Am I oversharpening
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: george_preddy on 13 Jun 2005 22:33 KennyJr wrote: > I've spent the last several days reading up on the foveon image sensor > and I've got to say that I like the idea. One pixel site reading all > three colors. It's a good idea with a lot of promise. > > I've also spent the last several days looking at pictures from Sigma SD9 > and SD10 cameras. So far I haven't been impressed. RAW only. While great for pros, this means amatures have to do what most aren't capable of doing--delving deeply into the digital domain. If you understand digital and are comfortable with the most advanced aspects, you've get stunning results. But there is definitely a time penalty for the quality increase. > I don't know if the > problem is with the sensor or with the firmware in the camera. Hopefully > Foveon and/or Sigma will work the bugs out of the technology. > > I think once they work the bugs out and start offering lower prices on > cameras with foveon sensors they'll start cutting into the market now > dominated by cameras using Bayer sensors. Until that time though I'll > stick with cameras that use the Bayer sensor. Their currently selling for about 1/4th the price of a similar MP count Bayer DSLR, although they used to be less than 1/10th the cost.
From: grant kinsley on 14 Jun 2005 00:20 On 13 Jun 2005 19:33:40 -0700, george_preddy(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > >KennyJr wrote: >> I've spent the last several days reading up on the foveon image sensor >> and I've got to say that I like the idea. One pixel site reading all >> three colors. It's a good idea with a lot of promise. >> >> I've also spent the last several days looking at pictures from Sigma SD9 >> and SD10 cameras. So far I haven't been impressed. > >RAW only. While great for pros, this means amatures have to do what >most aren't capable of doing--delving deeply into the digital domain. >If you understand digital and are comfortable with the most advanced >aspects, you've get stunning results. But there is definitely a time >penalty for the quality increase. > >> I don't know if the >> problem is with the sensor or with the firmware in the camera. Hopefully >> Foveon and/or Sigma will work the bugs out of the technology. >> >> I think once they work the bugs out and start offering lower prices on >> cameras with foveon sensors they'll start cutting into the market now >> dominated by cameras using Bayer sensors. Until that time though I'll >> stick with cameras that use the Bayer sensor. > >Their currently selling for about 1/4th the price of a similar MP count >Bayer DSLR, although they used to be less than 1/10th the cost. a sensel is not a pixel. I don't think there are any current DSLRs that go down as low as the Sigmas in pixel count, so your statement is ratehr meaningless G
From: george_preddy on 14 Jun 2005 00:34 grant kinsley wrote: > On 13 Jun 2005 19:33:40 -0700, george_preddy(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > > > > > >KennyJr wrote: > >> I've spent the last several days reading up on the foveon image sensor > >> and I've got to say that I like the idea. One pixel site reading all > >> three colors. It's a good idea with a lot of promise. > >> > >> I've also spent the last several days looking at pictures from Sigma SD9 > >> and SD10 cameras. So far I haven't been impressed. > > > >RAW only. While great for pros, this means amatures have to do what > >most aren't capable of doing--delving deeply into the digital domain. > >If you understand digital and are comfortable with the most advanced > >aspects, you've get stunning results. But there is definitely a time > >penalty for the quality increase. > > > >> I don't know if the > >> problem is with the sensor or with the firmware in the camera. Hopefully > >> Foveon and/or Sigma will work the bugs out of the technology. > >> > >> I think once they work the bugs out and start offering lower prices on > >> cameras with foveon sensors they'll start cutting into the market now > >> dominated by cameras using Bayer sensors. Until that time though I'll > >> stick with cameras that use the Bayer sensor. > > > >Their currently selling for about 1/4th the price of a similar MP count > >Bayer DSLR, although they used to be less than 1/10th the cost. > > a sensel is not a pixel. Pixel count is meaningless, Bayers upscales all images at least 400%. Fujis by 800%. > I don't think there are any current DSLRs that go down as low as the > Sigmas in pixel count, so your statement is ratehr meaningless 13.72MP isn't that common. The Sigmas output 4536 x 3024 pixels images.
From: JPS on 14 Jun 2005 03:13 In message <1118723676.491758.184380(a)o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>, george_preddy(a)yahoo.com wrote: >13.72MP isn't that common. The Sigmas output 4536 x 3024 pixels images. The Sigma software does; the camera images are only 3.43MP. -- <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS(a)no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
From: KennyJr on 14 Jun 2005 17:10
In article <1118716420.043879.238140(a)g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, george_preddy(a)yahoo.com says... > KennyJr wrote: > > I've spent the last several days reading up on the foveon image sensor > > and I've got to say that I like the idea. One pixel site reading all > > three colors. It's a good idea with a lot of promise. > > > > I've also spent the last several days looking at pictures from Sigma SD9 > > and SD10 cameras. So far I haven't been impressed. > > RAW only. While great for pros, this means amatures have to do what > most aren't capable of doing--delving deeply into the digital domain. > If you understand digital and are comfortable with the most advanced > aspects, you've get stunning results. But there is definitely a time > penalty for the quality increase. > It seems there aren't any pros out there then, at least none that I've seen. I have yet to see a SD9 or SD10 picture with decent color. Foveon needs to address this issue if they hope to compete with cameras using Bayer sensors. Of course many cameras using Bayer sensors output to RAW and they don't seem to have problems with color. I can't believe that someone used to tweaking pictures from Canon RAW files would have any difficulty with Sigma RAW files. At this point I'm inclined to conclude that the Foveon image sensor just isn't ready for prime time. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |