What chance has Sigma's SD1?

[feppe]

Yep, already at 630.000 Yen in Japan.

That's even smarter in fact... you have an exclusive camera with the best sensor in the world (claim I predict the owners will lay), one that is worth 10.000 US$, but you did in fact get it for a lot less... still you know people think it is worth 10.000 US$.

One of the oldest tricks in negotiation: ask for 10 times what your outrageous goal is. All of a sudden your original outrageous goal doesn't sound too bad.

[jimk]

actually i think on b&h site its already lower and it hasnt shipped yet .. but lets be honest a $1000 camera body type even if its as good as a canon 5d mk2 the sensor as as good as a nikon d3s sensor at 7k$? i think thats the price on b&h site http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/736546-REG/Sigma_SD1_Digital_SLR_Camera.html.. it has to beat 3 cameras i think in order to justify the price

the obvious leica m9 nikon d3s and maybe canon 5ds mk2 or 1ds3

honestly i think the price should be around 2k more or less .. just my 2 cents

[telyt]

Perhaps Sigma's theory is that there's no such thing as bad publicity... whatever they were thinking, there will be a LOT of photographers examining test photos and comparisons in microscopic detail.

[KevinA]

Perhaps Sigma's theory is that there's no such thing as bad publicity... whatever they were thinking, there will be a LOT of photographers examining test photos and comparisons in microscopic detail.

Exactly, give it a month or two and it will be less the $2k. Great stunt Sigma I hope it's a world beater of a camera.

Kevin.

[250swb]

My theory is that a Sigma executive noticed that he had to wait months for his Leica M9 because demand exceeded supply at the $7000 price point. So he figured that Sigma could achieve something similar (and charge even more because this camera has autofocus!), but unfortunately his PowerPoint slide got flipped 180 degress and the whole sales structure is now based on supply exceeding demand. I'm assuming he has a good pension plan because people simply do not come up with ideas like a $9000 DSLR if they have to worry about their future.

Steve

[Yakim Peled]

Exactly, give it a month or two and it will be less the $2k. Great stunt Sigma I hope it's a world beater of a camera.

Kevin.

No way it'll go from 6.9K to 2K in two months. Maybe two years.

[michael]

That's why my recommendation is that Sigma have to drop the price before the first unit ships.

If they don't, no one will buy at $10K, $9K, $8K or whatever because they will fear that the price will eventually come down and they'll have been a sucker.

Even the nut bar photographers in Japan who will buy anything for the sake of exclusivity will come back screaming at their dealers if the price drops by thousands, even a year later.

It's nor or never.

Michael

[Hans Kruse]

actually i think on b&h site its already lower and it hasnt shipped yet .. but lets be honest a $1000 camera body type even if its as good as a canon 5d mk2 the sensor as as good as a nikon d3s sensor at 7k$? i think thats the price on b&h site http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/736546-REG/Sigma_SD1_Digital_SLR_Camera.html.. it has to beat 3 cameras i think in order to justify the price

the obvious leica m9 nikon d3s and maybe canon 5ds mk2 or 1ds3

honestly i think the price should be around 2k more or less .. just my 2 cents

A crop sensor resolving around the current full frame Canon cameras on the market like Canon 5D mkII, 1Ds mkIII is not bad at all. No other crop sensor can do that. A Canon 7D resolves about the same as the old 5D mkI according to DxO on the best Canon glass available. The Nikon D7000 resolves around the same as the D3s with the best glass. The Bayer sensors seem to resolve about 0.58 of full resolution if you take the resolution numbers from DPreview over the years. I think this number is pretty conservative given the latest RAW converters like ACR 6 and Lightroom 3 which can pull even more detail out from Bayer sensors. This should added together give a resolution of the SD1 around 19MP (full frame equivalent) in the best case on the best possible glas and less with standard zooms. This year we likely will see full frame cameras from Canon and Nikon in the 30MP+ range so there will be little to convince people to buy a Sigma SD1. All the reviews will say this I would expect.

After I looked at the posted photos on the Sigma site I'm not impressed and saying that they compete with a 5D mkII is even a stretch. RAW files may give a little change to the better as long as there are not color shift problems and color moire as on previous models.

So what does this say, if you agree with this analysis? That I agree with the poster here that the price should be no more the 2K and likely less than that. Given that you would need to buy into another lens mount and one that is used very little I think 2K is even very optimistic.

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

Sigma has already damaged themselves with the announced price and the marketing hype they try to generate about the X3 sensor.
A serious and reliable company wouldn't do that.

[Pete Ferling]

Nice article BTW, Michael.  I've had a job in the past, having helped to engineer a great, usable product, and watch it get shot down due to poor marketing, (or actually a lack of it).

For a man whom makes a living behind the lens, and works in a company that would afford him any camera if asked, I still find that a crop sensor Canon does the job.  90% of what I do in the real world hits a double page spread in a brochure, or the web.  The 7D does a fine job, and I have some impressive product shots that hit 36" as well - which suits our pull up banners.  We no longer print larger than that, having dropped large prints for digital billboards and HD LCD monitors at trade shows, (we affectionately call them "digital posters").

For the most part, these semi-pro DSLRs have been hitting a level of quality that suits majority of our work (including video), and I'm hard pressed to see any real advantage without having to move to a phase one or mamiya, and then, at that level, I don't think that price is really an issue.  So, while it may seem odd that someone of my position is found using a prosumer camera (I do have a dusty 1Ds mark I on the shelf), nothing beats a real world working knowledge of a good tool.  I guess in a weird way that while price really doesn't matter, it doesn't mean that I have to spend the big bucks either.

[uaiomex]

What possible excuse is feasible to change the asking price in the age of instant communication? Other than admiting they plainly f...... up, Sigma will sustain the price. I think that under current technology, Sigma can't output enough sensors to consider this camera a typical production camera. It is more like an exotic chassis and body made in a garage-factory somewhere in Europe fitted with a production big block american V8. Well, in this case, just switch the exotic side.
In the meantime, they will obtain some revenues and experience they need for a new technology they're already developing. Another possible scenario.
Eduardo

[melgross]

I've had a fair amount of experience with Foveon sensor cameras. The first thing I can say is that sharpness is not equal to double a Bayer sensor camera. That is, unlike what Michael expects, this camera will not have the equivalent of 30 MP. It will be closer to 24 MP. Now, that's pretty good. But Sony and Nikon already have cameras out with that resolution. Later this year, Canon will up that, and it's possible that Sony and Nikon will as well.

But I've found a big problem with Foveon sensors. That is, they have poor color purity. Unlike Beyer sensors that rely on filters, the Foveon relies on the selective absorbson of light that silicon exhibits as the light passes through the chip. That is, as the light passes further through, different colors are absorbed, allowing each color sensor to reside behind the one in front. This is what makes the Foveon possible. But, that absorbson isn't perfect, hence, colors poison the other layer sensors, resulting in color mixing that simply can't be fixed.

In addition, the sharpness is higher in some colors, but lower in others, when comparing to Bayer sensors. While Foveon sensors have a higher resolution in the red and blue, it's actually lower in the green, again, when compared to Bayer sensors. That's entirely because Bayer sensors have two green sensing sites to one of each red and green, while Foveon sensors have equal sites for all colors. We are most sensitive to green, specifically a green-yellow. So, in practice, the sharpness advantage of Foveon sensors is highly dependent on the subject matter. Sometimes it appears a lot sharper, and sometimes less so.

When I first read about this camera, I thought that Sigma was making a pro model, in the way we think of pro models, and so even though the price was crazily high, I though it MIGHT be worth it for some. But upon finding that it's just a mid range advanced amateur body, I'm rather shocked. While their high end lenses are good, the rest are just what they seem to be. Unless they up their QC by a good bit, this entire senario is doomed, even if they lower the price.

[melgross]

The SD1 should be great as a pure BW-camera. All the disadvantages of the Foveon sensor mostly vanish in this case. This does, of course, assume that the software does the right thing and does not add a lot of noise before converting to BW.

There are a number of issues with your post, but I'll just address that last. The Foveon gains no advantage as a B/W sensor. Used that way, it's just a medium resolution 15 MP sensor.

