What made you pick the D9 over Canon's 10D or Nikon's D100? Did you pick the Foveon for techno-ideological reasons? Did you get a good deal?
I'm looking to buy a DSLR too. When the 10D hit the US$1500 price point, I was tempted. But with Olympus just having introduced its E1 DSLR featuring the FourThirds system, I'm not yet ready to commit to one vendor. The Pentax DSLR looks promising as well. I think I'll wait until spring or summer 2004 to replace my film SLR and digital P&S combo.
What made me pick it was mainly the fact I didn't pay for it. Long complicated story but involves me giving it back to the guy that 0wnz it at some point in the future ...
Having said that it was the one I wanted to check out for techno-ideologue reasons as you suggest!
And it's a very interesting thing, this whole DSLR thing. The lens on the Sigma is like toadally ossom; the whole thing reeks of quality images, and it does not disappoint. One way of looking at it is that it has 3.4MP and the other is that it has 10.1M photodetectors ... kind of odd until you really compare it. I compared it with my 4MP Leica. It SPANKS it in terms of detail and colour, really hurts it badly ... in an A/B you really see the difference (and the Leica is a great camera, although not SLR and maybe 1/4 the price).
The odd thing is that the images are still just 3.4MP ... so it puts to rest that resolution=quality (hell, 640x480 at a small size could look AMAZING). Make them big and it gets the grain. An ASLR at the same price would take pictures with more flexible usage.
But I love digital photography ... I love plug'n'play'n'print ... and the software that comes with the camera, although OS X ready, does not use the Image Capture framework but some dodgy java app to turn the RAW images the Sigma takes into TIFF or whatever. A PC guy may be fine with this but my stardards of ease of use and aesthetics are higher. See my quandry? Nasty java UI, many steps, not intuitive, not a pleasure. What do I like about digital again?
And then the camera itself ... hmm ... many a dodgy UI thing there indeed. Many. Hmmm hmm hmm. Two sets of batteries, inferior LCD ...
Not simple question. But the colour and detail are the best I have seen on a digital.
Well, the Leica is really just a rebadged Panasonic or Fuji depending on the model, but yes, the biggest disadvantage to traditional digital cameras is how they must interpolate all images captured by the sensor since an equivalent 4 megapixel camera really only has 1 million blue, 1 million red, and 2 million green photosites.
I'm dying for Foveon to break into the consumer market.
Not simple question. But the colour and detail are the best I have seen on a digital.
How many high end digital cameras have you used? I only ask because I read some reviews of the Sigma that, surprisingly, said it was inferior to a number of cameras.
How many high end digital cameras have you used? I only ask because I read some reviews of the Sigma that, surprisingly, said it was inferior to a number of cameras.
Well, it might not actually be more accurate in hue, but the colors are more consistent relative to each other from pixel to pixel.
How many high end digital cameras have you used? I only ask because I read some reviews of the Sigma that, surprisingly, said it was inferior to a number of cameras.
A few. I've seen those reviews too ... and would broadly agree with most of them. However they often compare the camera to more expensive units IIRC.
A few. I've seen those reviews too ... and would broadly agree with most of them. However they often compare the camera to more expensive units IIRC.
Back when I was in the market for a camera, those reviews kind of scared me off. Well that and the proprietary lenses. I decided to wait for the next generation of Foveon cameras even though I probably could never tell the difference.
Back when I was in the market for a camera, those reviews kind of scared me off. Well that and the proprietary lenses. I decided to wait for the next generation of Foveon cameras even though I probably could never tell the difference.
To be fair to Foveon I have also seen reviews that say it kicks butski. To me the software and the camera UI is the bad point ...
I understand you can use some other lenses on it.
Aaaaand gen. 1 is always dodgy. There is NO doubt that at a higher resolution Foveon will have a world beater ... if they can put that chip in a consumer camera it will change the rules totally.
There are some revolutionary pro-cameras comming this fall...
Yeah. But what about pro-sumer and con-sumer cameras, New? My manual SLR cost a few hundred bucks and a few hundred more for lenses. It takes amazing pictures. I'd be ready to move to a DSLR, but even the 10D's relatively low $1500 price tag makes me hesitate. If I could get a basic DSLR with fast (betw. f2 and f3) 35mm- and 100mm-equivalent prime lenses for that price I'd be in.
For now, I'm still waiting. I already use my two year-old entry-level Canon A20 digicam significantly more than my film SLR. But I dearly miss mechanical manual focus, fast prime lenses, and the precision inherent in an SLR's through-the-lens viewfinder.
