From: SMS on
nospam wrote:
> In article <hm3o8h$qfi$1(a)>, Pete Stavrakoglou
> <ntotrr(a)> wrote:
>> I've got too many these days. I have the SD14 (have always used Sigma
>> before others, including the SD9). I also have an Olympus E-510 and my wife
>> bought me a Canon 7D for my 50th. Now that's a nice camera.
> that's a nice wife.

She was so upset at the colors from the Sigma cameras that she did it as
much for herself as for him.
From: SMS on
nospam wrote:
> In article <4b860fa5$0$1663$742ec2ed(a)>, Ray Fischer
> <rfischer(a)> wrote:
>> Besides, the problem with Sigma cameras isn't the sensor.
> that's one of the problems.
>> It's everything else.
> that's the rest of the problems.
>> Their cameras are really kind of crappy and do not
>> stand up against similarly-priced models from Nikon and Canon.
> they don't stand up to *any* models from nikon or canon, regardless of
> price.
> let's not forget that the sd14 initially sold for $1599

No they didn't. That was the asking price. Now the asking price is $660.
If they can get it down to about $300 they might have a market.
From: nospam on
In article <hm8oo9$ekt$1(a)>, David J Taylor
<david-taylor(a)> wrote:

> That would be an interesting test - making the same size print from a
> 4.6MP Foveon and a 12MP (or whatever) Bayer DSLR. How close would you
> need to look at the print to see the difference? Probably far closer than
> most people would naturally view the print.

the difference would be aliasing, not colour detail, and that's because
the camera lacks an anti-alias filter, which is the main reason why
people see a difference. it has very little to do with the sensor
From: nospam on
In article <4b8801f1$0$1595$742ec2ed(a)>, SMS
<scharf.steven(a)> wrote:

> > let's not forget that the sd14 initially sold for $1599
> No they didn't.

actually, they did.

> That was the asking price.

and the diehard fanbois paid that for the first few months. there
hadn't been a new sigma camera for a few years and there was a lot of
pent up demand.

once the initial wave was over, sales tanked. it dropped to $1200 and
then kept dropping until it bottomed out at $350.

since then, it's crept back up, probably because there's no way in hell
sigma can release the sd15 at a profitable price when they have a $350
sd14 still available. there's not really much difference between the
two cameras.
From: nospam on
In article <4b87ff15$0$1662$742ec2ed(a)>, SMS
<scharf.steven(a)> wrote:

> To invest huge amounts of money in sensor
> development for a line of D-SLRs with close to 0% market share does not
> make any sense.

yet sigma says they are working on future foveon sensors, for high end
cameras! if they think they're going to compete with the likes of nikon
or canon, they're on crack. some day, they're going to realize they
can't fund this sinkhole forever.

> That's not to say that someone in the future might not come up with a
> sensor that layers pixel sensors on top of each other, but there is no
> practical reason to do that unless they can solve the technical problems
> that have affected Foveon.