[melgross]

Actual tests of the SD15 have found the resolution equivalent to an 8 or 9 megapixel Bayer pattern sensor so the SD1 will have the equivalent of a 24 to 27 megapixel Bayer sensor. 8 to 9 megapixels also happens to be the equivalent of 35 mm film so the SD1 can claim to be a medium format camera based on megapixels. Theoretical calculations have found the Foveon sensor to be equivalent to 2 times the resolution of a Bayer pattern in the red and blue and square root of 2 times a Bayer in the green so the SD1 will have the equivalent of a 22 to 31 megapixel Bayer sensor. The Foveon sensor gathers 3 times the light of a Bayer pattern so the SD1 has the area equivalent of 2.3 times a full frame Bayer sensor so SD1 can claim to be a medium format based on light gathering ability. 

That's not even close to being accurate in practice other than for sharpness. I've found, in using these cameras, that a 50% increase in sharpness over the single layer MP number is about right. The cameras have had poor sensitivity overall, no matter what some theoretical numeration says.

This will be in no way equal to a medium format model, and likely not equal to the current top Nikon.

[melgross]

I have a SD9, Sd14 and DP1.  My own testing of the SD9 against my 350D showed convincingly that was essentially no visible resolution difference between them (there were visible differences in the type of aliasing artifacts however, which was fun to evaluate). 

Likewise, in my Sd14 vs Kodak 14nx article that is quite well known, I showed that in prints up to 24x16 inches there is for all practical purposes, no resolution difference. 

Overall, I'm happy with a rule of thumb that says the Sigma cameras have a resolution that roughly, approximately on a par with Bayer sensors of around twice the spatial pixel count. It's what Sigma themselves think when they are not busy marketing it at 3x the count.

Of course, there'll always be something to quibble over and someone to produce a piece of academic research that says differently, but for practical everyday shooting purposes, testing shows the 2x ratio is a reasonable rule of thumb for rough equivalence.

While I haven't read your "well known" article (or for that matter, heard it it), my experience is that it never exhibits twice the resolution of a bayer sensor. I don't know your testing methods, but I ran a fair sized commercial photo lab for a long time, and with my equipment, I ran more than a few tests, and prints. My evaluation of Foveon sensor cameras was "meh!".

I'd like this one to be much better, even though the price is a joke.

[deejjjaaaa]

I don't know your testing methods

and what are yours ? because so far it is opinions only

[jimk]

sigma is not about selling xxx amount of units like canon /nikon/sony  if they sold 500 units a year they are happy sort of its about being "different" then the canikon/sonys the question is how many or who will spend 6-8k to be different 6k-8k on a less than 1k type of body

we shall find out soon i guess

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

After thinking about the X3 sensors principle I came to the conclusion there is a flaw inherent in the design which will limit its use on the long run:
Its simple: The sensor produces huge files without an according gain in image quality.
The Bayer array sensors have a large ability to gather (selected) luminance data and a limited collection of chrominance data.
Basically this leads to a sort of data compression which is similar to the principle of jpegs: compress the color, keep the luminance.
What appears to be faulty at the first look comes out as the greatest strength of this system:
Getting the most relevant data in appropriate amounts to generate maximum quality images with minimum loss in quality by a clever hardware based compression.
Said differently: The average amount of information per byte of data in a file produced by a bayer pattern sensor is probably much better than in a foveon based system, because of the hardware inherent reduction of information during capture due to the bayer pattern.
This means less disc space, faster storage on the memory card, higher possible framerate.
So - my impression now is, that they try to sell as a magic bullet what really is an incumbering mass of irrelevant data no one really needs.
q.e.d.?

[Yakim Peled]

That's why my recommendation is that Sigma have to drop the price before the first unit ships.

That's a logical idea however, IMHO there is zero chance it'll happen.

[hjulenissen]

Said differently: The average amount of information per byte of data in a file produced by a bayer pattern sensor is probably much better than in a foveon based system, because of the hardware inherent reduction of information during capture due to the bayer pattern.

True, but then any raw file format performs lousy compared to in-camera jpeg if image quality per byte is important.

The reason why we use raw is that it gets us a little more quality and flexibility, at a large filesize cost. Since storage and bandwidth is cheap compared to the number of images and frames per second that most of us need, this tradeoff makes sense.

By this logic, a Foveon sensor that actually gave significant improvements in image quality could still be worthwhile even if it resulted in 3x the filesize.

-h