Yeah. But what about pro-sumer and con-sumer cameras, New? My manual SLR cost a few hundred bucks and a few hundred more for lenses. It takes amazing pictures. I'd be ready to move to a DSLR, but even the 10D's relatively low $1500 price tag makes me hesitate. If I could get a basic DSLR with fast (betw. f2 and f3) 35mm- and 100mm-equivalent prime lenses for that price I'd be in.
For now, I'm still waiting. I already use my two year-old entry-level Canon A20 digicam significantly more than my film SLR. But I dearly miss mechanical manual focus, fast prime lenses, and the precision inherent in an SLR's through-the-lens viewfinder.
Escher
Yeh, SLR is the way. No doubt. That's kind of what I was getting at above; there is NO remotely cheap DSLR that can match a cheap ASLR with some decent lenses at the moment ... so why get one?
there is NO remotely cheap DSLR that can match a cheap ASLR with some decent lenses at the moment ... so why get one?
I guess that's what the pragmatist in me says as well. But it would be so nice to have a DSLR yesterday.
According to DPReview.com, Olympus is prepping a consumer sibling to its just-introduced FourThirds system professional Olympus E-1 DSLR for 2004. I have great hopes for that camera (and system).
Considering this year's developments on the DSLR front, there's a very good chance that I'll be able to find one that matches my needs and budget sometime next year.
I'm in the same boat, waiting for an affordable DSLR to replace my old ASLR. I'm afraid we might never see one for the prices they sold the analog ones at. The prices should be down more than they are at this point.
I guess that's what the pragmatist in me says as well. But it would be so nice to have a DSLR yesterday.
According to DPReview.com, Olympus is prepping a consumer sibling to its just-introduced FourThirds system professional Olympus E-1 DSLR for 2004. I have great hopes for that camera (and system).
Considering this year's developments on the DSLR front, there's a very good chance that I'll be able to find one that matches my needs and budget sometime next year.
Escher
I wouldn't put much stock into this system. Olympus as usual, just seems to be pushing the upper-end prosumer market while leaving the traditional heavyweights to continue developing full-frame SLRs at cheaper and cheaper prices. Full frame image sensors allow more detail by virtue of size in addition to being fully compatible with your old lenses.
SD9 mmmm. Tasty. My only problem with it is that it has a top ISO rating of 400. My vote is for the Canon 10D for the same price range. The CMOS technology Canon is running has eclipsed CCD. They also have better color managment firmware in their cameras than any of the other manufactorers. Plus Canon is currently top dog when it comes to AF capabilities. Nikon should leap frog them soon though.
Full frame image sensors allow more detail by virtue of size in addition to being fully compatible with your old lenses.
See, Eugene, the problem (or advantage) is that my "old lenses" are all manual (non-autofocus) Canon and Pentax lenses. So none of my lense will be compatible with any DSLR. So far, I have stayed away from autofocus film SLRs. So when I eventually buy a DSLR, I'll move both to digital and autofocus, at the same time. (Note that I do have a digital P&S that I use a lot. I'm talking about the SLR cameras.) This means that I'll be buying into an entirely new lens system with a new DSLR. If Olympus' FourThirds system can get me a smaller and lighter DSLR system, I'm completely open to it. Ideologically, I think Olympus' approach makes a lot of sense.
If Canon or Nikon can sell me a full-frame (35mm size) DSLR body for $1000 by next year, I'll put up with the traditional large size of an SLR camera. OTOH, if Olympus can ship a lighter, smaller FourThirds DSLR at the same price, I'll favor the more portable system (assuming comparable optical performance.
I really like the performance and price of Canon's 10D. But the fact that I can't get really wide angle lenses without spending a fortune still gives me pause. Both full-frame sensors and the FourThirds system will give me the expected flexibility on the wide end. We'll just have to see who gets there first.
Plus Canon is currently top dog when it comes to AF capabilities. Nikon should leap frog them soon though.
LiquidR: Do you have any particular upcoming Nikon products in mind? As stated above, I'm open to all new systems. However, I'm leaning towards Canon because of their more generous software package and great experience with my Canon digital P&S.
Revolutionary cameras coming this Fall eh? Is that just an educated guess (the same as many photographers - particularly Nikon photographers - are making), or do you happen to have some information you'd like to share wit us? Don't worry. I doubt Nikon will send AI a cease and desist order the way Apple would. Nikon may not even know this place exists.
LiquidR: Do you have any particular upcoming Nikon products in mind? As stated above, I'm open to all new systems. However, I'm leaning towards Canon because of their more generous software package and great experience with my Canon digital P&S
No, no real info. I was just making an assumption due to the nature of the business, shortly after Nikon leap frogs Canon, Canon will probably leap frog Nikon, kinda like the competitive relationship of nVidia and Radeon.
Plus the digital realm of photography is evolving so fast, from equipment, file storage, color management, reproduction, etc... It's scary how fast it's going. Equipment that was 40K 6 years ago is worth less than 1K now.
But I do like the idea of the SD9 chip, makes sense to me, but what do I know I'm still wet processing and may wet process til the day I die.
Comments
What made you pick the D9 over Canon's 10D or Nikon's D100? Did you pick the Foveon for techno-ideological reasons? Did you get a good deal?
I'm looking to buy a DSLR too. When the 10D hit the US$1500 price point, I was tempted. But with Olympus just having introduced its E1 DSLR featuring the FourThirds system, I'm not yet ready to commit to one vendor. The Pentax DSLR looks promising as well. I think I'll wait until spring or summer 2004 to replace my film SLR and digital P&S combo.
Escher
Having said that it was the one I wanted to check out for techno-ideologue reasons as you suggest!
And it's a very interesting thing, this whole DSLR thing. The lens on the Sigma is like toadally ossom; the whole thing reeks of quality images, and it does not disappoint. One way of looking at it is that it has 3.4MP and the other is that it has 10.1M photodetectors ... kind of odd until you really compare it. I compared it with my 4MP Leica. It SPANKS it in terms of detail and colour, really hurts it badly ... in an A/B you really see the difference (and the Leica is a great camera, although not SLR and maybe 1/4 the price).
The odd thing is that the images are still just 3.4MP ... so it puts to rest that resolution=quality (hell, 640x480 at a small size could look AMAZING). Make them big and it gets the grain. An ASLR at the same price would take pictures with more flexible usage.
But I love digital photography ... I love plug'n'play'n'print ... and the software that comes with the camera, although OS X ready, does not use the Image Capture framework but some dodgy java app to turn the RAW images the Sigma takes into TIFF or whatever. A PC guy may be fine with this but my stardards of ease of use and aesthetics are higher. See my quandry? Nasty java UI, many steps, not intuitive, not a pleasure. What do I like about digital again?
And then the camera itself ... hmm ... many a dodgy UI thing there indeed. Many. Hmmm hmm hmm. Two sets of batteries, inferior LCD ...
Not simple question. But the colour and detail are the best I have seen on a digital.
I'm dying for Foveon to break into the consumer market.
Originally posted by Harald
Not simple question. But the colour and detail are the best I have seen on a digital.
How many high end digital cameras have you used? I only ask because I read some reviews of the Sigma that, surprisingly, said it was inferior to a number of cameras.
Originally posted by bunge
How many high end digital cameras have you used? I only ask because I read some reviews of the Sigma that, surprisingly, said it was inferior to a number of cameras.
Well, it might not actually be more accurate in hue, but the colors are more consistent relative to each other from pixel to pixel.
Originally posted by bunge
How many high end digital cameras have you used? I only ask because I read some reviews of the Sigma that, surprisingly, said it was inferior to a number of cameras.
A few. I've seen those reviews too ... and would broadly agree with most of them. However they often compare the camera to more expensive units IIRC.
Originally posted by Harald
A few. I've seen those reviews too ... and would broadly agree with most of them. However they often compare the camera to more expensive units IIRC.
Back when I was in the market for a camera, those reviews kind of scared me off. Well that and the proprietary lenses. I decided to wait for the next generation of Foveon cameras even though I probably could never tell the difference.
Details please...
I have a canon s400 for my consumer camera but I am looking to switch from 35 to a pro digital soon... I want to pay less than 2k though...
Originally posted by bunge
Back when I was in the market for a camera, those reviews kind of scared me off. Well that and the proprietary lenses. I decided to wait for the next generation of Foveon cameras even though I probably could never tell the difference.
To be fair to Foveon I have also seen reviews that say it kicks butski. To me the software and the camera UI is the bad point ...
I understand you can use some other lenses on it.
Aaaaand gen. 1 is always dodgy. There is NO doubt that at a higher resolution Foveon will have a world beater ... if they can put that chip in a consumer camera it will change the rules totally.
Originally posted by New
There are some revolutionary pro-cameras comming this fall...
Yeah. But what about pro-sumer and con-sumer cameras, New? My manual SLR cost a few hundred bucks and a few hundred more for lenses. It takes amazing pictures. I'd be ready to move to a DSLR, but even the 10D's relatively low $1500 price tag makes me hesitate. If I could get a basic DSLR with fast (betw. f2 and f3) 35mm- and 100mm-equivalent prime lenses for that price I'd be in.
