The quality of the shots are terrible, but they are not indicative of the sensor's abilities. In the "passant" photos you can see the background clarity is second to none.
You can blame the smoothness of the photos and the barrel distortion on the Sigma lens. You can blame the general crappiness of the photos on the photographer.
From the looks of it, Foveon does have potential. It's really a shame they got stuck with Sigma. i probably won't jump on the Foveon bandwagon the next time I buy a camera. I'll probably go with one of the Canon D-SLRs.
Just a question about the Foveon. Is it a full frame (35mm) sensor. Bigger sensors tend to resolve quite well (even with lower overall resolutions). While the x3 design certainly contributes to the performance of the sensor, if it's a full frame it would have quite an advantage over other D-SLR's. The Fuji 6/12MP superCCD comes close to the 3.5MP Foveon getting down to about 18 on the veritical lines standard resolution chart. The Foveon does get down to 20, and with great clarity, so maybe it's not that 'close', but remember the Fuji's 12MP performance is largely interpolated. Canon and and Kodak have just showed 11 and 14MP full frame 35mm CMOS D-SLR's. The performance of these should be amazing, with a good lense system they should approach what was previously digital back territory!
There are some potential problems with the Foveon arrangement that might limit it's application in the near term. We'll see, I guess.
Annoyone at the Photokina show wanna give us an update.
The only problems I've seen with the Foveon imager are 1) light sensitivity and 2) overpowering yellow.
The Foveon can use pixel grouping to effectively create bigger pixels to combat the ISO issues. The over saturated yellows can be fixed in Photoshop.
The Foveon X3's I've seen aren't full frame sensors, but there's really no reason why they can't make one.
<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/"; target="_blank">Phil Askey</a> has sample pics from the Sigma SD9 on his site. For preproduction photos with crappy Sigma equipment, the photos are very impressive.
Matsu, again, you are flat out wrong (noticing a trend here.) Bayer pattern CCD and CMOS sensors only have one photosite per pixel. They have to use a bit of interpolation to create an accurate image as a result.
Most Bayer pattern CCDs utilize 4 pixels in the following arrangement:
[code]R G
G B</pre><hr></blockquote>
This was what spurred FujiFilm to use honeycomb shaped pixels to try to fix the problem of arranging 3 photodetectors into a 2x2 square.
hmurchinson, don't worry, Matsu has no idea what he's talking about.
---
Matsu, please give up now. I invite you to go ask Phil from DPReview, Steve from Steve's Digicams, or anybody with know-how in this field.
You originally said: [quote]but a Bayer pattern also has three photosites per pixel<hr></blockquote>
I told you they didn't, and you persisted. Why? The Foveon X3 does have 3x the photodetectors as a Bayer pattern image sensor. Each pixel on a conventional image sensor has ONE photodetector.
You're confusing the pixels of large LCDs or CRTs for CCDs. You're thinking they use the same technology. They don't. On an LCD or CRT, you are correct, each pixel has 3 discreet color elements. On a tiny image sensor, each pixel almost has one. The manufacturers simply cannot use the same technology due to the size constraints.
Like I said, the digital photo any Bayer pattern imager based digital camera creates is interpolated. That's why you see moire. If each pixel had its own set of red, blue and green elements, you wouldn't need to interpolate the image and you wouldn't see moire! That's basically the whole point of the Foveon system...no interpolation is necessary.
With a Bayer pattern sensor, the image processor usually has to examine a 3x3 or 5x5 grid to guess what the real colors should be. Consider the following examples...
Here's a 5x5 pixel Bayer pattern sensor:
[code]R G R G R
G B G B G
R G R G R
G B G B G
R G R G R</pre><hr></blockquote>
Now consider the Foveon X3 with each "@" representing three photo detectors:
An evolution of the Bayer pattern sensor ... SuperCCD:
[code] R
G G
R B R
G G G G
R B R B R
G G G G
R B R
G G
R</pre><hr></blockquote>
While in the end, all image sensors resolve a 5x5 image, the Foveon requires no interpolation whatsoever. The end result, is a cleaner, crisper image that doesn't need to be interpolated and sharpened by the camera's internal image processor. The SuperCCD's raw image should be slightly better than a conventional CCD's because the photodetectors are packed closer to each other.
If that's not enough proof, the following diagram shows what a CCD looks like. The conventional CCD example shows 2 pixels, one with a green photodetector and one with a red photodetector. The dotted square around the red photodetector in the SuperCCD example is equivalent to "one pixel."
Thank you once again for revealing to everybody how often you are wrong. Stop wasting my time.
Why do you still insist on being right when you are wrong? I don't get you. There's no sub-pixel grouping of photodetectors. Why are you being so stupid?
