Micro 4/3 This could possible get me back to m43: Sigma m43 Foveon

serhan

All-Pro
May 7, 2011
NYC
I will buy one if they produce one... ILC dp option was discussed in Sigma dpreview forum many times, but usual Sigma crowd was saying the lenses are made to Dp series and it is perfect, etc,.. Sigma uses Canon af algorithm for SD series, but they didn't try to make it ef mount... Sigma is a lens company so they might want to keep the mount in house like SD...
 

entropic remnants

Hall of Famer
Mar 3, 2013
John Griggs
They should PARTNER with Oly or somebody who knows how to make a camera.

Shrinking the Foveon has some negative implications for image quality though. It'll be a bright light or tripod camera only and not for moving subjects, lol.
 

Luckypenguin

Hall of Famer
Dec 24, 2010
Brisbane, Australia
Nic
If they want to use a proprietary mount, would they best off using APS-C (since that is the current sensor size they manufacture)? Sony's E-mount is open to lens developers, I wonder if it's open to camera developers.

Also, joining Micro 4/3 just gives them the lens mount architecture and communications protocols. Sigma would still be the ones making the camera...
 

entropic remnants

Hall of Famer
Mar 3, 2013
John Griggs
If they want to use a proprietary mount, would they best off using APS-C (since that is the current sensor size they manufacture)? Sony's E-mount is open to lens developers, I wonder if it's open to camera developers.

Also, joining Micro 4/3 just gives them the lens mount architecture and communications protocols. Sigma would still be the ones making the camera...
They already have their own mount for their very clunky DLSR's. Seems they should just make a DSLR version using their existing tech.

But therein lies the problem: Sigma seems to just suck at camera system design. They should be licensing that sensor right and left if they can.
 

Yeats

All-Pro
Jul 31, 2012
New Jersey, USA
Chris
The problem with a mainstream company like Olympus or Ricoh going Foveon is that video sucks. So does high ISO, for that matter.

I believe Sony is working on a Foveonesque sensor. I think it's a good bet that Sony would get the video aspect right.
 

entropic remnants

Hall of Famer
Mar 3, 2013
John Griggs
The problem with a mainstream company like Olympus or Ricoh going Foveon is that video sucks. So does high ISO, for that matter.

I believe Sony is working on a Foveonesque sensor. I think it's a good bet that Sony would get the video aspect right.
Making it smaller than APS-C compounds their problems. The stacked pixel architecture isn't very sensitive.
 

entropic remnants

Hall of Famer
Mar 3, 2013
John Griggs
Yup. Stupid Neanderthal sensors, we need SNAS! (Sensitive New Age Sensors)

:p
Watch what you wish for. They'd probably have a government-managed smart tech that automatically deletes any image they consider politically incorrect, lol.
 

john m flores

All-Pro
Aug 13, 2012
The problem with a mainstream company like Olympus or Ricoh going Foveon is that video sucks. So does high ISO, for that matter.

I believe Sony is working on a Foveonesque sensor. I think it's a good bet that Sony would get the video aspect right.

Yeah, I wonder if the poor low light and video is due to something inherent in the Foveon approach or in Sigma's application of it. One possible benefit of the Bayer array in low light is that multiple pixels are used to capture the light, perhaps providing some additive effect, while the Foveon uses stacked pixels, thus providing some subtractive effect.

I just made that up though, so it's probably a can of stupid.
 

biglouis

Veteran
Aug 4, 2013
Definitely not!

I love my SIgma's but reducing the sensor size would, imho, be counter-intuitive. Nor does the sensor size really need to increase. I'm not even sure it makes sense for it to be FF.

What I would like is a DPxM with an interchangeable mount. (Preferably m-bayonet haha!).

I'm sorta hoping that with the fire-sale of DPxM and DSLR bodies going on at present something is definitely in the pipeline for the new year.

LouisB
 

Yeats

All-Pro
Jul 31, 2012
New Jersey, USA
Chris
Yeah, I wonder if the poor low light and video is due to something inherent in the Foveon approach or in Sigma's application of it. One possible benefit of the Bayer array in low light is that multiple pixels are used to capture the light, perhaps providing some additive effect, while the Foveon uses stacked pixels, thus providing some subtractive effect.

I just made that up though, so it's probably a can of stupid.
I just figured the video issue arose from the fact that the Foveon sensors uses 3x the photosites of a Bayer sensor that produces a similarly-sized image.
 

Luckypenguin

Hall of Famer
Dec 24, 2010
Brisbane, Australia
Nic
I'm going to make some assumptions here, first being that this rumour is true since otherwise there is no point to go any further. Now assuming that Sigma is going to minimise costs by using the same sensor architecture as the existing APS-C chip we are left with a Micro 4/3 sized Foveon chip of about 10mp. Now, the Foveons are at best considered to give an apparent resolution advantage over a Bayer sensor of 1.5x which when multiplied by 10mp gives 15mp. So, considering that the current Micro 4/3 sensors available are 16mp and already have very weak AA filters (or none in the case of the E-M1) this scenario actually puts the Sigma at a slight disadvantage, which leaves only colour response in the potential positives column as the major distinguishing feature from what is already available in Micro 4/3.
 

Woody112704

Veteran
Nov 7, 2013
Iowa
Jared
I'm going to make some assumptions here, first being that this rumour is true since otherwise there is no point to go any further. Now assuming that Sigma is going to minimise costs by using the same sensor architecture as the existing APS-C chip we are left with a Micro 4/3 sized Foveon chip of about 10mp. Now, the Foveons are at best considered to give an apparent resolution advantage over a Bayer sensor of 1.5x which when multiplied by 10mp gives 15mp. So, considering that the current Micro 4/3 sensors available are 16mp and already have very weak AA filters (or none in the case of the E-M1) this scenario actually puts the Sigma at a slight disadvantage, which leaves only colour response in the potential positives column as the major distinguishing feature from what is already available in Micro 4/3.
Depending on what you are planning to use it as if they put a Foveon in it. You may have to look at it in the same light as the DPM's are now. Unless they have made some major improvements to certain aspects of it. It would be awesome but I think that there are going to be lots of issues with the first iteration of the camera, unless like I said they have fleshed out a lot of the issues that the DPM's have
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom