Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: DaShiv on February 07, 2004, 01:37:09 am
-
Actually on the DPR review, the SD9 showed more resolution than the D60, so the SD10 will probably will enlarge better than the DRebel's images if using a good resizing program/action (such as Genuine Fractals). And it gives the benefits of smaller file sizes as well. My main beef again is Canon glass vs Sigma glass, plus also there are some noise and ISO issues with the Foveon sensors, whereas Canon's CMOS sensor has been simply wonderful to me.
That said I think people who like what the Foveon chip has to offer should certainly try the SD9/10 out, just like those interested in a line of DSLR-optimized lenses should certainly feel free to look into the Olympus E-1. Choices are good for everyone! But I'm happy with the Canon system myself, thank you very much.
-
I don't like the algorithms that have to guess during their interpolation. Yellowy blotchiness in skin & hair, purplely blotchiness on grey walls, structures. Pretty poor software Mr Bayer! Huh? It's not a 6MP camera it's 2 MP except for green sensor, when it's 4MP and the photosites are not even adjacent. Every one always misses this fact.
Yep. Purple and yellow blotchy horror everywhere.
(http://visual-vacations.com/ProfessionalServices/equestrian/187U9552.jpg)
Ian, you need a bit of a reality check regarding the abilities of Bayer-pattern sensors and the cameras that use them.
-
With all due respect, I wish you were right:
Being a Ph.D.'d scientist myself (theoretical mathematics, also known as number theory), involved with the study of number in such diverse fields as chemistry, astronomy, biology, etc., I can only say that there are still many scientists out there that hold theories to be truths, and who are very closeminded when faced with challenging new ideas. Not every scientist accepts new insights at the same rate. Some "convert" more easily than others. Science is not as absolute as some think it is.
Technology is far more absolute in that sense than science. But I don't udnerstand why you take to me to task on comparing the SD10 with the 1Ds. May be the previous responder did that. I was only reacting to Michael's statement, which i found to be illogical.
But I am confident if a new Sigma SD20 came out with a 3-layer 5MP sensor plus a resolution of the noise issue at higher ISOs, then it would handily beat any 35mm type DSLR currently on the market.
-
You might even claim that the SD10 can produce marginally better quality images than either the 6MP 300D or 10D, but I think that will depend on the quality of the attached lens.
.....
It's not clear that the SD10 can produce better quality images than the 300D, but if it can and these differences are clearly noticeable on large prints using a wide range of lenses, then that would be something to get excited about.
A friend of mine has the D Rebel (300D) and he has shown his images to me on a CD. They look pale compared to the SD10 in terms of color, still have that typical digital flat look, and the overall contrast was generally harsher than the SD10's. The colors looked a little "too happy" as well. They were taken by the Rebel's kit lens, but I have a kit lens with my SD10 as well, which I think performs better. The SD10's images generally look more 3D-ish, more film like and the software ofers great control over the RAW data very generous latitude parameters.
The argument that Canon has more lenses than Sigma is kind of silly, because do you know of any photographer who owns them all? How many do you really need? It depends on what type of stuff you shoot. For some people one lens may be enough, for others just a few, etc.
The SD10's great advantage is that I generally do not need blown out highlights, and that was a crucial deciding factor for me, Nothing could be worse, in my opinion, than blown out highlights. That's data lost forever.
-
Well, I used to shoot that rather dense Velvia before, and I must say the DR of the Sigma SD10 is a big step in the right direction. The Sigma SD10 is not as saturrated as the SD9 is (one of the reaons I didn't buy it, despite much lower price).
Why not post this question on dpreview's sigma forum?
-
Janus,
The SD10 does have stunning image quality as a 3 megapixel camera, and any D30 owner would be seriously tempted to switch to Sigma, if the D60/10D/300D/1Ds etc. didn't exist.
But you must be aware that any astute buyer will be carefully weighing the pros and cons. The bottom line is, the 300D/Rebel has similar performance but with a great deal more options in terms of lens quality.
-
Sigma Sigma bla bla bla..
Can the Sigma do action photography like this?
(http://www.westol.com/~brettd/sd10/car3.jpg)
Wait... That was taken with a Sigma.. My bad :D
-
Janus,
I don't find the dpreview forums particularly stimulating. A brief squiz of the SD10 forum indicates most posters are terribly concerned about their lens choices. There's little that addresses in depth the serious flaws of the SD10, ie. inaccurate color above ISO 400 and hopless performance at long exposures. What we get is a head-in-the-sand reaction to these deficiencies in the form of exaggerated anecdotal reports of superior color rendition at low ISO's (compared with the 10D).
The Foveon concept is brilliant and it's a great shame that more resources are not being pumped into R&D. A true 10MP full frame Foveon sensor would beat the pants off the 1Ds. It would be equivalent to a 20MP Bayer type sensor. Perhaps the ideal full frame DSLR. I hope they succeed.
-
[font color=\'#000000\']Sigma's latest lens offering is now available:
http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/24_60f28_exdg.html (http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/24_60f28_exdg.html)
see also
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0405/04051202sigma2460.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0405/04051202sigma2460.asp)[/font]
-
[font color=\'#000000\']Jonathan, that was a hit below the belt.
I certainly did not write that review. It wasn't that good, the samples were unconvincing.
It is a good example that a bad review is possible if the reviewer doesn't know what the #+@*$ he is doing.
For example, I didn't take these photos, someone ele did:
http://www.pbase.com/champa/along_the_stre...exicans_riviera (http://www.pbase.com/champa/along_the_streets_of_the_mexicans_riviera)
Tell me, is this a good camera, or what?[/font]
-
[font color=\'#000000\']Thanks Lin, exactly my point all along.[/font]
-
A report in the British magazine Total Digital Photography recently stated, according to a post on the Sigma SD10 forum:
The Feb 2004 issue has a good article on the photographer Paul Harcourt Davis (his latest book on macro photography: Small Things Big). He uses a Nikon D100 and Sigma SD10 and some sophisticated glass.
Quote from article; "... and the Sigma SD9 and SD10 beat all the six megapixel cameras I have seen and used hands down".
(link is here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums....477832) (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=7477832))
------
All I can say: that is exactly my experience as well. Even the so-called kit lenses this camera came with perform very well. Anyone who thinks this is just a 3MP camera doesn't get the point. I have a Canon G3 for casual family photos with 4MP whose image quality looks very pale compared to what I get from the Sigma SD10. Pixel quality is what coutns, not just pixel count. I enlarge these images to 48MB and submit them to an agency. No problem, I have opriutned 16x20 and looks fantastically sharp!
The lens I use the most at present is one of the highest rated lenses in the world: the Sigma 50mm Macro (2.8) EX.
This camera is perfect for outdoor shooting in daylight at ISO100, etc. You get my drift....like using slow speed slide film and have a fixed lens rangefinder like a Fuji 69 or Makina 67 or 903-SWC. WIll of course get more lenses.
For fine art and studio work I think this camera is a great tool, but not for sports, low light, fast moving objects, etc.
It is a niche camera, but I think as such is does extremely well. Very good for making great b/w prints. The software is very good (although colro wheel should eb a color sldier as in FotoStation 2.0 Pro version).
I think Michael may eventually review it and give a thumbs up just like he just did with the Contax N digital review.
I have psoted a gallery of images at:
http://www.pbase.com/janus/sigma_sd10&page=all (http://www.pbase.com/janus/sigma_sd10&page=all)
and panoramics at:
http://www.pbase.com/janus/panoramas_using_a_sigma_sd10 (http://www.pbase.com/janus/panoramas_using_a_sigma_sd10)
Let me know what YOU think.
-
Actually, there are number of contributors (Tammons, for one) at dprewview.com in the Sigma forum who not only own either an SD9 or SD10 but also own a Fuji S2, Nikon D100, Rebel 300D, and Canon 10D. The fact that owners of those others cameras also purchased a Foveon based system says something. I know that the owner of the 10D has it for its ISO performance but perfers the SD9 and SD10 in good light. I'm not an advocate of having dual systems. So if you only want one system, Nikon or Canon may be the one for you. But there is a difference between the prints produced by Foveon vs. Bayer cameras. One is *not* superior to the other. It's more of a personal preference.
-
So the average of 2MP and 4MP is 3MP. The Foveon is a 3MP camera and the quality is roughly equal to the Bayer type 6MP (perhaps 6.5MP). We haven't missed this fact. :D
-
But I don't udnerstand why you take to me to task on comparing the SD10 with the 1Ds.
Well, I don't think you've made such claims and I, myself, would never have thought of making such a comparison, but I think such a comparison is legitimate as long as the limits and nature of the comparison are made very clear.
The pixel pitch of the SD9/10 is actually bigger than that of the 1Ds (9.12 micron as opposed to 8.8 micron), but I believe if you were to shoot the moon (for example, or a distant bird on a twig) with both cameras, using a Sigma 800mm F5.6 prime, the SD10 would produce the sharper image.
In this sense, for this very narrow purpose, the SD10 could be a better choice of camera than the much more expensive 1Ds.
-
This is a silly debate. Sigma and Foveon have *never* positioned their camera or the F7 chip as a competitor to *any* 10+MP imaging device, Bayer or otherwise.
Sigma and Foveon have not, but ALF did.
I have never heard of any Bayer sensored DSLR, whether it be the Canon EOS 1Ds or the Kodak 14N being compared to the resolution of a medium format film camera but I have with the Sigma SD9:
ALF is either surprisingly ignorant, or intentionally deceptive. In either case, his claims are patently ludicrous.
-
But this I can tell you about latitude: I accidentally totally overexposed an image, and even in SPP it showed up nearly all washed out. Yet, with the software controls I was able to almost perfectly restore the image back to normal.
The adjustments available in SPP are impressive, but there are similar adjustments available in Photoshop CS raw converter which I use, and in the Shadow/Highlight control, after conversion.
It certainly makes sense that the SD10 should have a higher dynamic range than other Bayer type DSLRs because the photodetectors are large (9.12 micron) and there are three of them for each pixel, but it's impossible to tell from the SPP software.
An indication of DR would be how the camera behaves in relation to the type of film you used to use before going digital. Most professionals seem to use slide film with a DR of about 6 stops which is about the same as the DR of the Canon DSLRs. I used mostly colour negative film which has a DR of around 8 stops and therefore the DR limitations of the D60 were painfully obvious. It required a bit of getting used to.
-
Ray wrote: But you must be aware that any astute buyer will be carefully weighing the pros and cons. The bottom line is, the 300D/Rebel has similar performance but with a great deal more options in terms of lens quality.
Ooh, wait a moment. I almost made a comment abotu the 300D/Kiss/Rebel-D yesterday, but I didn't, as I didn't want to single out any camera. But since you brought it up, I have to respond now. A friend of mine has one, and he has shared his full res pictures with me, and it does NOT, I repeat does not, compare favorably to the SD10. The colors are not quite right with that Canon (greens are too Velvia like), and the images have that typical flat digital look.
Overall: very Dissimilar performance, not similar.
-
to drhiii:
Check your link: I cannot go to your webpages.
And anyone who wants to see my updated SD10 pages:
http://www.pbase.com/janus/sigma_sd10 (http://www.pbase.com/janus/sigma_sd10)
http://www.pbase.com/janus/sigma_sd10_part_ii (http://www.pbase.com/janus/sigma_sd10_part_ii)
http://www.pbase.com/janus/sigma_sd10_real..._fake_panoramas (http://www.pbase.com/janus/sigma_sd10_real_and_fake_panoramas)
Let's hit the 10,000 mark on how many people have read this SD10 forum! We are now well at over 9000! Is this a record for Luminous or what?
-janus
-
Ray,
You simply have to accept that some photographers prefer a different feature set and image look than you do. Just as some Hassy owners prefer a square and not the additional weight of an RZ or RB rotating back. A difference is not a deficiency.
-
Actually, careful use of the fill-light feature in the Sigma SPP software, which can be used in a positive and negative direction, may have cured this as well.
There is also a way in PS to cure this: blend a slightly over and a slughtly underexposed image and blend the two to get rid of blow outs and block ups.
After all, only that part was overexposed, while the rest of the shot looks fine. Sometimes, in real life, though, a white part being struck by such strong sunlight will even be "blown out" to the human eye, let alone a camera.
While I do not necessarily disagree with you, I would love to see the raw file and play around with it.
-
[font color=\'#000000\']
Tell me, is this a good camera, or what?
I would say "what."
Actually I should be more specific. It is a good cam as you are capable of taking pictures with it. But it is plagued with issues wich keep it from competing properly with the rest of the cams out there. The SD10 is only the second generation of the sensor and corrisponding tech. Or perhaps even v1.5 of the tech as I think there have only been software improvements since the SD9.
I've gotten a chance to play with some of it's RAW files and the PP2 software. It' a good 3mp camera that can perhaps compete with a 4.5mp camera in amount of resolved detail and it has good color. PP2 is a great program.
Considering the cost of the camera compared to the capabilities of it's competition it's not the greatest camera out there. And it's certainly not as good as you've (Janus) been touting.[/font]
-
[font color=\'#000000\']The down side as far as image enlargeability is concerned is that when the subject material has geometric lines at other than 90, 45 or 180 degree angles, the 3.5 megapixel file array produces visible stair-stepping aliasing which is readily apparent in printed enlargements.[/font]
[font color=\'#000000\']How much can aftermarket software overcome these "jaggies"? What do you think is the best program?
I have used spline, but have been disappointed. I have used bicubic at 5% intervals, which is better than Spline. I am not familiar with the results of Genuine Fractals or other programs out there. I havew also used Fred Miranda's StairInterpolation, and it's not bad, but not discernibly better than the 5% solution.[/font]
-
Michael did not review the Contax N Dig. He wanted to, but could not get one from the distributors.
-
Wow, Janus----gorgeous!!!
Howard
-
I don't like the algorithms that have to guess during their interpolation. Yellowy blotchiness in skin & hair, purplely blotchiness on grey walls, structures. Pretty poor software Mr Bayer! Huh? It's not a 6MP camera it's 2 MP except for green sensor, when it's 4MP and the photosites are not even adjacent. Every one always misses this fact.
-
Here's my dream camera:
Son of 1Ds, 16MP, 8 FPS. 4 layer Foveon sensor, B+G+R+IR. (no kludging with filters for IR shots) Color accuracy/sensor noise better than current 1Ds even at ISO 6400. Oh, and less than $3000.
-
This page has had more than 1000 hits in about two weeks! Not bad!
Actually, the Japanese guy at d-shell.net is working on different adaptors, but needs a suficient number of orders to make it worth his while. The M42 adaptor has been the only one made so far, and a new version is coming in March.
He has also a prototype SD9 camera with a new front plate to accept Canon lenses, that work with autofocus and auto f-stop control. Basically, it is a one-time conversion to a Canon mount/cameras with a Foveon sensor. He showed me a movie of it. But nothing concrete yet, as he is looking for investors. A wild idea, that I am not sure will take that easily. You would loose any guarantee on the Sigma part of the camera, and I am not sure the Japanese guy will warrant the entire camera. But as SD9's drop in pice, it may be worth a gamble, unless the conversion is too darn expensive.
But, and this is interesting, the Sigma mount is apparently so close to the Pentax K mount, that if you make minor modifications to the K mount, by removing the plastic protruding piece on the bottom of the lens and also cut the f-stop pin, you can use it as a fully manually controlled lens on either Sigma SD9 or SD10 (and their film cameras for that matter). You loose 1.5mm of spacing, and I am not sure how it affects the infinity focus of the lens.
The Sigma SD10, for outdoor work, continues to amaze me; see my updated gallery (update to be completed before Feb. 18).
http://www.pbase.com/janus (http://www.pbase.com/janus)
Also check out Sigma Japan's new cool website in English language:
http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/sd10/english/index.htm (http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/sd10/english/index.htm)
SD10\" target=\"_blank\"][a href=\"http://www.pbase.com/image....RL=http\" target=\"_blank\"]http://www.pbase.com/image....RL=http (http://www.pbase.com/image/26005316/original.jpg[a href=\"http://www.pbase.com/image/26005316/original)[/a] photo[/a]
-
Ray you are way off the mark mate and Janus you should really know better....You are both mistaking the image size for the amount of resoluton data the chip outputs.
The Foveon X3 is a TRUE 10.2 megapixel sensor because it has 3.4 million green pixels, 3.4 million red pixels and 3.4 million blue pixels.
A 6.2mp EOS 10D, in comparison, has only 3.1 million green pixels, 1.55 million red pixels and 1.55 million blue pixels.
This means that both the SD9 and SD10 have slightly more green pixels and double the amount of red and blue pixels than an average 6mp Bayer sensored DSLR.
In fact the nearest directly comparable Bayer sensored DSLR is the Canon 11mp EOS 1Ds which has 5.5 million green pixels, but only 2.75 million red pixels and 2.75 million blue pixels.
You also have to pay 5-6 times more for the 1Ds so its not exactly value for money!!!
As you can see, compared with the 1Ds the Siggy SD's both have more red and blue pixels and only have a little less green pixels.
You might think this would help the 1Ds to resolve green detail such as foliage better than the SD's but in practice the opposite occurs due to the sharper image produced by the Foveon X3 sensor.
I have never heard of any Bayer sensored DSLR, whether it be the Canon EOS 1Ds or the Kodak 14N being compared to the resolution of a medium format film camera but I have with the Sigma SD9:
http://www.sd9.org/sd9vrsmed.htm (http://www.sd9.org/sd9vrsmed.htm)
What does this mean in practice?....It means the Foveon X3 endowed cameras can produce huge high quality prints more than double the size that any 6mp Bayer sensored DSLR is capable of:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums....7182672 (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=7182672)
Oh and if any of you here are into IR photography you should seriously think about getting the SD10 as if you remove the "dust protector" you have probably the worlds most sensitive digital IR camera. (The dust protector is also the the IR filter on the SD10)
Note: this will not work with the SD9 as its IR filter is not removable.
Alf B.
-
Michael you wrote:
"In any event, I'm no expert in this area, and have no reason to believe that you are either. But I have talked extensively with experts in this regard and am comfortable with my understanding and explanation."
So you are more right that the other non-expert? Becasue you talked to experts? So, they really know? And how can you judge the person you are responding to? What experts did he talk to?
One of the flaws in modern sioence is that too many scientists ignore that with which they are uncomfortable. So they frantically hold on to what they feel is comfortable for their own understaning. A kind of "fit" between what they would like to believe and what they have chosen to fit into that category.
But, obviously, this is bogus science. That is belief, not science. How many people "believe" in evolution, even though it is still only a theory? Same with the big bang theory. It is a theory, with plenty of dissenters. Many people take theory for fact. nothing could be more wrong.
Hence, what you say is utterly illogical: how can you on the one hand affirm that are not an expert, but yet hold on to what you "have heard from other so-called experts", even though you also affirmed that the person you were responding to is probablky not an expert either. Are his expert friends "inferior?"
And you urge everyone else not to disucss the issue any further. That is not a very democratic attitude, by the way, and it is simply illogical.
I will not go into the technical discussion about pixels. The SD10 is capabale of taking some "####" good pictures. That is enough. The 17x24 prints I have made on an aging Epson 3000 speak for themselves. Once I get the new Epson these prints should look even better!
Nuf said. Nothing personal. Love this website!
-
This is not a simple topic. Also, there isn't much good information available on it for the layman.
Here (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=7668974) has a very good explanation of how the Bayer Matrix does its work and how luminance and chrominance information are interrelated.
A couple of points where I disagree with the author. Firsly, the ability to get chromanance information from the R/B sites is now a lot more than a "hack". Some of the math has become very sophisticated. That's why Capture One is such a great RAW converter. These folks do matrix conversion as good as anyone and better than most. But, that's a digression.
The point is that folks that I've spoken with who eat sleep and breath this stuff on an engineering level seem to agree that the reduction in resolution from a Bayer matrix is at worst about 25% these days. This means that a Foveon chip would need to be about 75% the size of a Bayer-based chip to have equal resolution.
To therefore compare a 3.4MP Sigma to an 11MP Canon is not supported by the facts.
Michael
-
Well, Sigma now has a OS lens (Optical Stabilizer) an 80-400, or on the Sigma a 135-680mm lens.
See http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker/sigma_80400_os (http://www.pbase.com/rickdecker/sigma_80400_os) for some test shots by a fellow SD10 owner.
-
I haven't done any testing on dynamic range.
But this I can tell you about latitude: I accidentally totally overexposed an image, and even in SPP it showed up nearly all washed out. Yet, with the software controls I was able to almost perfectly restore the image back to normal.
Although the Sigma SD9/10 has auto bracketing, it only makes sense to set it to its maximum setting, as the latitude is so good, that slight differences can easily be overome or mimicked in the software.
As with film, dynamic range depends a lot on the light: the softer and more even the light, the more dynamic range, and the harsher, the less of a range.
I took some shots of white marble buildings today and when I slide the fill light of SPP all the way to the right to make the image really light, I still retain detail in my whites.
In another shot, when I sldie the exposure setting in SPP to the right, I still have a gopod image at 1.5+, and somewhat washed out at 2.0.
Go to Sigma's Japanese website and play with the controls yourself!
http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/sd10/english/picture/index.htm (http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/sd10/english/picture/index.htm)
(click on the demo bar to activate it and then click on any of the control sliders)
-
Too many cameras, too little time.
That's all there is to it.
Maybe one day.