For now, I'm still waiting. I already use my two year-old entry-level Canon A20 digicam significantly more than my film SLR. But I dearly miss mechanical manual focus, fast prime lenses, and the precision inherent in an SLR's through-the-lens viewfinder.
Escher
Originally posted by Escher
Yeah. But what about pro-sumer and con-sumer cameras, New? My manual SLR cost a few hundred bucks and a few hundred more for lenses. It takes amazing pictures. I'd be ready to move to a DSLR, but even the 10D's relatively low $1500 price tag makes me hesitate. If I could get a basic DSLR with fast (betw. f2 and f3) 35mm- and 100mm-equivalent prime lenses for that price I'd be in.
For now, I'm still waiting. I already use my two year-old entry-level Canon A20 digicam significantly more than my film SLR. But I dearly miss mechanical manual focus, fast prime lenses, and the precision inherent in an SLR's through-the-lens viewfinder.
Escher
Yeh, SLR is the way. No doubt. That's kind of what I was getting at above; there is NO remotely cheap DSLR that can match a cheap ASLR with some decent lenses at the moment ... so why get one?
Originally posted by Harald
there is NO remotely cheap DSLR that can match a cheap ASLR with some decent lenses at the moment ... so why get one?
I guess that's what the pragmatist in me says as well. But it would be so nice to have a DSLR yesterday.
According to DPReview.com, Olympus is prepping a consumer sibling to its just-introduced FourThirds system professional Olympus E-1 DSLR for 2004. I have great hopes for that camera (and system).
Considering this year's developments on the DSLR front, there's a very good chance that I'll be able to find one that matches my needs and budget sometime next year.
Escher
Originally posted by Escher
I guess that's what the pragmatist in me says as well. But it would be so nice to have a DSLR yesterday.
According to DPReview.com, Olympus is prepping a consumer sibling to its just-introduced FourThirds system professional Olympus E-1 DSLR for 2004. I have great hopes for that camera (and system).
Considering this year's developments on the DSLR front, there's a very good chance that I'll be able to find one that matches my needs and budget sometime next year.
Escher
I wouldn't put much stock into this system. Olympus as usual, just seems to be pushing the upper-end prosumer market while leaving the traditional heavyweights to continue developing full-frame SLRs at cheaper and cheaper prices. Full frame image sensors allow more detail by virtue of size in addition to being fully compatible with your old lenses.
Originally posted by Eugene
Full frame image sensors allow more detail by virtue of size in addition to being fully compatible with your old lenses.
See, Eugene, the problem (or advantage) is that my "old lenses" are all manual (non-autofocus) Canon and Pentax lenses. So none of my lense will be compatible with any DSLR. So far, I have stayed away from autofocus film SLRs. So when I eventually buy a DSLR, I'll move both to digital and autofocus, at the same time. (Note that I do have a digital P&S that I use a lot. I'm talking about the SLR cameras.) This means that I'll be buying into an entirely new lens system with a new DSLR. If Olympus' FourThirds system can get me a smaller and lighter DSLR system, I'm completely open to it. Ideologically, I think Olympus' approach makes a lot of sense.
If Canon or Nikon can sell me a full-frame (35mm size) DSLR body for $1000 by next year, I'll put up with the traditional large size of an SLR camera. OTOH, if Olympus can ship a lighter, smaller FourThirds DSLR at the same price, I'll favor the more portable system (assuming comparable optical performance.
I really like the performance and price of Canon's 10D. But the fact that I can't get really wide angle lenses without spending a fortune still gives me pause. Both full-frame sensors and the FourThirds system will give me the expected flexibility on the wide end. We'll just have to see who gets there first.
Escher
Originally posted by LiquidR
Plus Canon is currently top dog when it comes to AF capabilities. Nikon should leap frog them soon though.
LiquidR: Do you have any particular upcoming Nikon products in mind? As stated above, I'm open to all new systems. However, I'm leaning towards Canon because of their more generous software package and great experience with my Canon digital P&S.
Escher
LiquidR: Do you have any particular upcoming Nikon products in mind? As stated above, I'm open to all new systems. However, I'm leaning towards Canon because of their more generous software package and great experience with my Canon digital P&S
No, no real info. I was just making an assumption due to the nature of the business, shortly after Nikon leap frogs Canon, Canon will probably leap frog Nikon, kinda like the competitive relationship of nVidia and Radeon.
Plus the digital realm of photography is evolving so fast, from equipment, file storage, color management, reproduction, etc... It's scary how fast it's going. Equipment that was 40K 6 years ago is worth less than 1K now.
But I do like the idea of the SD9 chip, makes sense to me, but what do I know I'm still wet processing and may wet process til the day I die.