Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Misc Forums > New Technology

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 23, 2005, 5:19 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,724
Default

Ay, by gum!! I spies a foveon o the horizon!! Stay sharp matey!!
KENNETHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 19, 2005, 4:53 PM   #12
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 34
Default

Here are some test photos from recalled/prototype X530's: :G

http://www.digicamreview.co.uk/photo.../polaroid_x530
http://www.pbase.com/skaliwag/test_shots
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/re...4/13/1349.html
code is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21, 2005, 3:32 AM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2
Default

It takes great pictures if you use it correctly.

I looked at the sample pictures and there are three things you need to know about this camera, since it's basically a Sigma SD5(half of the SD10):

1:Thesensor is meant to be used in RAW mode only. Any other mode AT ALL will cause the same interpolation and moires that you get with a typical camera, along with huge amounts of compression noise. The ONLY way to get the Foveon sensor quality is to leave it alone and shoot RAW mode. This means 140 pictures on a 1gig card(ouch)

2:All images need to be post-processed with the Sigma 2.1 software, just like the SD9/10s do. The in-camera firmware is pathetic at best.

3:The camera, like the Sigmas, has a unique problem with the sensor as well - again, it needs to be left alone. This means the lowest ISO all the time. Any other ISO setting will create tons of artifacts and crud. This means it needs to be run like a 35mm camera with ISO 100 film and aperature priority(fixed shutter speed, almost like setting a typical camera to the "flash" setting.)

These problems are unfixable and cannot be worked around. It's like shooting film in a way. It's just the way the technology works. The few images that I have found, though, that are RAW ISO 100 externally processed - they look flawless - just less sharp than the Sigmas of course.

Unfortunately, recalling it won't make this function like a Canon S50. It only will give you stunning pictures in one mode, kind of like a compact version of a Digital Rebel - it's a pro(difficulty) camera masquerading in a $399 consumer package.
Plekto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2006, 3:00 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 22
Default

Well it's heading into September 2006 and nice to see Sigma and Foveon back in the saddle soon. 14 megapixels sounds about right. Hope the price is right, for the GREAT images.
Robert Johnston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2006, 8:08 PM   #15
Member
 
danag42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 69
Default

My only question about the Foveon sensor is that the reolution is limited to the number of individual three-layer sites on the chip. So Foveon's claim of a 15 megapixel chip is technically correct, there are that many pixels, but some of them record the same sensor site. So resolution is really 5 megapixels, even if the color depth and smoothness are superior.

The limit to the ammount of detail you can capture is limited to the number of individual photosites, even if each photosite has three pixels collecting color information.

Perhaps it's better than interpolation, perhaps not. But it's not collecting as much detail as they claim.
danag42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2006, 10:58 AM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 22
Default

danag42 wrote:
Quote:
My only question about the Foveon sensor is that the reolution is limited to the number of individual three-layer sites on the chip. So Foveon's claim of a 15 megapixel chip is technically correct, there are that many pixels, but some of them record the same sensor site. So resolution is really 5 megapixels, even if the color depth and smoothness are superior.

The limit to the ammount of detail you can capture is limited to the number of individual photosites, even if each photosite has three pixels collecting color information.

Perhaps it's better than interpolation, perhaps not. But it's not collecting as much detail as they claim.
That's right, that the output resolution is only in fact around 5 megapixels. That's a fact. However, apparently, from the arguments coming from the Foveon users, the Foveon is so much better than a normal CCD pixel that the resolution is increased a great deal, and a 4 megapixel Foveon compares in resolution to a 10 megapixel CCD of any other type.

I can agree that the resolution from a Foveon will be superior to other CCD/CMOS resolutions, but I just haven't seen image comparisons that deal with the resolution issue alone. A normal CCD system is very imprecise and a Foveon is about as precise as you can get. For 4 megapixels Foveon to equal 10 isn't that hard to believe, since if you double a 4 in width and height, that's 16 megapixels, and old-style CCD's use a very poor data gathering system, so the user claims that Foveon resolution is VASTLY superior per pixel count, is believable.

I'd just like to see two things: 1) a direct image comparison targeting the resolution issue alone, and 2) Foveons with a output pixel count of 14 million pixels, as measured by PhotoShop and the output image (height pixel count and width pixel count), and forgetting about the quality of the pixel.......just the pixel count on output.

As long asthis issue of pixel count definitionconfusion drags on, Foveon will keep losing the argument and be an extremely low seller.
Robert Johnston is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:02 PM.