The X3 chip (http://www.foveon.net/)

John -- thanks for the info -- I don't know how I missed that big of a technical breakthrough! Hope it all pans out and that Nikon, Canon, et. al., start to use it after the deal with Sigma runs out.

Excerpted from dpreview.com: "Foveon and Sigma have today revealed the list price and shipping date for the SD-9 digital SLR, the first digital camera to use Foveon's ground-breaking X3 sensor. The SD-9 (body only) will have a list price of $1800 in the US and £1299.99 inc VAT in the UK and should be available in late October (2002)."

I think that dpreview's Sigma SD-9 review will be out in the next month.

Found these images via Google -- WOW!

Foveon X3 images (http://www.sjphoto.com/web-special/)

Very impressive results. It was only a matter of time. I wonder what's next? :)

Ed

The pics are kick'in...... Last year, one of the corporate guys used the prototype from the company. Printed out to tiff.'s on paper. They were kick'in. Put my 760 to shame...:cry: :bawling:
Pretty soon I'm going to have an $8000 dollar hammer. I'll be pounding nails into the wall with it.
But that comparison is unfair. Different technology. It's like comparing todays U.S.Army(going back in time) and fighting the indians with their bows and arrows.

<<Hope it all pans out and that Nikon, Canon, et. al., start to use it after the deal with Sigma runs out.>>

Yes, I hope they learn like the indians did. Get the high tech stuff.(learned to use firearms). Those bows and arrows just don't cut it.

So, for the digitally ignorant, is the signficance the higher capacity of this chip?

What's the significance of the "Sigma deal"; is that some sort of liccensing agreement that expires, that would enable camera maker use the X3 instead?

Their website says they are "actively engaged with other major digital camera manufacturers" , which implies that the partnership with Sigma is non-exclusive.

As far as I understand it, in other digital cameras each sensor only detects red, green OR blue light. So all images have some interpolation (i.e. calculated values) in the individual colour channels.

However, red, green and blue light each penetrate silicon to a different depth so Foveon have come up with the bright idea of making sensors that consist of red, green and blue detectors embedded in silicon one above the other, so that each sensor detects light of all colours.

This means that each sensor detects a lot more information than a sensor in a conventional digital camera, and in turn this SHOULD mean that for any given megapixel resolution pictures produced using the Foveon are higher quality than equivalent megapixel pictures from anything else.

I'm looking forward to finding out.... :)

Leah:

In one post you've opened huge doors for me. Thanks very much.

~Danny~

I've been reading up on this .... I want one! The technology is going to produce far in excess of what we have now as digital cameras.

The price that is expected to be on the launched cameras are well out of my budget, my only hope is that enough manufacters get the bug and create enough products for the market that they have to bring the price down more, to be competitive.

Clare

Hello folks,

Hope everyone had a fantastic Christmas and received plenty of gadgets to play with over the next year!

I have been after a few new items for the office - printer - monitor - new computer - etc. But decided they can all wait! So I ordered the SD9 and its now here. I will write a review for all to see and hopefully post loads of examples taken with my new toy! (sorry sensible piece of business equiptment :) )

Now I am going to play - I'll be back soon!!!!

Clare

Wow!! I'm not too sure we'll hear from you for a while -- you may be having too much fun!!

This will be a great opportunity to see how good this camera can be -- I'm looking forward to seeing some images and hearing your review.

I'd been hearing about this but I never saw samples before. Now I have, thanks to the link that CJ posted.

Pretty amazing.

Wow Clare!! I'm anxiously awaiting example images! (If you have the time, I'd be really interested in seeing comparisons between your "old" digital camera (assuming you have one) and the SD9.

Jeanie

Good for you Clare. I'm hoping you will find that there is a great deal of difference. I recently read a review in a PC magazine, and it was not generating the positive remarks I was hoping for. While the article did say it was an improvement, it was not the huge difference expected. I'm hoping your opinion is more positive.

Ed

A couple of great 'retouch" examples there also.

My first impressions of this camera are good. The body is well made and the dials and buttons are very accessable - I hate nothing more than having to grow an extra pair of hands and eyes just to beable to comfortably use a camera!

My comparision will be against my current digital camera, which is a Casio EX3000EX/Ir (which I have had fantastic results on!) The casio is :
3.3 mega pixel
Canon lens
Compact Flash 1+2
More details if you want them above is the general idea....

At the moment I have not got the correct lens for the camera and am making do with a standard 28-85mm lens which is on loan from the shop until my lens turns up. I was hoping this would be today but no luck there - just have to wait. In the mean time I will just get used to using a SLR again.

Up to now I have just been playing with the camera - I have had good results with skin tones and as the camera has a white ballance adjuster, there should be no problems there. It comes with 7 automatic settings for the white ballance - but the manual over ride is very acurate :bigthmb: (Sigma 1 v Casio 0)

More later
Clare

This is probably where I will write things as I find them out - at the end of my play time :D and when I have the right lens I will write the review ..... is this okay with everyone or would you just like the review?

Heres some of the first images to come out of my SD9. Its so cold outside at the moment I froze while taking this bunch, I am suprized any are infocus as I was shivering - the sacrifices we make to play with new toys!

My first image is of a wall. There is no manipulation other than resizing so it doesn't take hours to down load. I think the results are quite good but am hoping that the new lens will improve the overall sharpness of the images. Through out the day I tried to shoot a variety of images (unfortunatly there isn't much colour about today - overcast and winter!) I will post more later as I resize them.

Clare

Here's another - chose this building for the brick detail.

I have just realised I took all of todays images with the ISO set to 400 - excuse me while I slam my head against my desk!!!

I am so used to the Casio which doesn't have half of these settings and cameras that use DX coding - I will have to make myself a check list

Bang....Bang.....Bang.....

This is the most colourful item I could find!

One thing that I have noticed is that the software that comes with the camera produces a better image than photoshop - I have yet to work out why this is, but it could be the colour setup that is different between the two programs.

Is this the type of details people want? Ask any specific questions if you want to - I will try and answer them.

Clare

Clare;

Thanks for the info and pics. Could you post; One subject, two pics, one from each camera at same spot? If possible, so as to get a better idea of the diferences.

Thanks;

No problem - I will take them both out on my next shoot - hopefully tomorrow if the weather is good and I am not to hung over from the New year booze!

This is my last image from today - its another detail shot.....

Happy New Year to all,

Clare

Clare, as to posting here as you find things out about the SD9 vs. waiting for a review - I vote for posting here as you find them. Yes, we'd still like the review, but hopefully the things you post here will make it easier for you to write the review in the end.

I also vote for side-by-side comparisons of the Casio and SD9. I understand the lack of color at this time of the year! Perhaps at a greenhouse? ;)

Thanks for the info so far. I'm reading all with interest!

Jeanie

Thanks Jeanie,
I will continue posting here - I have begun my review but have no idea when it will be ready!!! - this thread will definately help
Must remember to spell check it :!:

If there is a specific image that I really like I will post it in the gallery - I am sure you will all know which one's they are ;)

One thing that I am really impressed with is the colours it reproduces - I can't get over how realistic they are, yet they don't have that overly digital unrealistic look to them. - you can almost touch them...... am I making sence?

Take Care - Keep safe - Happy new year

Clare

I too am interested in Clare's first impressions, seems like an interesting toy to have. For those that want to learn a little more in the meantime it can be found at this link

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmasd9/

Clare - I know what you mean about colors. I'm especially aware of that when friends send me pictures of their kids. I don't know how to describe it, but I can always tell the pictures were taken with a digital camera. Perhaps it's just that they are amateur snapshots and they don't know how to set the white point correctly.

Jeanie

One more vote for a side by side comparison. I don't know about anyone else, but I found the 400 ISO setting to be pretty impressive, especially on the cropped areas! Of course the slower ones were great too.

Ed

This has turned into quite a thread. Nice stuff Clare, can't wait to see more. I hope this foveon sensor catches on in a big way. This is the begining of the end for film cameras. This first sensor is only 3.x megapixels. Wait until the 6 megapixel sensor is released. There will be new ground in image capturing made there.

Happy New Year everyone, it's just still 10:30 PM here is Louisiana on the 31st.

It's raining outside today and being new years day most places are shut so I am reviewing my images from yesterday.

One of the interesting points that I have found today is that the images have a close resemblance to film cameras. I have included another attachment here that I hope illustrates what I mean. Obviously when you enlarge the image but a stupid magnification you will see the individual pixels - but at a sensible magnification about 1:1 or slightly larger the images seem to have grain. This is probably to do with the 3 layers that the X3 captures. What do you think?