Michael
-
I would just add that to get the same pixel level sharpness from a 10D or 300D as from a SD9/10 you have to use L glass, which makes the system a bit more expensive. However, these debates are silly, as all the current DSLRs basically are bad cameras--bad either in resolution or dynamic range or good in resolution (1Ds) but bad in price. The real camera we all want is probably several years away.
-
RE: M42 lenses:
That's absolutely correct ! ! !
And there are some gems out there; I got hold of a few rare, but excellent MC lenses.
I bought the M42 adaptor from www.d-shelll.net and am using a set of screw mount lenses. I use a lightmeter to set exposure.
Actually, a lot of SD9 and SD10 owners are using all kinds of M42 lenses, with great results, and simply because....well, because it's a lot of fun...
As Bugs Bunny would aptly say to M42 lens users: "Screwy ain't it?"
-
For grins, here is a gallery with sd9 and sd10 pics. I love the camera(s), a personal choice of course.
drh
http://david.oldcolo.com/gallery/sd9 (http://david.oldcolo.com/gallery/sd9)
-
Needless to say, the change to your SD10 will be permanent with this kind of operation. Does anyone read Japanese and can decipher this? Is this being done by the same guy from www.d-shell.net who has been working on this, or by someone else as well?
-
I have already decipherd the text with: www.babelfish.altavista.com
And its actually in simplified Chinese not Japanese (The japanese use Chinese characters)
The grammar does not translate 100% into English so it can be a bit hard to understand but some imformation reads very clearly, such as this:
"The Canon and Sigma lens electronics (electrical connections) are identical in configuration"
So it should be fairly easy to make an adapter that will allow AF and camera controlled aperture to be used.
The resulting adapter, the C/SA Teleconverter adapter (shown in the pictures fitted between the lens and the camera)
It is made from a Canon 1.4x teleconverter and a Sigma Teleconverter or an old disposable Sigma lens.
The Canon male bayonet plate is removed from the Canon teleconverter and replaced with a male SA plate from Sigma teleconverter.
I think they have used packing and longer screws to bring the Canons elctrical contacts at the camera end up to meet the contacts inside the SA mount on the SDx.
A commercialy viable adapter would need the lens elements replaced or re-configured to allow a 1:1 magnification ratio.
-
A difference is not a deficiency.
Erik,
I can't quite follow your reasoning here. If you check out the pros & cons conclusion on the dpreview site you'll find that the main thing the SD10 has got going for it is its image quality is on a par with the 10D, and by implication the cheaper 300D.
Significant noise at long shutter speeds, color shifts and bleeding above ISO 400 and restriction to Sigma mount lenses are both differences and[/b] deficiencies.
As regards features, the SD10's lack of them is noted as a 'Con', although to be fair there are a couple which the 10D doesn't have (or at least my D60 doesn't), namely 'undelete' and a split histogram.
-
If you have no need for high ISO the lack of it is not a deficiency.
Erik,
Well, as Jonathan says, it's pretty restrictive being inhibited from using higher than ISO 400 as a lot of owners of the Kodak 14n have probably discovered, but I'd accept this is something one could live with, just as one could live without the need or desire to take 20 sec. night shots.
So we are left with only one positive, that I can think of - supposedly superior color rendition at low ISO's. One thing the dpreview comparison clearly shows is that the SD10 has less color noise, an advantage unfortunately offset by a tendency to color clipping, resulting in halos.
There might be differences straight out of the box with little post processing, but I'd be doubtful if any 'preferred' color rendition from the SD10 could not be created in post processing of a 10D image. Could be wrong though. :)
-
[font color=\'#000000\']The general consensus is that it can hold its own against 6MP cameras, which I confirm.
No camera is perfect. For example, the new Kodak 14 in its Nikon or Canon versions have terrible moire issues. And one can pick on any camera. I am sure I can pick on your camera as well.
People generally expect too much from their digitals, only to be disappointed. Yes, I am sometimes disappointed with my Sigma SD10 as well, but with my previous film equipment, I have gotten plenty of lousy shots as well. That's the reality of photographing.
With a film camera you depend on film and choose it carefully for each task.
Likewise, why should I expect my digital camera to be able to mimmick all those films out there? That's a ridiciculous and unrealsitic way of thinking.
We getting closer to realizing this, but we are not there yet.
I am a very picky person, yet I chose the Sigma. Why? I just loved what the Foveon sensor is capable of under a limited set of conditions, which fitted my type of shooting just to a T. Is that a reason for others to put the camera down?
The oriignal Kodak 14n, and even the Contax Digital SLR are capabale of excellent results if the conditions are perfect. People who shoot under those conditions do not need to be criticized for making a choice for Kodak or Contax, no matter how many problems the camera has outside those parameters.
Meanwhile we press the manufacturers to address those issues, as they are serious, and I agree with you. I already sent my wish list to Sigma, and they responded.
They read the forums. As the SD10 is a little better than the SD9, I hope that the SD11 will be different by a mile.
I did not invest heavily in Sigma lenses, as I may jump ship for another brand for a second camera/body.
For example, I am extremely curious about the new Fuji S3.
Time will tell. Will Contax try again? Others? What about the upcoming digital Leica R?
In the meanwhile, while I wait for a more perfect camera, I shoot SD10. Laugh at me all you want. He who has the last laugh, has the best laugh.
[/font]
-
Sure did. Of course we all know that would have triggered a red highlight warning on the preview screen. The photographer then would have simply had to have reduced the exposure with the exposure compensation dial when re-taking the photo. It just goes to show how operator error is a constant both in film and digital shooting. Technology is no substitute for proper technique. After all, with the highlight warning and histogram there simply is no excuse for blown highlights, especially when you have the opportunity to re-take the shot.
-
[font color=\'#000000\']I'm guessing you wrote that gushing review...
BTW, nice chromatic aberration in the water droplets.[/font]
-
[font color=\'#000000\']I would have to agree with Janus on this point. All the test images I have seen support the view that the 3MP SD9/10 is roughly equivalent to a 6MP Bayer type DSLR with around 1.6x cropping (ie. excluding the Contax full frame 6MP) in terms of absolute resolution and general image quality, within certain limitations. In fact, this is probably the chief cause of so much interest in this technology. How can a 3MP camera perform so well? Wouldn't a true 10MP Foveon type sensor be truly remarkable? When is it going to happen?[/font]
-
I actually do not see Michael as a prime source for camera reviews. He reviews them only when he has one (like the Sony F818 he recently got). I was kind of saying it teasingly, to make the point that the Sigma SD10 seems like the unknown ace in the hole that nevertheless is a very capable camera.
Kinda' disappointed by the lack of responses here.
-
Kinda' disappointed by the lack of responses here.
Janus,
Well, you can see the problem here! As a 3MP camera, the SD10 has no peer. It'll beat the socks off Canon's D30, for example. But it is not necessarily a better deal than Canon's 300D. You might even claim that the SD10 can produce marginally better quality images than either the 6MP 300D or 10D, but I think that will depend on the quality of the attached lens.
Let's look at the facts. The 300D is considerably less expensive than the SD10, has better low light performance and has a greater range of high quality lenses that can be attached.
It's not clear that the SD10 can produce better quality images than the 300D, but if it can and these differences are clearly noticeable on large prints using a wide range of lenses, then that would be something to get excited about.
