Will You Get Sigma's 20 MP/layer Full-Frame Camera?

[Kendall Helmstetter Gelner]

The megapixels race reminds me, a computer nerd, of the MegaHertz/GigaHertz race in computer CPUs. Everyone obsessed over GHz until they realized that a) what they had was often fast enough b) straight line computation performance (i.e. a single task) was not the full measure of desirability.

20MP of Foveon non-Bayer is more than enough for anything a person reasonably wants to do. 20MP Foveon is roughly equivalent to 36MP Bayer and with smart/careful Photoshop work you could easily upsize it to 72MP Bayer equivalence.

I think the base is more like 40-50MP bayer equivalent (since just doubling the green channel resolution alone is a conservative estimate). So maybe with good upsampling, even more than 72MP bayer...

If you are doing anything above 20x30inch prints, you are an outlier... I am old enough to remember that getting a "good" 20x24 from low-ISO 35mm or medium format, was considered to be the mark of a craftsman.

There is one other component to that though, heavy cropping. At times I've had only a wide angle or not very telephoto lens with me and I really like being able to crop half or more of the image away.

 

[xpatUSA]

... MP,MP,MP,MP ad infinitum ... ;-)

Of course this makes ME a little sad, because I really do want medium format image resolution in a smaller package ...

Hmmm, geometric resolution in the image plane ...

Fuji GFX 50S: 94 lp/mm

Sigma SD1 Merrill: 100 lp/mm

Looks like you already got it :-D

--
Ted

 

[FDecker]

Sigma will surely call it a 60 MP camera, which will make it the "highest resolution" camera Sigma has ever made. It will surely capture more "information" than any previous Sigma camera . . . but it will not produce files with greater resolution than the SD Quattro H.

It is slightly higher resolution (5520 x 3680 for the L, 5,440 × 3,616 for the H). But with that same resolution across all layers it should offer more detail on average than the H (which can achieve as much detail, but not in all situations).

The numbers for the H are 6192 x 4128. So, in plain MP count, the resolution of the L is lower than that of the H. The numbers you give are for the sd Quattro (non-H).

 

[FDecker]

I think that the 1:1:1 structure is better in pixel acuity. 20MP with a good S/N ratio and high contrast/acuity are definitely good enough.

I hope, they stay with the sd Quattro design language. I love the viewfinder and the rest of the housing.

 

[Johan Borg]

Actually I used pre-Merrill, because there seem to be a lot of people who will not us a Merrill, because of how "noisy" it is, and because they seem to think it captures color differently. The full-frame camera is going to have a sensor that is far less densely packed with pixels, being about 2.5x the size, but with only about 35% more MP. I think the new sensor will be much more like the one in the SD15 and previous generations, than the SD1 Merrill, and that's why I wrote "pre-Merrill" rather than just "pre-Quattro."

And this likely explains the 20MP figure: Foveon sensors have a noise floor that doesn't improve much with down-sampling. The SDQ H simply doesn't deliver better images at ISO 1600 than a SDQ, despite the bigger sensor, and neither would a full frame sensor with the same pixel size.

Even if Sigma hadn't made *any* advances in technology since the introduction of the Merrill sensor, a similar sensor with larger and cleaner pixels sounds very, very tempting. So yes, I'll probably get one.

I'd also probably get a DP2T with an APS-C crop of the same chip, even if that means half the pixel count of my DP2Q. 3840 x 2160 pixels (4K) fit within the APS-C imaging circle of the new sensor, by the way...

 

[ahaslett]

The megapixels race reminds me, a computer nerd, of the MegaHertz/GigaHertz race in computer CPUs. Everyone obsessed over GHz until they realized that a) what they had was often fast enough b) straight line computation performance (i.e. a single task) was not the full measure of desirability.

20MP of Foveon non-Bayer is more than enough for anything a person reasonably wants to do. 20MP Foveon is roughly equivalent to 36MP Bayer and with smart/careful Photoshop work you could easily upsize it to 72MP Bayer equivalence.