Clare

Hi Clare. Are you sure that you are shooting at 100 ASA? Was there enough light on the subject? The images seem to have too much grain (noise) for 110% magnification. My only basis for compareson is one of my 3.4 MP images from my Nikon. Try another test shot with a well lit composure. I am no expert so my opinion may not be correct but I think you should not have that much grain in that image.

Hi KevinBE,

These are at 400 ASA/ISO, I forgot to change the ASA after experimenting with the camera in doors - one of those new digital settings I will have to remember to reset after a shoot!!!

I am hoping the grain to be better on my next test shoot which I will do at 100ASA - If I remember.....

Clare

The cabbage image that I used as my comparison was a cross processed film image - but I thought it showed grain well for people who wanted a comparisson.

Kevin,

Is there any chance you can post some results from your Nikon camera as a comparison? What Nikon is it? Is it an SLR? - If it is I would be very interested in the results you have had.

Thanks
Clare

Hi Clare, that ASA400 explains a lot. That is a very good image for that speed.

My camera is just a Nikon CP-995. I have an SLR on my wish list but it looks like there have been other items with higher priority lately. Maybe if my business turns out to be a viable enterprise I could justify one as a business expense.

What type of image would you want? It will probably pale in contrast to your new SD9.

Hi Kevin,

A good comparision image would be anything with detail and preferably some colour, or difficult to reproduce detail. Please don't forget to give us some background info on your camera. How many pixels etc.

The weather here was sunny for a change this morning so I grabed my cameras and headed out for a nother photo session. I have hopefully got some comparison images between the SD9 and the casio. I will post these as soon a I reconect the Casio to my computer! ( My compact flash reader has died - so I will have to look for the original drivers....)

In the mean time I thought I would post you another example from the SD9. This is a 100ASA (I remembered!) image. The grain is definately better than the 400ASA examples.

Clare

Well I finally got my drivers working - that only took a few hours!!!

Here are the first comparison photos.

The casio image is smaller than the one from the sigma. I think the first thing I saw was that the clarity of the colours seem to be better on the sigma. The blues and the reds seem to me to be clear with a good tonal range. The casio's in comparison look to be a little bit washed out. The depth of field on the casio is better than the SD9. I don't know whether this is because of the sensor or the difference between SLR and compact design. I like to have the choice that the depth of field from the sigma gives, but there is something quite nice about the casio's DOF.


It was very bizarre swaping between the two cameras today - they are so different. Both of these cameras are very good and I still love the simplicity of the use of the casio. With the Casio you are able to take the images from the view on the LCD screen - which I find to be the best way other wise you tend to get a bit of parallax error, which is very evident in macro work. The sigma on the other hand only lets you take the image through the view finder, and allows you to preview the image after the exposure.

So here is the first image - please post what your reactions are - I am very interested in all of your opinions. Which image do you prefer?

Clare

I don't know how scientific this is but here is what I have put together. The images are from my Nikon CP-995 taken at 3.4 Megapixel. I displayed these images in photoshop at the full image size, 1536 X 2048 Pixels. I then took a screen shot of a section of the image and cropped it to a managable size. I then zoomed in at 200% in photoshop and took another screen shot and cropped near the same area as the first shot. This is alien to me so if I need to do this differently then let me know and I will make another attempt.

Here is the first image.

Here is the second image.

Clare, I like the SD9 better - though the sky looks a slightly lavender to me. I wasn't there, so I'm not sure what the correct sky color is, but the Casio sky looks more like Colorado skies. ;) However, I agree that the Casio image appears a bit washed out. Also, the tonal variations don't seem to be as "smooth" with the Casio.

I'm assuming you could change the depth of field on the SD9 with aperture priority? But, there's no DOF preview, correct?

Jeanie

Thanks for your images Kevin. The first one seems a little underexposed (at least the section you cropped) and when I lighten it, there is definite grain showing. The second one has very little grain though - and looks to be better exposed. How do the colors compare to what you saw when you were taking the photos?

Jeanie

Hi Jeanie, those pictures were not modified in Photoshop at all. I wanted to show the images just as the camera captured them. One bad trait of most digital cameras is that most images will need some tonal correction. The second image was much better tonally right out of the camera. The colors were dead on though, the color balance was working just right.

The first image did include some sections with a lot of shadows. Another weakness of digital cameras is in shadow detail. That is why I chose that image. Also the DOF was very shallow on both images.

Clare, the SD9 pictures seem to contain a lot more dynamic range in the colors. It is very obvious which camera took which picture.

Here are links to view the originals:

http://www.pbase.com/image/10193633

http://www.pbase.com/image/10193902

That is a lot better than trying to compare to my little camera. Phil does a good job in his reviews.

Hi all,

Chuck, thanks for that link - very interesting. I tried to read as many reviews as possible before deciding on this camera, but you always miss one out. This has also given me a better insight into the results from the other SLR camera on the market.

Kevin, thanks for posting some comparison images from your Nikon camera. They compare well with the Casio results that I have experienced.

Jeanie, The SD9 does have a DOF preview button. The DOF was so good on the casio I kind of got used to letting it take over....opps! I am pleased to be back with the SLR camera gang, I feel more like its me taking and making the shot rather than letting the camera take over - I love manual cameras :) The sky does seem to be a little bit lavender, I am going to try a UV filter to overcome this. I'll tell you how it goes.

I have also noticed that the camera does sometimes over do the highlight areas, as the review that Chuck gave found. I am going to have to be very careful to make my exposures correct. I am hoping this is a software issue.

I have just found out that my Sigma lens that was ordered with the camera will not arrive for another 2 weeks, which is a bit disapointing. I was really hoping to get hold of it to compare the two lens. As the one on order is specifically for the digital camera, and the one I am currently using is a normal 35mm camera lens - although it does have quite a nice macro on it.

All for now, I am off to try and locate that UV filter....

Clare

I've just posted another image to the gallery from the SD9. It was taken at 100ASA and I was after a delicate look to the image. I am not a botanist so its just called flower!!! :)

Still haven't got my lens, but I bought a UV filter (had them all as 49's but none as 55's!) I will go and photograph the building again and see what the sky looks like..... here we wait for good weather......

Hope you like the new image

Clare

Hello folks,

I have just added a review for the Sigma SD9, thanks Doug for the input.

http://www.retouchpro.com/reviews/censura.php?tsid=1&csid=74aee9eaa0c254049b875ecab781936f&cmd=details&itemid=243&username=Clare

If I have left out anything then please ask and I'll edit it to include your question

Clare

Some time ago I had tried their demo. It was pretty good. I feel it's a contender. Now if the heavyweights(Kodak,Nikon,ect.) can use this technology(X3) for their own. And design some good software for it as well.
This will most liikely be decided on how the SD9 sells at a consumer level.
Let's get ready to rumble!!!!!

Hi Chuck,

Things have been a little bit hectic here what with the new site and trying to do a big advertising drive. The camera is fantastic, and although I have had a bit of dust on the sensor (I had to buy the largest blower brush I could find to remove it) I have had few problems with the quality of the images or the techniqual camera stuff.

I have added 3 new pages for the floral library on my site, these were all taken with the SD9. The only shoots in the floral gallery that were taken with the casio are the gerbras on page 2 and the lilies on page 3. If you would like to see any of these in more detail just give us a shout and I'll post something larger.

I have been mainly using the SD9 in a studio environment and although I have taken it on location once haven't got anything new to show. (unfortunately the lens is a bit too heavy for me to hand hold the camera and I did not have a tripod on me on the location shoot ) I am hopefully going to go and shoot some more Thames at night images for the Landscape gallery this week, so there mights be some more shoots later.

Your grandson must be very happy with the cannon :) I look forward to your comments on your new camera :) If there are any specific shots you would like for a comparison, give us a shout and I will see what I can do.

Hope you are enjoying your new camera
Clare

I would like to see some images from sigma using the x3 chip. To see how sigma adapted to the x3. You can put a link up to your web page and place your images(orginals) up, in jpg, setting of 12(least compressed)...... So Mr. Nelsons' server does not get bogged down.


John

Thank you for the link. I had checked(dp review) that out one time before. I think there were different examples though. I am one that likes' unbias reviews(and examples) for equipment. This is not to say, dp review is biased. I mean to say "real world examples" . Example: When I went to purchase a scanner(flat bed) from a store, they always have those"professionally" shot pictures of cars and whatnot, they scan. Flat lit. No major shadowing, going on..........Just so happen. At the time, I had a picture my kid shot, to test.........I found out. That he stills needs practice...... I like to test, an "average Joes' " type of picture. To look not at the scanning of the highlights or even the midtones. But the shadow areas of the scan. And the above holds(for me) for printers(inkjets and dye-subs) as well, when printing.
Those "professional photographers" can make any piece of equipment look good, even for those shadow areas.

John