the Panasonic S1, the Leica SL and SL2, the Nikon Z6 II, etc.).

The thing is, all those other cameras operate quickly, offer IBIS, Wi-Fi, video, and most of them can focus very well and quickly. If Sigma's camera does have IBIS and at least a tilt screen and high-quality viewfinder, it will have to have some sort of great focusing capability, fast operation, and amazing image quality (which I suspect it will) to even be considered by most photographers (especially those with high expectations, like Leica buyers). Even with a whole bevy of common features, many people will reject the FFF for being unable to handle shooting at ISO 3200 (assuming the FFF produces high-ISO files just a little better than the SD1 Merrill).

I think Sigma could do special things though, offering a camera that can do stuff that others can't . . . like they did with the fp and fp L. No other L mount camera can do 60 MP, except the fp L. Maybe there will be something Sigma can make the FFF do that none of the other L mount cameras can do . . . though offering Foveon image quality already really is something quite special in its own right.

I'm not asking for a camera with solar panels or a two-way radio built into it, but I'd like to see GPS put in there. How many other L mount cameras have that? I assume it would be simple to implement, if all it does is what the GPS in my Sony A65 does (just add coordinates to the jpeg - including the embedded jpeg). Now will GPS convince a lot of people to buy the camera? I doubt it, but it's something that will really differentiate the camera from the other L mount cameras . . . not that it will really need that for most potential buyers to consider it, I guess. I think focus stacking would be a good idea too, but I guess it would depend how they implement it, and if SPP can be enhanced to include the ability to process such files effectively, without causing a huge amount of time and effort.

Scott,

The big question is will we ever see the proposed new FF X3 sensor.

It was supposed to be done by the end of this year, 2022, but nothing has been said to say that they have moved to the stage 3  prototype mentioned earlier this year.

Although I have been and still am a big user of Sigma X3 cameras since 2002 I am seriously tempted for some time now to move on but have been hanging on waiting more frustratedly to get some real information as to whether that FF X3  is likely to be seen fairly soon or ever.

With all the Sigma gear I have  I don't need it, I suppose, but I have looked forward for a long time for a really all round full frame Sigma camera having all the image quality that their cameras are capable of but much more universally usable.

Am I waiting in vain.?

S

Ceistinne wrote:

Scott,

The big question is will we ever see the proposed new FF X3 sensor.

I don't think so. I think it is just a matter of when, but not if. We can assume the FFF is coming. If not, then there is no point in debate or discussion of anything to do with it . . . and we can just assume Sigma cameras of the future will be like the fp and fp L, which I guess would not be the end of the World, but I would like the FFF to come into existence, and I would like to see a "Quattrified" successor. That's the camera that I really hope to see, because I am a detail addict (in other words, I want a 100 MP camera . . . or a 200 MP camera). First up will need to be the first full-frame three-layer sensor though, as Sigma is now calling it.

It was supposed to be done by the end of this year, 2022, but nothing has been said to say that they have moved to the stage 3 prototype mentioned earlier this year.

Well, if it comes in 2023 that would be great, but if it takes until 2024 then so be it. Whenever it is done is when it will be done. I plan to shoot with it for years to come either way, though who knows? Maybe Sigma will introduce a "Quattrified" version of the FFF just two or three years after the first FFF, and it will be THAT camera which I shoot with for years and years into the future.

Although I have been and still am a big user of Sigma X3 cameras since 2002 I am seriously tempted for some time now to move on but have been hanging on waiting more frustratedly to get some real information as to whether that FF X3 is likely to be seen fairly soon or ever.

I too am a little frustrated, but I just continue to build out my Nikon lens system. I now have a 14-24mm f2.8 G and a 200-400mm f4 VR G, with two nice Nikon primes that sit in between 24mm and 200mm (a 50mm f1.8 G and an 85mm f1.4 G). Today a 135mm f4 macro arrived, but it is not a Nikon lens. Instead I am doing a cross-platform experiment. An adapter will be arriving soon, hopefully, and I'll be able to use my new old Asahi medium format lens (a 6x7 lens) on my Nikon D810. I'll be able to use that lens on any camera, because it is the opposite of a mirrorless lens, and it will be very interesting to see what sort of image quality I can get out of it. I may end up getting a Sigma 135mm f1.8 Art lens in Nikon F mount to compare to it, eventually. I plan to get a 24-35mm f2 Art and a 40mm f1.4 Art for my Nikon too . . . and at some point (maybe the next lens I get) I'll get an all-around zoom (probably a Nikon 24-120mm f4 VR G). Then it will be time to go mirrorless. Hopefully by that time the FFF will be available. Otherwise I may just get an fp L or a used Sony A7r IV. Either way, I should be able to use all my Sigma SA mount lenses and my Nikon F mount lenses on whatever mirrorless camera I get. I may end up with more 6x7 lenses too.

With all the Sigma gear I have I don't need it, I suppose, but I have looked forward for a long time for a really all round full frame Sigma camera having all the image quality that their cameras are capable of but much more universally usable.

Me too.

Am I waiting in vain.?

I don't think so. I believe it's coming . . . just taking more time than anyone expected. Hopefully the wait will be worth it. That's what this thread is about . . . how Sigma can really do the best they can . . . not just with the sensor, but with the camera, maybe some accessories, the launch of the camera, and the support for the .x3f files too. Already Sigma has begun their move into the L mount system, with a great new line of small lenses as well as that amazing new 105mm Art macro and so many other L mount lenses, which, along with all the Panasonic and Leica lenses, will make the FFF much more versatile than the SD Quattro H and previous cameras with Foveon sensors.

S

ChromeLight wrote:

My question is will the EVF be as terrible as the one in the Quattro cameras? If they are able to off load a high resolution video feed into the EVF like everyone else then I will consider getting a FFF. But there's no way I'll consider looking through something that's worse than a 1970s View Master for the better part of a decade.

I truly don't know what you mean. I shot with a Sony A65 for quite a while before shooting with my SD Quattro H. That Sony had a significantly better viewfinder than the one in my Sony A55, which had a much better viewfinder than the one in my Sony R1. I didn't notice any big disadvantage of the viewfinder in my Sigma vs. the one in my Sony A65, which was a viewfinder that was complimented by reviewers at the time. I guess today it would be considered unacceptable though. I have used my friend's Fuji GFX100 from time to time, which is by all accounts a very modern and premium quality mirrorless camera, with a good viewfinder, and I don't find his viewfinder considerably better than the one in my SD Quattro H. In fact, when I was shooting the two cameras side-by-side to compare images I was making to be as identical as possible (for comparing on the computer screen - see this thread: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63281635 ), it didn't seem like there was a significant difference between one viewfinder and the other (meaning the viewfinder in his Fuji and the viewfinder in my Sigma). I just didn't notice any significant difference. I was not comparing viewfinders at the time though, so maybe that's why I didn't notice. I'm sure the Fuji has a better viewfinder. After-all the camera costs $10,000, right? What I'm saying though is I guess the viewfinder in the Sigma can't be THAT bad if I didn't even notice a difference.

Still, I'm sure Sigma will use a better viewfinder for the FFF. It will most likely be similar to the 3.69M dot viewfinder that works with the fp and fp L . . . or maybe something even better.