I think the base is more like 40-50MP bayer equivalent (since just doubling the green channel resolution alone is a conservative estimate). So maybe with good upsampling, even more than 72MP bayer...

If you are doing anything above 20x30inch prints, you are an outlier... I am old enough to remember that getting a "good" 20x24 from low-ISO 35mm or medium format, was considered to be the mark of a craftsman.

There is one other component to that though, heavy cropping. At times I've had only a wide angle or not very telephoto lens with me and I really like being able to crop half or more of the image away.

From experience, I’d say a DP Merrill about matches an A7R at 36Mpix and gives a little to an A7R2 at 42Mpix. It depends on lenses, light and artefacts.

Andrew

 

[saltydogstudios]

The megapixels race reminds me, a computer nerd, of the MegaHertz/GigaHertz race in computer CPUs. Everyone obsessed over GHz until they realized that a) what they had was often fast enough b) straight line computation performance (i.e. a single task) was not the full measure of desirability.

20MP of Foveon non-Bayer is more than enough for anything a person reasonably wants to do. 20MP Foveon is roughly equivalent to 36MP Bayer and with smart/careful Photoshop work you could easily upsize it to 72MP Bayer equivalence.

I think the base is more like 40-50MP bayer equivalent (since just doubling the green channel resolution alone is a conservative estimate). So maybe with good upsampling, even more than 72MP bayer...

If you are doing anything above 20x30inch prints, you are an outlier... I am old enough to remember that getting a "good" 20x24 from low-ISO 35mm or medium format, was considered to be the mark of a craftsman.

There is one other component to that though, heavy cropping. At times I've had only a wide angle or not very telephoto lens with me and I really like being able to crop half or more of the image away.

From experience, I’d say a DP Merrill about matches an A7R at 36Mpix and gives a little to an A7R2 at 42Mpix. It depends on lenses, light and artefacts.

Andrew

As someone with a couple of DP Merrills and whose used an A7R2 I'd roughly put them on a par with each other - though I honestly have no desire to figure out which is 10% better or worse or even 20% better or worse. As long as I'm happy with the quality of the images I get out of each (I was not with the A7R2) - that's all that matters.

 

[fusoexplorer]

mike earussi, post: 62381643, member: 904360"]
Depends on both the reviews and the price. Also the Quattros never seemed to have the full resolution advantage over Bayer that the 1:1:1 chips have so it wouldn't surprise if it had slightly higher resolution than the H.

Well, if it does, and I seriously doubt that, based on what I've seen between the SD1 Merrill and the SD Quattro, then I will get one too. I think the new camera will be better than the SD Quattro H in many ways, but only by a little bit (i.e. a little less noise, a little finer per-pixel image quality, a little faster operation, a little bit better viewfinder, a little bit bigger raw shooting buffer, etc.). The kicker will be if it has a tilt screen or Wi-Fi . . . or both. In that case I might consider getting it, and I think Sigma might realize that, and go ahead and include such a feature. What I'm really hoping is that Sigma decides to revamp their thinking a little over the next few months, and adds another 6 or 8 megapixels, producing a sensor that captures 28 MP per layer instead of 20 MP per layer. That's a 40% increase, but still will produce images that are significantly less noisy than the Merrill. Such a camera will out-resolve the 50 MP cameras out there, and I think that would be a key to Sigma being seen as a major player in the high-end camera market. I think it would also mean they could make the price another $500 to $1,000 more, and very little extra cost. But I guess maybe they plan to be more conservative this first time out, and then step up to such a sensor in a few years. I hope I don't have to wait THAT long to get a more significant upgrade from the SD Quattro H . . . but if that's the way it is, so be it. I do wonder if this step means that they might make Quattro sensors between 1:1:1 sensors, skipping a generation each time. In other words, if you're a Quattro proponent, then you would have to wait, skipping a generation, to upgrade your camera to a new model, and if you're a Merrill proponent, then you'll have to wait, and skip the Quattro generation, in order to upgrade to a new model. This would allow them to have Quattro and "Merrill" cameras on the market at the same time, though the latest model with always be one with either a Quattro or a "Merrill" sensor. This might be a very sensible strategy, especially if they start producing a new full-frame, L-mount camera every year or so. It would allow people who like one flavor or another to upgrade every couple of years, or have to wait at least four years to upgrade, if they want to skip the latest generation of camera with their preferred sensor type.

--
Scott Barton Kennelly
http://www.bigprintphotos.com

[/QUOTE]

 

[Scottelly]

It looks like I may have to consider medium format more seriously. I've been thinking about getting the new Fuji. I know someone who is going to get one of those, and I will surely "try out" that one myself. For now I will stick to what I've got, and then step up to the S1R, when I can afford one. I want more "resolution" than my SD Quattro H offers though. The 100 MP medium format camera will offer me the ability to print at 60" x 90" with about the same quality as I can now print at 40" x 60" . . . which I think would be nice. Since the new Fuji and lenses for it will be so expensive and less portable though, I may just decide to wait, and use the SD Quattro H and S1R for my most "important" work. I plan to sail around the World, and during that three year trip, I will shoot many thousands of photos . . . making my idea of shooting with an 8x10 film camera too impractical. I was hoping Sigma would make a full-frame Quattro, or possibly a full-frame camera with a 28 or 30 MP Merrill (1:1:1) sensor. Since that's not the case, and since I plan to make giant prints, it looks like I'll end up sticking with what I've got. Now to get the S1R and fix up my Bristol 30 (sailboat).

Wow. Enjoy the trip man. Where are you planning on going?

I figure I'll head down to Key West, and leaver from there toward the Panama canal, through that short-cut to the Pacific, and then down the coast of South America to somewhere in Peru, across to the Galapagos, then on to Tahiti and a bunch of other Pacific Islands, including the Cook Islands and Fiji, before heading to Brisbane, Australia, where I figure I could spend a few months working somewhere, to take a break and re-supply. (I'm an Australian citizen.) Then I'll head out toward the Maldives, after sailing along the coast of northern Australia. I might head down to Perth, before heading across the Indian Ocean, because I know someone there, and I might want to take a break after sailing so far along the coast of the continent. Eventually I'll go to the Seychelles and Madagascar, after I spend some time in the Maldives, before heading to South Africa. My plan is to sail around the Cape of Good Hope when the weather is right, and then across to Argentina, before heading up the coast of South America, and back up through the Caribbean to Key West. I would like to visit Bali and the Phillippines, which I could do by heading up there from Darwin, but that is likely to add six months or even a year to my journey. I guess I'll see what I think when I get to Australia. I've met people who planned to take a one year trip around the Caribbean, but there were still on their sailboat in the Caribbean after ten years.

Drop-outs!

That sounds like an amazing journey.

I plan on getting an RV or maybe converting a van and doing an overland trip.

While NYC is a great place for culture and food and whatnot (if you don't mind the rat race) it has one distinct disadvantage - it's on the coast, which severely limits the places you can go on a long-weekend road trip (but Europe is just a ~5 hour flight).

This is very much in the back of my mind as I hoard my various bits of camera gear & consider what to sell off, what types of systems to buy into. What sorts of photos will I be taking & where will I stow all that gear?

I'm going to assume that a breakin is possible, so I'll want to have the most important stuff physically with me, which means I'll want light-weight gear capable of producing images to whatever quality I want to produce.

I'm happy with the Sony A7 with M-Mount glass for low-light performance in a reasonable package - who cares if it has an AA filter if half the photo is out of focus bokehballs anyway?

So then what to do for daylight (or long exposure night). The L-Mount alliance is intriguing to me because I can continue to use my M-Mount glass & put a Foveon sensor behind it - assuming the Foveon plays nicely with adapted lenses.

The DP Merrill generation shares a battery with the Ricoh GR - from GRD1 through GR2 - and having fewer types of batteries to worry about is important to me.

A GR for wide-angle and street style "from the hip" shooting + DP2 or DP3 Merrill would be a great compact travel combo. Just one battery type to worry about & no lenses cluttering up my life.

Looking forward to seeing your posts on the days you happen to have internet access.

Well, it's not going to happen any time soon. I have to make it to Santiago, Chile in June and July first, and then I have to fix up the boat and get the Panasonic S1R with a "quick" lens first (meaning a native lens that focuses quickly, for walk-around, general use, like my Sigma 24-135mm f2.8-4.5, which I'm using on my Nikon D810 now). I figure about a year or more, but I might just decide to take a two or three month trip down into the Caribbean first, to get used to long sailing trips, and develop my navigation skills. That might make me decide I need a bigger boat, and frankly a lot of people, including my dad, think I should not consider doing it in a boat under 40 ft. long. I figure if a 15 year old girl can do it solo on a 37 ft. boat, then I can do it on a 30 ft. Bristol (a more seaworthy boat than what she used).

 

[Roland_d]

I never liked Quattro, found at least the early pics I saw really noisy/blotchy at low ISO

if less noisy than SD1 (by 2 stops…)

if it can do 1920x1080 video (could binned 4 pixels to 1 for video)

then, it could be hard to resist

but I "fear" that Leica will use this sensor and if they do, this could push the price up

rd

 

[Scottelly]

Too early to tell...What kind of rendering will it have ? IMHO it won't be much like Merrill, maybe something more like pre-Merrill, with colors like Quattro ? Anyway it's an interresting move they made going back to 1:1:1 structure, I hope they did by conviction and not because of user complaints.

When Mr Yamaki toured the Quattro generation sensor, he said something like "Of course we look to our competitors and see that they can do low light increasingly well, and we wish that our sensor can do the same."

In the CP+ presentation, the Foveon guy said that their goal was "ultimate image quality" and "large format film" quality.

I suspect that - while the Quattro was in many ways a step forward in the technology, it lost a bit of what made the Foveon different from a Bayer sensor, and they realized that if they're going to compete, they need to stop optimizing for a wide-variety of uses and start optimizing for what makes Foveon different from Bayer - the 1:1:1.

In my playing with Quattro images, I overlayed an SPP monochrome image over an SPP color image with luminosity blend in Photoshop. I liked the results A LOT.

If the new 1:1:1 sensor can produce images of that quality - not Merrill generation crunchy, and not Quattro generation soft - but the best of both worlds - I'd be VERY happy.

(see sample image here - look for the denim jacket image)

https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry/an-ode-to-the-sigma-merrill-506dd0864169

I (naively ?) think Mr Yamaki aims first and foremost for the best IQ for each generation. Now, IQ being a rather subjective notion, people will like a given "rendering" or not. Other than that, I hope for the best both worlds like you (I didn't use pre-Merrill generations), although I don't find Quattro rendering soft but there are always things that can be improved.

In my experience - at least in portrait mode on the Quattro

• Mid-tones were over exposed
• The images were less sharp/contrasty

I suspect that "portrait mode" makes heavy use of the lower layer ("red") for luminance information - the "red" layer having the most pleasing skin rendition.

(yes I'm saying "red" in quotes because I know it's not actually a "red" layer).

In monochrome the Quattro is excellent and IMHO better than the Merrill generation which had exaggerated microcontrast.

I agree that he aims for the best image quality for each generation, and the move to Quattro was likely as much about getting as many photons as possible down to the lower layers to improve color fidelity as it was to improve high ISO performance/dynamic range.

I don't think it's a mistake that the follow up to the Quattro is a larger pixel pitch 1:1:1 sensor. Their motivation for going full frame may even have been to increase pixel pitch without dramatically reducing pixel count, rather than a marketing decision to "go full frame."

Someone nerdier than me can figure out what the "pixel pitch" of the lower layer Quattro sensor was and how that compares to a 1:1:1 20.3 MP FF sensor.

I believe that going to Quattro may have been a development experiment, and possibly a means of "stalling" until processors were good enough to handle the data from a full-frame 1:1:1 sensor with a lot of pixels. Obviously the SD1 was way under-powered . . . like the SD-14. I think processors have probably progressed enough now to handle a 60 MP per layer data volume.

I was also thinking about how the 20 MP Quattro sensor was/is 1/3 more pixels than the sensor in the SD1 and Merrill cameras, but doesn't seem to give a noticeable difference in image quality, even at 40" x 60" print size. Since the SD Quattro H is not 1/3 more than the 20 MP full-frame camera (more like a little over 1/4), maybe the new camera will really be a match for the SD Quattro H. In this case, I think it just might be worth upgrading, given the full-frame camera's lower noise levels, improved dynamic range (presumably), faster operation (also an assumption), better viewfinder (hopefully), and the shallow flange distance, which will allow the use of a vast array of lenses. Just the fact that we'll be able to mount Canon lenses on the camera, using the MC-21 adapter, will be HUGE. The more I think about the possibilities of the new sensor and camera, the more I think I will probably want one, eventually . . . even though it's not really what I wished for (most recently).

 

[ELSELS]

KSauzeRK, post: 62384210, member: 904360"]
Too early to tell...What kind of rendering will it have ? IMHO it won't be much like Merrill, maybe something more like pre-Merrill, with colors like Quattro ? Anyway it's an interresting move they made going back to 1:1:1 structure, I hope they did by conviction and not because of user complaints.

When Mr Yamaki toured the Quattro generation sensor, he said something like "Of course we look to our competitors and see that they can do low light increasingly well, and we wish that our sensor can do the same."

In the CP+ presentation, the Foveon guy said that their goal was "ultimate image quality" and "large format film" quality.

I suspect that - while the Quattro was in many ways a step forward in the technology, it lost a bit of what made the Foveon different from a Bayer sensor, and they realized that if they're going to compete, they need to stop optimizing for a wide-variety of uses and start optimizing for what makes Foveon different from Bayer - the 1:1:1.

In my playing with Quattro images, I overlayed an SPP monochrome image over an SPP color image with luminosity blend in Photoshop. I liked the results A LOT.

If the new 1:1:1 sensor can produce images of that quality - not Merrill generation crunchy, and not Quattro generation soft - but the best of both worlds - I'd be VERY happy.

(see sample image here - look for the denim jacket image)

https://medium.com/ice-cream-geometry/an-ode-to-the-sigma-merrill-506dd0864169

I (naively ?) think Mr Yamaki aims first and foremost for the best IQ for each generation. Now, IQ being a rather subjective notion, people will like a given "rendering" or not. Other than that, I hope for the best both worlds like you (I didn't use pre-Merrill generations), although I don't find Quattro rendering soft but there are always things that can be improved.

In my experience - at least in portrait mode on the Quattro

• Mid-tones were over exposed
• The images were less sharp/contrasty

I suspect that "portrait mode" makes heavy use of the lower layer ("red") for luminance information - the "red" layer having the most pleasing skin rendition.

(yes I'm saying "red" in quotes because I know it's not actually a "red" layer).

In monochrome the Quattro is excellent and IMHO better than the Merrill generation which had exaggerated microcontrast.

I agree that he aims for the best image quality for each generation, and the move to Quattro was likely as much about getting as many photons as possible down to the lower layers to improve color fidelity as it was to improve high ISO performance/dynamic range.

I don't think it's a mistake that the follow up to the Quattro is a larger pixel pitch 1:1:1 sensor. Their motivation for going full frame may even have been to increase pixel pitch without dramatically reducing pixel count, rather than a marketing decision to "go full frame."

Someone nerdier than me can figure out what the "pixel pitch" of the lower layer Quattro sensor was and how that compares to a 1:1:1 20.3 MP FF sensor.

I believe that going to Quattro may have been a development experiment, and possibly a means of "stalling" until processors were good enough to handle the data from a full-frame 1:1:1 sensor with a lot of pixels. Obviously the SD1 was way under-powered . . . like the SD-14. I think processors have probably progressed enough now to handle a 60 MP per layer data volume.

I was also thinking about how the 20 MP Quattro sensor was/is 1/3 more pixels than the sensor in the SD1 and Merrill cameras, but doesn't seem to give a noticeable difference in image quality, even at 40" x 60" print size. Since the SD Quattro H is not 1/3 more than the 20 MP full-frame camera (more like a little over 1/4), maybe the new camera will really be a match for the SD Quattro H. In this case, I think it just might be worth upgrading, given the full-frame camera's lower noise levels, improved dynamic range (presumably), faster operation (also an assumption), better viewfinder (hopefully), and the shallow flange distance, which will allow the use of a vast array of lenses. Just the fact that we'll be able to mount Canon lenses on the camera, using the MC-21 adapter, will be HUGE. The more I think about the possibilities of the new sensor and camera, the more I think I will probably want one, eventually . . . even though it's not really what I wished for (most recently).
[/QUOTE]
:-D

 

[Scottelly]

Sigma will surely call it a 60 MP camera, which will make it the "highest resolution" camera Sigma has ever made. It will surely capture more "information" than any previous Sigma camera . . . but it will not produce files with greater resolution than the SD Quattro H. It will match all the other Quattros though, and most likely it will offer some improvement over those, with regard to noise, color, etc. I'm wondering how many SD Quattro, SD1 Merrill, and pre-Merrill camera owners (and possibly even SD Quattro H owners) plan to get the new full-frame camera, now that it's been announced it will have a pre-Merrill style sensor design. I don't plan to buy it, because I already have a camera that produces photos that have at least 25% more pixels (the SD Quattro H), but I think if I had an SD Quattro then maybe I would seriously consider it, though I suspect the new full-frame camera will be a pretty expensive camera.

What say you? (and why?)

If the intro is 2020 and reviews, pros and cons, squabbles, infighting and backbiting take some months, I might decide in 2021 or so if the 1:1:1 FF offers me a real improvement on what I have. Then, if I can afford it, if health permits, maybe ..........

Scott, I think it's clear from responses here that you are alone in obsessing about MP. I feel that I "upgraded" from a Nikon FF with 60mm micro lens to a DP3M :-D . I'm guessing that most Sigma camera users feel the same kind of kinship with Foveon sensors.

Maybe you'd be happier dumping Sigma and going Nikon/Sony/Canon?

In some ways I would be George, but I don't have to dump Sigma to get a camera like those. I'll be getting the S1R, and I'll be able to use my SA-mount lenses on it. Eventually, now that things have settled down in my mind a bit, I suspect I will want to get the new camera, as much because of its L mount, as the fact that it will be full-frame and have the superior cloud capture capability of a 1:1:1 sensor. I guess we'll see, but I suspect the fact that the camera will be the newest generation, it will most likely be faster and more responsive than the SD Quattro H . . . and that's always a plus, as far as I'm concerned, especially when shooting portraits with auto-focus turned on.

In 2013 I tried using a high-resolution Sony, which offered three times the MP count of the photos from my SD-14. Even THAT didn't make me quite happy. Sure, some extra detail seemed to be there, but the photos never made me as happy as my favorite photos from my SD-14 . . . and the difference in speed of operation was huge (much greater than the difference between my SD Quattro H and my Nikon D810).

 

[Scottelly]

I don't think I will get another interchangeable lens camera unless some kind of deal of the century happens.

I find that the quality of the lens is the most important component of image quality, and high quality L mount lenses will be too expensive for my budget and commitment level. I am not that impressed with the results when putting legacy lenses (50 Summilux, 28 Canon LTM, 50 Super Takumar) on my Nex 7 and I don't see why the results will be much better on a full frame body so I will pass.

I'm still holding out for a zoom DP with EVF and tilting screen, but that will never happen, sadly.

Jan

There were many who said a full-frame Foveon will never happen, and frankly I would have to agree that I thought a full-frame 1:1:1 Foveon would never come. I suspected that Quattro was the future . . . or something new. I'm glad that Sigma has decided to revisit the 1:1:1 philosophy. I really look forward to seeing how the new camera performs . . . even though it is only going to capture about 1/3 more MP than my SD1 Merrill.

 

[Scottelly]

Sigma will surely call it a 60 MP camera, which will make it the "highest resolution" camera Sigma has ever made. It will surely capture more "information" than any previous Sigma camera . . . but it will not produce files with greater resolution than the SD Quattro H.

It is slightly higher resolution (5520 x 3680 for the L, 5,440 × 3,616 for the H).

Actually, photos from the H are 6,192 x 4,128.

But with that same resolution across all layers it should offer more detail on average than the H (which can achieve as much detail, but not in all situations).

I don't think there will be a visible difference in most subject matter, just like there is almost no visible difference between the Merrills and the APS-C Quattros.

It will match all the other Quattros though, and most likely it will offer some improvement over those, with regard to noise, color, etc

The thing is the sensor is larger so with the resolution so close, that means the photo sites should be larger, that combined with it being a newer sensor should mean less noise and improved higher ISO support.

I agree. If the SD1 Merrill can do ISO 800 o.k. (and I think it can most of the time), then the full-frame camera will be able to do ISO 1600 o.k. The SD Quattro H can't seem to do ISO 800 very well, from my experience, even after all this development time (meaning they have been working on improving the Quattro image quality for years now). In fact, it's so bad at ISO 400 and up that I almost NEVER use anything but ISO 100 and 200.

. I'm wondering how many SD Quattro, SD1 Merrill, and pre-Merrill camera owners (and possibly even SD Quattro H owners) plan to get the new full-frame camera, now that it's been announced it will have a pre-Merrill style sensor design. I don't plan to buy it, because I already have a camera that produces photos that have at least 25% more pixels (the SD Quattro H), but I think if I had an SD Quattro then maybe I would seriously consider it, though I suspect the new full-frame camera will be a pretty expensive camera.

The other factor in its favor is the massive lens support. If any Canon trick lenses appeal (like a tilt-shift), well you can use the EF-L adaptor.

Yes.

Or I can use any really good SA mount lenses I already have. Or of course any of the L mount lenses from any of the three L-mount alliance companies...

Another HUGE plus.

On top of that it opens up the very nice ability to use what lenses you like, but actually being able to swap out camera bodies for meaningful feature changes. I have long held that what the digital era has lost most people is the ability to change out film - sure you can adjust ISO but it's not the same degree of change you could get by moving from one type of film to another. With the L-mount system I can get the Panasonic L-mount camera for video (4K 60FPS) or very high ISO support, in fact when the SA adaptor starts shipping I am thinking very strongly of getting the Panasonic L mount camera and adaptor, and then the Sigma next year for a fully complimentary system. In the meantime I'd use my SA lenses on the Quattro H and the Panasonic camera.

This is exactly what I plan to do, so I guess we think alike.

 

[joe173]

If it is priced right and affordable, I might consider. However, I FULLY support Sigma for their decision to go back to 1:1:1 format. I have watched Yamaki-san's presentation, and I really liked his choice of words when he said like "..we are going back to our traditional and original sensor format". It seems like Sigma guys have got the message from user reactions from various forums and websites.

Sigma will surely call it a 60 MP camera, which will make it the "highest resolution" camera Sigma has ever made. It will surely capture more "information" than any previous Sigma camera . . .

Yes. I think so.

but it will not produce files with greater resolution than the SD Quattro H.

I don't care.