You are again confusing facts with your own ridiculous assumptions. FujiFilm uses internal bicubic interpolation to create a bigger final image with SuperCCD. They originally claimed their FujiFilm FinePix 4700 created a 4.3 mpixel image. It did create a 4.3 megapixel image, but only with a 2.4 megapixel sensor, It wasn't based on weird interpretations of what makes up a pixel or a photodetector. The CCD still had 2.4 megapixels, and also 2.4 individual photodetectors.
Look at the fricking diagram that I lifted from DPReview. That square box shows ONE pixel with ONE photodetector. The 4 photodetectors together do NOT represent one pixel.
"The Foveon X3 is the world's first color image sensor that captures red, green and blue light at each pixel, resulting in brilliantly sharper images, enhanced color, and freedom from unwanted "color rainbow" artifacts common in photographs from today's digital cameras. Foveon X3 image sensors detect color in a manner similar to that of color film. With film, different colors of light penetrate to different layers of photosensitive material, with each layer detecting a specific color. Using a similar concept, Foveon X3 image sensors consist of three layers of photo detectors embedded in silicon and are the first to detect three colors at every pixel location. The name X3 comes from a unique capability that the Foveon X3 technology brings - the ability to capture three colors at each single pixel location."
Give it a rest. There are no vague definitions of the word pixel here. If that was true, there would be plenty of press about it on all the digital camera enthusiast websites.
There's no misunderstanding or miscommunication. You're just plain wrong, and I invite you to ask the experts.
As a person who use these equip. daily what matter is what you really see, not the technical specs. It just like comparing PC specs over Mac when we all know that it only goes as fast as the slowest link and in case of PeeCee world it is the user.
I owned Nikon D1 recently sold it for a replacement. I have used Leaf Cantare ($28,000.00), PhaseOne, Sinarbacks, Kodak ProBack, Kodak 645 Pro, Kodak DCS 760, D1, D1x, Leaf Cmos...The price range was $28,000 to $5000.00 being lowest. Image quality is noticeable from one to another and I used it depending on what I needed in the end. Due to high prices for these professional equipments I have been eagerly awaiting for the Foveon but as it stands they are not going too far since it is matched with Sigma.
After researching extensively I purchased Fuji S2 Pro and this camera is increadible for what it does at $2399.00. I will be comparing it to a friend's Kodak 645 Pro back that he purchased for $14,000.00. I know the results already but will show him the difference. The Fuji S2 will be better than his output and it comes very close to Leaf Cantare and PhaseOne that cost $28,000.00.
Anyone interested in digital cameras (aside from point and shoot) will be gaining a lot quickly. Since the latest release of Fuji S2 Pro and Nikon D100 digital under $2500.00 price it has put tremendous pressure for rest of the existing camera/wares. Nikon already dropped D1x from $6500 to $5000 to $4500 to now I think you can find it for $3700 new. Same with Kodak DCS760. Just last year collegues have purchased this camera for $18,000.00. When the Fuji S2 Pro was announced in Feb 2002 Kodak dropped 760 price to $12,000.00 It now sells for $7999.00.
This should give you indication of what's to come.
As a person who use these equip. daily what matter is what you really see, not the technical specs. It just like comparing PC specs over Mac when we all know that it only goes as fast as the slowest link and in case of PeeCee world it is the user.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The technical difference between bayer pattern CCDs and the X3 are not what I'm concerned about. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. The fact that Matsu continually makes false claims (in and out of this thread) is what bugs me.
My statements converted to a more detailed report.
It's too bad Matsu was too ashamed of his superficial, misguided knowledge, to keep his comments up for the rest of us to see. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Moral of this story: Take Matsu's comments with an oceanful of salt.
PS, I edited me long before you started off on the linkage kick, so it was kind a funny when you did. HEHEHE... And I had to, or I'd get mad at me if I didn't listen. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
I read about the Foveon in Pop sci. Using their new technology this camera looked like something that would finally convince me to switch from film (yes finally!) However, this looks to be a PRO camera... What is the cheapest one!? I saw the price 1899 mentioned, that's about 8 times more than I could afford... Will there be consumer models and if so, will that be before Christmas?
<strong>I read about the Foveon in Pop sci. Using their new technology this camera looked like something that would finally convince me to switch from film (yes finally!) However, this looks to be a PRO camera... What is the cheapest one!? I saw the price 1899 mentioned, that's about 8 times more than I could afford... Will there be consumer models and if so, will that be before Christmas?
I'm really not interested in any digital cameras unless they have a full frame sensor. I understand Canon is/has released some digital bodies with full frame sensors. This is kind of important, because on a digital SLR such as the Nikon D1, a 50mm lens effectively becomes a 90mm because of the size of the CCD. Full frame sensor brings us a better picture *and* justifies bringing all my Nikkor lenses with me. Currently, it's like hauling around medium format lenses and plugging them into a 35mm body.
The issue with 35 mm sized image sensors is whether it's really the best direction for professional digital cameras to go. Kodak and Olympus have decided, for example, that today's glass optics can resolve images on smaller/denser image sensors. They're pushing a 3/4 inch standard for pro level digital cameras to reduce not only the cost of cameras and lenses, but the size as well.
Sacrificing backward compatibility for forward-progress...basically.
Comments
<a href="http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/foveon_09202002_pr.html"; target="_blank">http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/foveon_09202002_pr.html</a>;
If you want to see very unprofessional sample photos, check out: <a href="http://www.guymichel.com/Test-Sigma.html"; target="_blank">http://www.guymichel.com/Test-Sigma.html</a>;
The quality of the shots are terrible, but they are not indicative of the sensor's abilities. In the "passant" photos you can see the background clarity is second to none.
You can blame the smoothness of the photos and the barrel distortion on the Sigma lens. You can blame the general crappiness of the photos on the photographer.
From the looks of it, Foveon does have potential. It's really a shame they got stuck with Sigma. i probably won't jump on the Foveon bandwagon the next time I buy a camera. I'll probably go with one of the Canon D-SLRs.
I was wondering why I hadn't seen any info until going to Steves Digicams. Lot's of new cams and good looking 4MP Digicams at $500 nice!
There are some potential problems with the Foveon arrangement that might limit it's application in the near term. We'll see, I guess.
Annoyone at the Photokina show wanna give us an update.
The Foveon can use pixel grouping to effectively create bigger pixels to combat the ISO issues. The over saturated yellows can be fixed in Photoshop.
The Foveon X3's I've seen aren't full frame sensors, but there's really no reason why they can't make one.
<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/"; target="_blank">Phil Askey</a> has sample pics from the Sigma SD9 on his site. For preproduction photos with crappy Sigma equipment, the photos are very impressive.
[ 10-08-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
Most Bayer pattern CCDs utilize 4 pixels in the following arrangement:
[code]R G
G B</pre><hr></blockquote>
This was what spurred FujiFilm to use honeycomb shaped pixels to try to fix the problem of arranging 3 photodetectors into a 2x2 square.
X3 = 3 photodetectors per pixel
Bayer = 1 photodetector per pixel
[ 09-26-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
[ 10-08-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
---
Matsu, please give up now. I invite you to go ask Phil from DPReview, Steve from Steve's Digicams, or anybody with know-how in this field.
You originally said: [quote]but a Bayer pattern also has three photosites per pixel<hr></blockquote>
I told you they didn't, and you persisted. Why? The Foveon X3 does have 3x the photodetectors as a Bayer pattern image sensor. Each pixel on a conventional image sensor has ONE photodetector.
You're confusing the pixels of large LCDs or CRTs for CCDs. You're thinking they use the same technology. They don't. On an LCD or CRT, you are correct, each pixel has 3 discreet color elements. On a tiny image sensor, each pixel almost has one. The manufacturers simply cannot use the same technology due to the size constraints.
Like I said, the digital photo any Bayer pattern imager based digital camera creates is interpolated. That's why you see moire. If each pixel had its own set of red, blue and green elements, you wouldn't need to interpolate the image and you wouldn't see moire! That's basically the whole point of the Foveon system...no interpolation is necessary.
With a Bayer pattern sensor, the image processor usually has to examine a 3x3 or 5x5 grid to guess what the real colors should be. Consider the following examples...
Here's a 5x5 pixel Bayer pattern sensor:
[code]R G R G R
G B G B G
R G R G R
G B G B G
R G R G R</pre><hr></blockquote>
Now consider the Foveon X3 with each "@" representing three photo detectors:
[code]@ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @
@ @ @ @ @</pre><hr></blockquote>;
An evolution of the Bayer pattern sensor ... SuperCCD:
[code] R
G G
R B R
G G G G
R B R B R
G G G G
R B R
G G
R</pre><hr></blockquote>
While in the end, all image sensors resolve a 5x5 image, the Foveon requires no interpolation whatsoever. The end result, is a cleaner, crisper image that doesn't need to be interpolated and sharpened by the camera's internal image processor. The SuperCCD's raw image should be slightly better than a conventional CCD's because the photodetectors are packed closer to each other.
If that's not enough proof, the following diagram shows what a CCD looks like. The conventional CCD example shows 2 pixels, one with a green photodetector and one with a red photodetector. The dotted square around the red photodetector in the SuperCCD example is equivalent to "one pixel."
Thank you once again for revealing to everybody how often you are wrong. Stop wasting my time.
