Sigma SD 10 Newbie Help UPDATE

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Lex Mathews, Jul 26, 2004.

  1. Yes - you can buy a medium format back from Phase ONE for $16,000
    and then you can buy a large format camera adapter for $4,000.

    Sounds like a clumsy and expensive solution to get a too large
    camera for a too small sensor. I can easily buy a medium format
    camera for that $4000 and get a better camera. Hmmm ... why does
    an adapter cost $4000? Strange.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Aug 10, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. I don't believe that Foveon ever claimed this.

    I added a section to the web site, http://sigmasd10.com, that details
    the Foveon/Sigma efforts to redefine a photodetector as a "pixel
    sensor."

    Foveon "Pixel-Speak" Campaign

    http://www.x3f.info/technotes/x3pixel/pixelpage.html

    Foveon desperately wants to market photodetectors, not pixels. This is
    because they have a sensor with 10.2 million photodetectors, but only
    3.4 million pixels. Unfortunately, everyone else quotes resolution in
    output pixels, which in the Bayer sensor, is equivalent to the number
    of input photodetectors.

    Foveon has taken a two-pronged approach in their marketing campaign.

    First, they created a new term for a photodetector, calling it a
    "pixel sensor," hoping that consumers will equate "pixel sensor" and
    "pixel." They are very careful to never leave out the qualifying word
    of "sensor," so they can't be accused of claiming that their sensor is
    10.2 million pixels; they simply never mention the fact that they have
    3.4 million pixels (unless you go back to some of their old press
    announcements, where they accurately describe the characteristics of
    their sensor).

    Second, they are trying to claim that each photodetector on a Bayer
    sensor is only 1/3 of a pixel, by redefining a pixel as "an RGB triple
    in a sampled color image."

    The former is marketing semantics, and while not technically lying, it
    is misleading. It's called "implicature," in the trade. The latter is
    simply incorrect. By all accepted definitions of a pixel, each
    spatially distinct photodetector on a Bayer sensor translates to a
    spatially distinct output pixel, with the chrominance determined by
    interpolating from adjoining pixels (usually at least eight adjoining
    pixels). Amusingly, Foveon didn't even get their attempt to mislead
    with "1/3" right, since if you accept their incorrect statements,
    you'd be at 1/4 of a pixel since there are twice as many green
    photodetectors as red or blue photodetectors.

    Foveon used to make a big deal about the fact that each of their 3.4
    million output pixels was "full color," calculated only from a single
    stack of three photodetectors. But this marketing approach proved
    problematic, because the color accuracy of the output from the Foveon
    sensor was not any better than the interpolated colors of the Bayer
    pixels (and most reviewers agree that the colors of the Foveon sensor
    are often less accurate).

    Let's compare Foveon-Speak to ROW (Rest of World), using the Foveon X3
    10M sensor, and a Bayer 6 megapixel sensor.

    Foveon-Speak
    ------------
    X3 10M: 10.2 million pixel sensors, 3.4 million pixels
    Bayer 6 Megapixel Sensor: 6 million pixel sensors, 1.5 million pixels

    ROW
    ---
    X3 10M: 10.2 million photodetectors, 3.4 million pixels
    Bayer 6 Megapixel Sensor: 6 million photodetectors 6 million pixels

    You can understand why Foveon wants to count input photodetectors
    (renaming them "pixel sensors"), while the ROW wants to count output
    pixels. Automotive analogies spring to mind, i.e. displacement versus
    horsepower, horsepower versus 0-60 times, driving range versus miles
    per gallon, etc..
     
    Steven Scharf, Aug 10, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Lex Mathews

    Crownfield Guest

    but you want the p25 is about 30,000,
    and a good adapter back for the large format is about 1995.
     
    Crownfield, Aug 10, 2004
  4. (Steven Scharf) wrote in
    Hmmmm ... they have cleverly rewritten their web site. I earlier found
    what I claimed above without any problems. But now ... it is gone.

    The nearest I can come now is this ...

    http://www.foveon.com/prod_f7.html
    http://www.foveon.com/prod_f19.html

    Both says that they are "measuring full color at every
    point in the captured image". So - what is a point?
    Can there be fewer points than pixels? Hardly. We are
    therefore assuming that they mean full color at each pixel.
    Nothing else is reasonable.

    Further down they say that the sensors contains 10.2 or a
    4.5 million pixel respectively. They also explain "pixel"
    as "pixel sensor". But that is a cheap trick. Why not call
    it "pixel sensor" then in the first place?

    Not only are they lying, they are deceptive also. They are trying
    to hide their lies in smoke. I think this is sad really. Their
    technology has a much brighter potential than such scoundrels
    deserve.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Aug 10, 2004
  5. Of course I want a p25 :)

    But why put it on a a large format camera?
    And where shall I get the money :)
    And why is the adapter $2000? What is it doing?


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Aug 10, 2004
  6. Lex Mathews

    Crownfield Guest

    to get swings and tilts, rise and shifts.
    If I can answer that myself, I will let you know.
    http://www.kapturegroup.com/

    allows changing from viewer to back easily,
    and allows 'panorama' multiple images also

    and

    The Kapture Group STITCHING Back Adapter lets you attach your digital
    back to just about any view camera. The included drop-in insert can be
    rotated to portrait or landscape orientation. Shoot in the single
    capture mode or flip the lever to switch to the double capture stitching
    mode. In the stitching mode you capture two side by side images and
    stitch them together in your image editing software. Stitching of 2
    captured images yields both a significant increased file size and field
    of view. Because your digital back can be oriented in either the
    landscape or portrait mode you also have the choice of 2 stitching
    aspect ratios depending on your layout needs.

    Kapture Group Sliding Back adapters incorporate a bright Beattie
    Intenscreen Plus focus screen. The silk-screened masking for
    2K x 3K, 4k x 4k and 5x4 has both horizontal and vertical grid lines for
    preview and composition.
     
    Crownfield, Aug 11, 2004
  7. If the image is digital, you can easily do almost everything in
    software, without any tilts, swings or shifts. The only thing
    you cannot do is advanced focus control. BTW - the large format
    lens is not as good as a medium format lens and it is much
    worse at the edges. So, shifts will lose more quality than doing
    the correction in software for a medium format camera.
    Nice! - but $2000? No way! It is only some nice mechanics and a
    good matting screen. $500 sounds like a more reasonbable price.
    But ... I am not going to buy one nevertheless ... :)


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Aug 11, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.