-
Well, actually I am thinking about a second high quality camera that does well in low light, although I don't shoot that much in low light. Before the SD10 I mostly shot Fuji Velvia and Provia, so having 100ISO now as my lowest ISO is actually twice the speed I was used to, and actually I often shot Velvia at 40!. Sigma makes a few excellent lenses, their 50mm macro, as indicated earlier, is absolutely top notch.
For my work, I don't need a large plethora of lenses. If the Sony F818 didn't have the noise problem, that would be my second camera. I am still stitting on the fence. Fuji S3? We will have to see.
A camera with a great wide to tele zoom is ideal since you don't have to worry about all that dust on your sensor. All DSLRs still have dust problems (except the overpriced Olympus E10) and they need to address that in the same way as Olympus did.
Again, as I said, the Sigma shines within its limitations. In that respect it performs much better than the Kodak 14n, because the Sigma SD10 is not finicky at all.
-
I see the announcement by Polaroid of a point-and-shoot camera using the Foveon sensor, but nothing yet about a bigger chip in a dslr.
My fantasy was for a 10mp full frame Foveon in a new Contax N2. Surely a marriage between Contax and Foveon would be ideal? Even 6mp would be interesting.
Quentin
-
check this out:
http://www.d-shell.net/ (http://www.d-shell.net/)
an adapter for the following lenses on the sigma?
SIGMA SA( Auto )
CANON EF ( Auto )
NIKON-F (Manual )
MINOLTA MD( Manual )
LEICA-R ( Manual )
CONTAX/Yashica ( Manual )
PENTAX-K/M42 ( Manual )
TOPCON-UNI ( Manual )
I don't own a digital camera yet, but I'm am very intrigued by the sigma sd10 and foveon chip. the original file photos on pbase.com are amazing. seems to be hands down the best bang for my buck. I don't think I'll pull the trigger until I see images from the Leica Digilux 2. Sounds like an amazing lens, leica form factor, intuitive controls, and possibly lower noise levels at an estimated $1800. Will that be the best money spend?
Regardless, as of today sigma at an 'iso 100 niche' is pretty amazing stuff.
-Keats
-
Alf,
The information you're providing is incorrect. A 6 MP sensor has 6 million photosites. Each of these contribute to resolution.
The Foveon 3.4 MP sensor has just 3.4 million photosites contributing to resolution. Why? Because the other two sets of 3.4 million photosites sit underneath the first set. The bottom two layers are recording the same spacial information as the top layer.
The reality is that the Bayer matrix does degrade resolution by about 30%, so the Foveon has some theoretical advantages, especially when it comes to colour purity. But, the better demosaicing algorithms have become highly accurate in recent years.
Truth of the matter is that Foveon has not set the world on fire. Fascinating technology, but so far other than Sigma and Polaroid there haven't been any takers.
Michael
-
One of the flaws in modern sioence is that too many scientists ignore that with which they are uncomfortable. So they frantically hold on to what they feel is comfortable for their own understaning. A kind of "fit" between what they would like to believe and what they have chosen to fit into that category.
Janus,
I'd say you've got this the wrong way round. It is more likely the non-scientist who will ignore that with which he/she is uncomfortable. A basic tenet of the scientific method is to question everything and not ignore the evidence.
If you've got any evidence that the SD10 approaches the quality of the 1Ds, let's see it. And I don't mean hearsay and second hand reports from unknown authorities, but comparison images taken using sound scientific methodology, which means, same subject, similar quality lens, same FOV, use of tripod and remote release etc. :D
-
This is a silly debate. Sigma and Foveon have *never* positioned their camera or the F7 chip as a competitor to *any* 10+MP imaging device, Bayer or otherwise.
But I would add that the S9 and the SD10 are different. The current Foveon chip in the SD10 does not aritfact (or has greatly reduced artifacting) due to its microlenses like the SD9 did. If you look at the Imaging-Resource review B&W resolution shots, you'll find that the SD10 test shots look a good deal different than the SD9. Let's not base our arguments on a camera that is not the current model. (One a side note, the SD9 may have shown aritfacting on B&W resolution shots, but I'm not aware of any review that could actually point out *made* up detail in real shots.) And since we like to bump up the color saturation in our shots and clone out farm houses, what's wrong with a little made up detail as well? Just kidding. But you get my point. Finally, at PMA I saw E-1 shots and shots from the new Kodak 14N. Both had visible moire. So I guess this brings us to this point: both technologies have their strengths and weaknesses. I don't think we needed this thread to realize that.
-
The argument that Canon has more lenses than Sigma is kind of silly, because do you know of any photographer who owns them all? How many do you really need? It depends on what type of stuff you shoot. For some people one lens may be enough, for others just a few, etc.
The SD10's great advantage is that I generally do not need blown out highlights, and that was a crucial deciding factor for me, Nothing could be worse, in my opinion, than blown out highlights. That's data lost forever.
The range, type and quality of available lenses can be a crucial factor in choosing a camera system. When I switched from Minolta to Canon a few years ago, it was primarily because of Canon's Image Stabilisation system and the existence in particular of the 100-400 IS zoom. I was also encouraged by the fact that it had a better range of tilt & shift lenses than any other 35mm manufacturer and a range of really top notch lenses, some of which I might one day be able to afford.
If you check out Photodo's site, you'll find only a small handful of Sigma lenses make it to grade 4 and above. The highest is 4.2. But more significant for me would be the lack of an IS system.
Nevertheless, an SD10 coupled with the Sigma 300-800 F5.6 zoom would be a very nice package. :D
I haven't read anything on the SD10's dynamic range. Are you claiming it's significantly better than that of the 10D?
-
Ray,
You can download the Sigma SPP software from Sigma. If you visit the Sigma forum on dpreview you'll find people who will give you RAW files, including myself. (I've even mailed CDs full of raw files to people--both good and bad shots.) There is even an X3F server somewhere. (Ask Laurence Matson about it on the forum). Playing with and printing the raw files and using the Fill Light feature is the only way you'll be able to judge dynamic range. I have no opinion on the matter. I just want people to have practical evidence when making a decision. I hope my information has helped you.
-
Michael, you are doing your readers and the photographing crowd a disservice with a remark like that! You really ought to put this camera higher on your priory list. It's been out already for a while. Also, if you wait longer, new toys will come on the market, and before you know it, the Sigma SD10 is totally forgotten. This camera deserves better attention.
Kodak found the SD10 body good enough to make the slr/c out of it (well, almost, with some changes!)
As a consolation to Frank (and everyone else, for that matter),
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sigma/sd...iew/index.shtml (http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sigma/sd10-review/index.shtml)
has a review. he says the camera has "stunning image quality". Couldn't agree more.
As a closing thought:
Just a passing shot of upcoming spring:
http://www.pbase.com/image/26856176/original (http://www.pbase.com/image/26856176/original)
OR:
http://www.pbase.com/image/26856176/original.jpg (http://www.pbase.com/image/26856176/original.jpg)
-
There is no doubt that the SD9/SD10 is a dandy camera, with lots of potential for ideal shooting conditions.
Like any tool, it does best when used within the limitations of its range of abilities. There is no perfect camera for all situations, and that includes the SD9/SD10. Lens issues are important - the reason I gave up my SD9 was precisely because as a professional, I can't justify purchasing a camera body with limited lens selections.