But I am sure new FF will bring back those qualities Sigma has long lost, which I know you won't agree, as it is not quantifiable. But like most other true Foveon fans, I find images from traditional Sigma cameras unique, with sense-of-depth (or 3D pop as some say), right down to the feeling in the air, film-like natural rendering. For me, that's more important than resolution.

"Images produced by Sigma [traditional] cameras, have what's been called an “emotional quality”. The emotion comes with a level of image quality that only the Foveon X3® direct image sensor can deliver. Image quality of a clarity and exquisiteness easily outclassing that of conventional digital cameras. This level of image quality reproduces the scene you shot, right down to the feeling in the air. It's only possible in a vertical color-capture system that does not require color interpolation.."

t will match all the other Quattros though, and most likely it will offer some improvement over those, with regard to noise, color, etc.

I think there will be considerable improvement in noise, and DR aspects compared to Quattro, since it has bigger pixels. In my opinion, improved noise and bringing back all those traditional qualities mentioned above contributes to overall improved image quality, not just by cramming more pixels.

I'm wondering how many SD Quattro, SD1 Merrill, and pre-Merrill camera owners (and possibly even SD Quattro H owners) plan to get the new full-frame camera, now that it's been announced it will have a pre-Merrill style sensor design. I don't plan to buy it, because I already have a camera that produces photos that have at least 25% more pixels (the SD Quattro H), but I think if I had an SD Quattro then maybe I would seriously consider it, though I suspect the new full-frame camera will be a pretty expensive camera.

What say you? (and why?)

I don't understand your obsession for more and more and more...resolution. Actually, what is your requirement and how much is enough for you? If your are so concerned about high res, I suggest you could go for any high end bayer FF or MF.

It's like which car has more HP. The car with the most HP must be best surely. Sigma can't fall behind the MP war. We need bragging rights.

Just go for film and buy a drum scanner and be done with it. You can still process 4x5 and 8x10 film sheets. A used drum scanner can be had reasonably if it has been serviced and doesn't need major repairs. Then you can get 8000dpi, print as large as you want, each scanned pixel with full color. It helps if you live in a major city.

Resolution is only one metric. It's not the end-all be-all of IQ. Quality of data is more important. 20mp, 25mp, who cares?? You'd need 100mp to double the pixel density from 25mp.

 

[jimbocourier]

... MP,MP,MP,MP ad infinitum ... ;-)

Of course this makes ME a little sad, because I really do want medium format image resolution in a smaller package ...

Hmmm, geometric resolution in the image plane ...

Fuji GFX 50S: 94 lp/mm

Sigma SD1 Merrill: 100 lp/mm

Looks like you already got it :-D

 

[xpatUSA]

... MP,MP,MP,MP ad infinitum ... ;-)

Of course this makes ME a little sad, because I really do want medium format image resolution in a smaller package ...

Hmmm, geometric resolution in the image plane ...

Fuji GFX 50S: 94 lp/mm

Sigma SD1 Merrill: 100 lp/mm

Looks like you already got it :-D

For comparison, what would be the lp/mm of a 42MP [Bayer] sensor?

Well, at 3:2 aspect ratio, that would be 7937x5291px but you didn't tell me the sensor size, so I can't tell you the lp/mm.

Sorry.

--
Ted

 

[mengaza]

If new sensor, no issue of green cast when use manual lens or canon lens, I will surely buy it.

 

[jimbocourier]

... MP,MP,MP,MP ad infinitum ... ;-)

Of course this makes ME a little sad, because I really do want medium format image resolution in a smaller package ...

Hmmm, geometric resolution in the image plane ...

Fuji GFX 50S: 94 lp/mm

Sigma SD1 Merrill: 100 lp/mm

Looks like you already got it :-D

For comparison, what would be the lp/mm of a 42MP [Bayer] sensor?

Well, at 3:2 aspect ratio, that would be 7937x5291px but you didn't tell me the sensor size, so I can't tell you the lp/mm.

Sorry.