[ 09-28-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
[ 10-08-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
You are again confusing facts with your own ridiculous assumptions. FujiFilm uses internal bicubic interpolation to create a bigger final image with SuperCCD. They originally claimed their FujiFilm FinePix 4700 created a 4.3 mpixel image. It did create a 4.3 megapixel image, but only with a 2.4 megapixel sensor, It wasn't based on weird interpretations of what makes up a pixel or a photodetector. The CCD still had 2.4 megapixels, and also 2.4 individual photodetectors.
Look at the fricking diagram that I lifted from DPReview. That square box shows ONE pixel with ONE photodetector. The 4 photodetectors together do NOT represent one pixel.
<a href="http://www.foveon.com/press_X3_business.html"; target="_blank">http://www.foveon.com/press_X3_business.html</a>;
"The Foveon X3 is the world's first color image sensor that captures red, green and blue light at each pixel, resulting in brilliantly sharper images, enhanced color, and freedom from unwanted "color rainbow" artifacts common in photographs from today's digital cameras. Foveon X3 image sensors detect color in a manner similar to that of color film. With film, different colors of light penetrate to different layers of photosensitive material, with each layer detecting a specific color. Using a similar concept, Foveon X3 image sensors consist of three layers of photo detectors embedded in silicon and are the first to detect three colors at every pixel location. The name X3 comes from a unique capability that the Foveon X3 technology brings - the ability to capture three colors at each single pixel location."
Give it a rest. There are no vague definitions of the word pixel here. If that was true, there would be plenty of press about it on all the digital camera enthusiast websites.
There's no misunderstanding or miscommunication. You're just plain wrong, and I invite you to ask the experts.
[ 09-28-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
As a person who use these equip. daily what matter is what you really see, not the technical specs. It just like comparing PC specs over Mac when we all know that it only goes as fast as the slowest link and in case of PeeCee world it is the user.
I owned Nikon D1 recently sold it for a replacement. I have used Leaf Cantare ($28,000.00), PhaseOne, Sinarbacks, Kodak ProBack, Kodak 645 Pro, Kodak DCS 760, D1, D1x, Leaf Cmos...The price range was $28,000 to $5000.00 being lowest. Image quality is noticeable from one to another and I used it depending on what I needed in the end. Due to high prices for these professional equipments I have been eagerly awaiting for the Foveon but as it stands they are not going too far since it is matched with Sigma.
After researching extensively I purchased Fuji S2 Pro and this camera is increadible for what it does at $2399.00. I will be comparing it to a friend's Kodak 645 Pro back that he purchased for $14,000.00. I know the results already but will show him the difference. The Fuji S2 will be better than his output and it comes very close to Leaf Cantare and PhaseOne that cost $28,000.00.
Anyone interested in digital cameras (aside from point and shoot) will be gaining a lot quickly. Since the latest release of Fuji S2 Pro and Nikon D100 digital under $2500.00 price it has put tremendous pressure for rest of the existing camera/wares. Nikon already dropped D1x from $6500 to $5000 to $4500 to now I think you can find it for $3700 new. Same with Kodak DCS760. Just last year collegues have purchased this camera for $18,000.00. When the Fuji S2 Pro was announced in Feb 2002 Kodak dropped 760 price to $12,000.00 It now sells for $7999.00.
This should give you indication of what's to come.
[ 09-30-2002: Message edited by: kwondo ]</p>
<strong>Matsu and Eugene...calm down
As a person who use these equip. daily what matter is what you really see, not the technical specs. It just like comparing PC specs over Mac when we all know that it only goes as fast as the slowest link and in case of PeeCee world it is the user.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The technical difference between bayer pattern CCDs and the X3 are not what I'm concerned about. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. The fact that Matsu continually makes false claims (in and out of this thread) is what bugs me.
My statements converted to a more detailed report.
It's too bad Matsu was too ashamed of his superficial, misguided knowledge, to keep his comments up for the rest of us to see. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Moral of this story: Take Matsu's comments with an oceanful of salt.
[ 10-30-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
Bugs ya, doesn't it?
PS, I edited me long before you started off on the linkage kick, so it was kind a funny when you did. HEHEHE... And I had to, or I'd get mad at me if I didn't listen. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
[ 10-30-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
Thanks.
<strong>I read about the Foveon in Pop sci. Using their new technology this camera looked like something that would finally convince me to switch from film (yes finally!) However, this looks to be a PRO camera... What is the cheapest one!? I saw the price 1899 mentioned, that's about 8 times more than I could afford... Will there be consumer models and if so, will that be before Christmas?
Thanks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Not this year.
Sacrificing backward compatibility for forward-progress...basically.
[ 10-30-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>