For my Canon and Kodak bodies, I can use Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Tamron and a significant number of other options. For the SD9/SD10 the choices are Sigma - that's it. Until Sigma can provide alternative mounts making a wider lens selection available, they will severely limit the desirability of these otherwise fine instruments.
As far as resolution is concerned - I found the SD9 to be equivalent to my 10D, but significantly less than my 1DS. This is true in practice as well as in resolution chart measurements. Regardless of the very excellent pixel level detail and edge roll-off provided by the Foveon chip, the pixel matrix limits the enlargeability of the capture to less than even a six megapixel bayer. Edge artifacting is visible on any straight lines in images which fall outside 180, 90 or 45 degrees and this detracts from some potential use, especially for architectural subjects where significant enlargement is desired.
The SD9/SD10 cameras have wonderful applications within their limitations just as do the Canon 10D, 1D, 1DS and new 1D Mark II. If there were lens alternatives, I would still have one, but sadly upper management at Sigma has opted out of that possibility, at least for now.
Best regards,
Lin
-
Lin
"For my Canon and Kodak bodies, I can use Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Tamron and a significant number of other options. For the SD9/SD10 the choices are Sigma - that's it."
Thats incorrect...Both the SD9 and SD10 take M42 screw mount lenses (via a cheap Pentax K to M42 adapter, available in almost every camera store or a CSM422 SA to M42 adapter available from www.d-shell.net) and it takes Pentax K mount lenses (via a very easy small mod to each lens).
D-shell are already working on a SA to Canon FD adapter, a SA to Nikon F adapter and a SA to Contax, SA to Minolta AF and more so as a Sigma user I hardly consider my lens choices as limited.
Besides, as I am not well off, the easily available very sharp but very cheap M42 primes currently suit all my requirements.
I read somewhere that the Canon EOS mount is 95% compatable with the Sigma SA mount and at least one guy managed to get an EOS mount lens fitted to a Sigma.
Alf B.
-
The enthusiasm among SD9 and SD10 users is so high, that a second communal shoot, centering around the theme of "oppostie seasons" was hosted on the pbase website. Check it out:
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/change_seasons_1 (http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/change_seasons_1)
P.S.:
The earlier shoot was called "Worlds Apart....A World Together" and was the most popular gallery on pbase for a while.
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/sigma_shoot_1 (http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/sigma_shoot_1)
So, as you can see, we are having fun too!
And did you know that this posting has gotten more than 7000+ views? That's far more than any other discussion here.
Can't complain.
-
I am just very curious, since this particular forum has had over 11,000 hits, if anybody besides myself, bought a Sigma SD9 or SD10? And what are your impressions?
Are you aware of the Sigma forum on http://www.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1027 (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1027)
-
[font color=\'#000000\']The SD9/SD10 have similar resolution chart readings to Nikon D100, Canon D60, 10D, 300D, etc., and in practical applications produce sharper pixel level detail having less roll-off. Since they have no antialiasing filter, their images are similar to a Kodak DCS-660 or 760 without its antialiasing filter.
The down side as far as image enlargeability is concerned is that when the subject material has geometric lines at other than 90, 45 or 180 degree angles, the 3.5 megapixel file array produces visible stair-stepping aliasing which is readily apparent in printed enlargements.
On the other hand, for landscape shots where the nature of the subject matter provides natural camouflage, the acutance is outstanding and the aliasing beyond Nyquist is perfectly acceptable because it's totally hidden.
In all, the image quality is extremely good within the constraints of ISO and subject matter.[/font]
-
[font color=\'#000000\']Update:
new lesnes announced by Sigma (also available in other brand mounts)
MACRO 50mm F2.8 EX DG
at http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/50f28_exdg.html (http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/50f28_exdg.html)
MACRO 105mm F2.8 EX DG
at http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/105f28_exdg.html (http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/105f28_exdg.html)
And already earlier:
Exclusively Designed for use with digital SLR cameras and has 6.9 times high magnification zoom ratio(2004.5.21)
18-125mm F3.5-5.6 DC at
http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/...25f3556_dc.html (http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/news/18_125f3556_dc.html)
For all other new products and annoucnements see:
http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/ (http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/)
So far the news............[/font]
-
Lin Evans wrote:
"Far from the best minds in Japan who create "adapters" have given up on trying to make any EOS mount compatible with the SD9/SD10."
Well, in all fairness Lin, this is absolute rubbish.
Far from giving up they are still hotly persuing it, and here is the proof:
http://www.cameraunion.net/forum/showthrea...threadid=204099 (http://www.cameraunion.net/forum/showthread.php?threadid=204099)
Yes, a Big Canon EOS mount lens fitted to a Sigma SD9!!!...Then go to page two and see the lovely sample pics from a Sigma with Canon "L-glass"!!!......Kind of makes you weep, dont it?
-
Ray,
If you have no need for high ISO the lack of it is not a deficiency.
Erik
-
>So we are left with only one positive, that I can think of - supposedly superior color rendition at low ISO's.<
Ray,
The Foveon chip doesn't have superior color rendition, if by rendition you mean the type of color pallette it outputs. The Foveon advantage is that the process by which color is measure in such a way that there is less resolution loss per pixel; hence you have a 3.4mp Foveon chip easily capturing more or less as much photographic optical detail as a 6MP Bayer. So if your goal is to capture as much pixel level detail as possible with a color measuring technique, Foveon succeeds on that narrow ground, and with no color moire to boot.
Erik
-
Did you notice the blown out highlights in the photo of the Annapurnas, in the vertical column of white stone work about 1/3rd from the left of the frame?
-
[font color=\'#000000\']A new review of the SD10 at:
http://www.dealtime.co.uk/xPR-Sigma_SD10~RD-136884620932 (http://www.dealtime.co.uk/xPR-Sigma_SD10~RD-136884620932)
(culled from the review:)
Photos posted at:
http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_web.jpg (http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_web.jpg) , to give you the big picture... this is a small section Cropped at 200% 265K
http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_crop.jpg (http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_crop.jpg) , showing some of the droplets... and this is the Entire image at 200% 2.68 Megs
http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_doubled.jpg (http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_doubled.jpg) , to show you how well these images scale.[/font]
-
[font color=\'#000000\']Meanwhile I shoot happily with my 1Ds which has excellent color and far better detail than the SDwhatever. Your previous statements that the SD10 is anywhere close to being in the same league as the 1Ds resolutionwise are ludicrous, and if the review and examples were so unconvincing, why did you post a link to them? Don't get me wrong, the Sigmas are good 3MP cameras, far better than the Kodak DC4800 I used to have. But they're not the end-all and be-all of digital photography. Enough with the shill thing already.[/font]
-
Can't speak for others, but I can't personally envision going with the SD10 because Sigma doesn't have my two current favorite lenses on their mount: the 85/1.2L and the 70-200 IS. The only conceivable other mount I might consider is using Nikon's 70-200 VR and 85/1.4 instead, but for that I'd have to think hard and fast about before giving up a half of stop on the 85. And I hear conflicting reports about how Nikon's VR stacks up against the newest-generation IS in the 70-200. And there's the cost involved with switching of course.
I own a DRebel and I'm not a huge fan of Canon's lower-end bodies (where the Sigma competes with them), but I really like their high-end glass. I think it's rare for someone to have minimal enough glass investment to try out the Sigma, while also being up-to-date enough to consider it as an option to begin with. The proprietary lens-mount system creates a bit of a feedback loop, with people going with Nikon/Canon because of marketing and then staying with them because of glass. I'm sure the SD10 would sell much better if they created Nikon-mount and Canon-mount versions (or even a 4/3 version) of it, instead of trying to promote their own mount.
-
I have been saying on other forums that Contax and Foveon would be ideal, as Contax needs to get back into this dslr market in order not to loose credibility.
Kodak goofed with their 14n, but if they make terribly good improvements, who's going to care? Likewise, if Contax does something right, they can rise above the muck the ND caused.
Also, their compact digital, the TVS-D needs to be improved to warrant that kind of price.
-
You are again confusing "spacial information" for resolution.
Ok, if the three layers were all placed in the same plane like the layout of a Bayer sensor you would immediatly see that this results in a 10.2 megapixel size image with 10.2 megapixels of resolution data, yes?
By doing this the sensor size has increased by a factor of three, without the pixels being any larger so the sensitively is identical though its true that this would result in wider angle images taken with the same lens.
The image size has also increased by a factor of 3 and this results in the 8mb RAW files outputed by the Foveon increasing to about 64mb for no additional resolution advantage, which I am sure you would agree is totally pointless.
This would mean a 1gb CF card would only hold about 15 shots!!!
Now you should understand why the foveons smaller image size whilst still outputing very high resolotuion images is a massive advantage.
Alf B.
-
Well, Sigma now has a OS lens (Optical Stabilizer) an 80-400.
Great start! I can't find any independent reviews and before I can make up my mind, I need to see a 10D shot at 400mm with IS and the same subject with the Sigma OS lens, at same aperture and shutter speed.
You can see the problem. If we're going to be truly objective about these issues, we need the results, the data. And we're not getting them.
I notice you haven't addressed the issue of dynamic range. Resolution and dynamic range are big issues with me. Tell me the dynamic range of the SD10 is better than that of the 10D and 1Ds, and my interest perks up. :D
-
Why not post this question on dpreview's sigma forum?
The question's already been asked and the answers are not conclusive. Anyone can guess that the DR is around 6 stops or 7 stops or 8 stops, but the only meaningful statement would be in relation to a direct comparison such as, the DR of the SD10 is slightly greater than that of the 10D, or vice versa.
I've had a look at Imaging Resources' 'Comparator' at http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/CDISPLAY.HTM (http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/CDISPLAY.HTM)
It's unfortunate that Imaging Resources' images vary slightly. There's usually something that prevents one from making a really accurate comparison. The outdoor shots of the house might use a slightly different focal length lens, or one shot might be in summer and the other in winter.
However, my general impression is that the 10D a slight edge regarding DR, and that seems to be due to lower noise in the shadows in the 10D shots.
-
A friend of mine has one, and he has shared his full res pictures with me, and it does NOT, I repeat does not, compare favorably to the SD10. The colors are not quite right with that Canon (greens are too Velvia like), and the images have that typical flat digital look.
Overall: very Dissimilar performance, not similar.
Janus,
It's very difficult to comment on such statements unless we know what RAW conversion processes were applied and what tweaks and adjustments were made at the time of conversion.
For example, some time ago in a discussion on Adobe CS RAW converter, someone made the comment that it wasn't colour accurate. The fact is, ARC has numerous adjustments that can be made at the time of conversion, including hue and saturation control for each primary color, brightness, contrast, tint and exposure compensation.
If the colors are not quite right, it's probably the fault of the user not the camera.
Sometimes one reads comments about a printer producing amazing results straight out of the box. Other folks might comment the same printer does not produce great results without considerable tweaking. There are so many variable factors, such statements have to be view with some suspicion, or at least caution.
-
The guy who runs http://www.d-shell.net (http://www.d-shell.net) sent me a video demonstrating that the Sigma SD10 can work electronically in very way with Canon lenses, but the change to an SD9 or SD10 would be permanent. I am not sure if he is currently doing to conversions for anyone.
There is nothing wrong by turning a digital camera into a manual focus and manual exposure picture machine. All you need is a lightmeter. You certainly save on battery power. For some people, including myself, it's just extremely enjoyable to be able to combine "analogue" with "digital" technology. The new RD1 by Epson is taking this route/approach as well.
http://www.i-love-epson.co.jp/products/pdf/rd1/index.htm (http://www.i-love-epson.co.jp/products/pdf/rd1/index.htm)
and
http://dp-now.com/archives/000677.html (http://dp-now.com/archives/000677.html)
-
Well, that means you're limited to shooting in bright sunlight, on a tripod, or using a flash. Most photographers find themselves periodically in shooting situations where a higher usable ISO is greatly desirable. Sports, weddings, street, and many other genres benefit greatly from having a usable high-ISO option available. X3 is a great idea, but it needs a far better implementation than the SD9/SD10 before I'd consider switching away from the 1Ds.
-
Some English, lots of Korean:
nicely done website, review of SD10
http://dizin.co.kr/dipeople/proreview/sd10/001.htm (http://dizin.co.kr/dipeople/proreview/sd10/001.htm)
-
[font color=\'#000000\']
A new review of the SD10 at:
http://www.dealtime.co.uk/xPR-Sigma_SD10~RD-136884620932 (http://www.dealtime.co.uk/xPR-Sigma_SD10~RD-136884620932)
(culled from the review:)
Photos posted at:
http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_web.jpg (http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_web.jpg) , to give you the big picture... this is a small section Cropped at 200% 265K
http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_crop.jpg (http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_crop.jpg) , showing some of the droplets... and this is the Entire image at 200% 2.68 Megs
http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_doubled.jpg (http://65.168.237.50/IMG00132_doubled.jpg) , to show you how well these images scale.
Who ever it was that wrote that review is quite clueless.[/font]
-
[font color=\'#000000\']I personaly haven't seen anything out there that shows the SDx can resolve an equal amount of detail that's capable with a 6mp DSLR and a sharp lens. Like I said before, it's more like 4.5-5mp in that regard.
If an image is under-exposed (even by half a stop) it produces some gnarly noise. Unfortunalty, this limits the usefullness of fill-light. Attempting to increase the DR of an image from the same RAW is out of the question.
I myself am a fan of the tech (big fan). It seems to have a great deal of potential, but as it is it doesn't hold up to what's currently out there. It's still in beta phase so to speak.
In the right conditions and with a proper exposure the SD10 can make some great quality images in front of a good photographer. But to say it hold it's own agianst any of the 6mp DSLR cameras is just obsurd.
For anyone who'd like to see for themselves the quality of the SD9/10 you can download the PP2 software (http://www.sigma-photo.com/html/cameras_downloads.htm) and some X3F RAW files from the following sites:
http://www.x3f.info/sd9/v2_0/download.html (http://www.x3f.info/sd9/v2_0/download.html)
http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/sd10/english/gallery/ (http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/sd10/english/gallery/)
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/x3f_raw_files (http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/x3f_raw_files)
I'm sure a Google search will net you even more.[/font]
-
IMO, Sigma should manufacture the SD9/10 with Nikon & Canon mounts. And why not, cause you can get their lenses with the same. I don't understand why manufacturers seem so uptight when it comes to lens mounts. I've got 4 EOS mount lenses (2 Sigmas, 1 Tamron 1 Canon) that I don't want to part with but I'd sure like to try them on the S3 for instance. If it was up to me, there would be 1 universal camera mount for all.
-
I sure hope this dream camera is not contravening the laws of physics. :D
-
My explanation stands. Your reply adds nothing to what you're attempting to explain, and is again, simply wrong.
You're simply (conveniently?) confusing image size, sensor size, pixel count, colour depth and resolution.
If you remove colour for the moment and simpy look at the luminance information being gathered (which effectively is also spatial resolution) then it should be clearer.
Indendant tests have shown that what passes for enhanced resolution on the Foveon is actually a form of artifacting. This has been well documented in several independant tests.
In any event, I'm no expert in this area, and have no reason to believe that you are either. But I have talked extensively with experts in this regard and am comfortable with my understanding and explanation.
No need to flog this horse any further.
Michael
-
IMO, Sigma should manufacture the SD9/10 with Nikon & Canon mounts.
Unfortunately, Canon and Nikon probably disagree, and would probably not allow it; I presume that it is for licensing reasons that we get third party lenses, but never third party versions of lens mounts.
That is why there is a bit more chance of Sigma going with a 4/3 mount, which they are allowed to do as a new member of the 4/3 consortium. Such bodies might make some sense after they start making 4/3 mount lenses, which Sigma has said is their goal in 4/3, for now at least.
(With Panasonic also joining 4/3, and working with Leica on digital cameras, including a rumoured interchangable lens model, perhaps you can fantasize about using Leica lenses with an X3 sensor, if that combination appeals to you.)
-
The Sigma SD10 seems to excel in Landscape type photography (often low iso, tripod, saturated colours). It thus seems surprising to me that Michael hasn't reviewed this camera or the SD9 previously. After scouring pbase.com, the sigma cameras seem to have a Velvia feel to them and seem superior, when light is abundant, to practically any other camera on the site. Come on Michael, get your hands on one of these and give us your thoughts. I for one would ne very interested in what you have to say in your analysis of a very different image capturing system.
-
Jonathan,
Understood. But I would add that with street photography aside most deliberate 20th Century creations of photographic art published in monographs and hanging in galleries today are easily accomplished (and were accomplished at time of creation) with low ISO film. So I think it's a bit of a stretch to call sunlight/studio light and tripod limiting. That's not to say that new vistas haven't been opened up by high ISO. But there are large portions of photography that simply don't require it; and some photographers may prefer to work in those areas entirely. I guess that was my point. I mean, why stop at ISO? What not call any camera that doesn't do 8fps limiting as well? Of course I'm joking about that last point. But I think you see what I mean.
Erik
PS I enjoyed your article.
-
The Foveon chip doesn't have superior color rendition, if by rendition you mean the type of color pallette it outputs. The Foveon advantage is that the process by which color is measure in such a way that there is less resolution loss per pixel;
I'm glad you mentioned that, Erik. That's precisely as I understand it. A foveon pixel is more accurate than a Bayer type pixel. (Discounting clipping factors resulting in halos etc.).
This is why the 3MP Foveon sensor delivers approx the same resolution as the 6MP Bayer sensor. One has the advantage of greater accuracy, the other the advantage of greater numbers. The foveon sensor describes 3M separate 'spaces' with great accuracy. The Bayer type describes 6M separate 'spaces' with less accuracy. Net effect? Same image quality. (Discounting clipping factors resulting in halos ??? )
-
I found that my friend's Canon D300/Rebel performs, colorwise, very similar to my Canon G3, and whole it is per say "bad", the colors of the SD10 are simply better, much better in fact.
IMHO, I have shot my G3 in RAW mode enough to know. But the RAW software by Canon does not compare favorably to the Sigma RAW software. Great, so your camera can shoot RAW, big deal. You need excellent software to bring that out. The Sigma software has been highly priased, although I like to see that dumb color wheel replaced with sliders as they have in the latest version of FotoStation. Unless you use RAW in PS7 or PS-CS, you are in bad shape with shooting RAW with a Canon.
-
Thats incorrect...Both the SD9 and SD10 take M42 screw mount lenses (via a cheap Pentax K to M42 adapter, available in almost every camera store or a CSM422 SA to M42 adapter available from www.d-shell.net) and it takes Pentax K mount lenses (via a very easy small mod to each lens).
Mounting a lens and it being "compatible" are different animals. You have zero electronic connect with this combination, so you have just changed your camera to an all manual system - not exactly what most would want.
As for making a Canon EOS work - good luck - what you are hearing is pure "urban legend" and the best minds in Japan who create "adapters" have given up on trying to make any EOS mount compatible with the SD9/SD10. There's a remote possibility that you may eventually see a Nikon lens compatibility, but in no way will you see Canon EOS lenses mounted to the Sigma unless Sigma changes the mount itself.
It's too bad that they have elected not to do this because it definitely holds the Sigma back as a viable competitor to other dSLR systems.
Best regards,
Lin
-
[font color=\'#000000\']Jonathan,
Always nice when you put in a positive comment.[/font]
-
[font color=\'#000000\']To Wienke and 61 Dynamic:
Let's make one thing clear:
I never compared the SD10 to a 1DS.
Professional internet and printed reviews in general state that this camera can hold its own against 6MP bayer cameras.
I stand behind this. I have shot a Nikon 6MP camera and still have the files. The SD10 holds its own nicely.
To state that a SD10 produces noise when the exposure is off just a bit is also simply not true. The Foveon chip is quite forgiving and I have rescued files that were accidentally poorly exposed, without suffering noise. I will admit that I always shoot at 100 ISO whenever I can.
There are SD9/10 users out there who have their files enlarged to 2x3 feet and they cannot believe their eyes.
I enlarge regularly to 13x19 and even 16 x 20 and have no problems.
The RAW files from the cameras can be doubled in size by the SPP software. Some do it in Photoshop. This doubling has very little effect on image quality.
To 61D:
The best samples are the pbase galleries by different people.
I printed one 13x19 image from a jpeg sample posted by Champa before I bought the SD10, and here's the link to that photo:
http://www.pbase.com/image/23799244/original (http://www.pbase.com/image/23799244/original)
Come on now, print it out.
Here's are other random samples:
http://www.pbase.com/image/28397513 (http://www.pbase.com/image/28397513)
http://www.pbase.com/image/28397513 (http://www.pbase.com/image/28397513)
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9 (http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9)
and a pano: http://www.pbase.com/image/20255548 (http://www.pbase.com/image/20255548)
http://www.pbase.com/image/27315541 (http://www.pbase.com/image/27315541) http://www.pbase.com/image/21254066 (http://www.pbase.com/image/21254066)
http://www.pbase.com/image/16177876 (http://www.pbase.com/image/16177876)
http://www.pbase.com/image/25222402 (http://www.pbase.com/image/25222402)
http://www.pbase.com/image/21254067 (http://www.pbase.com/image/21254067)
http://www.pbase.com/image/21254067 (http://www.pbase.com/image/21254067)
http://www.pbase.com/image/25288194 (http://www.pbase.com/image/25288194)
ETC !
I hate to sound like a salesman or Sigma spokesman, because I am not, but I strongly dislike any hitn of prejudice and innuendo.[/font]