Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Fair and Balanced View of the Sigma SD-10 Digital SLR Camera

Reply
Thread Tools

Fair and Balanced View of the Sigma SD-10 Digital SLR Camera

 
 
Steven M. Scharf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2004
I've updated the site, renamed it, and added the positive aspects of the
Sigma SD-10 as well. See:
http://nordicgroup.us/sigma

Thanks for all the suggestions.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Randall Ainsworth
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2004
> I've updated the site, renamed it, and added the positive aspects of the
> Sigma SD-10 as well. See:
> http://nordicgroup.us/sigma
>


I still wouldn't take one if you gave it to me.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
adm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2004

"Randall Ainsworth" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:100520040857376019%(E-Mail Removed)...
> > I've updated the site, renamed it, and added the positive aspects of the
> > Sigma SD-10 as well. See:
> > http://nordicgroup.us/sigma
> >

>
> I still wouldn't take one if you gave it to me.


I would. Preddy might buy it from me for $100 or so.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Mikey S.
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2004
Now that's crazy, I have no intention of trading in my Canon gear but if
someone was to GIVE me a Sigma setup, I'd be more than glad to take it and
try it out to see for myself. Any rational person would take something for
nothing, why not?

Think about it.

--

Mikey S.
http://www.mike721.com


"Randall Ainsworth" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:100520040857376019%(E-Mail Removed)...
> > I've updated the site, renamed it, and added the positive aspects of the
> > Sigma SD-10 as well. See:
> > http://nordicgroup.us/sigma
> >

>
> I still wouldn't take one if you gave it to me.



 
Reply With Quote
 
BillyBob
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2004
Steven,

Nice to see some substance instead of the illogical rantings and drivel of
GP - If I was Sigma I would consider legal action against the guy - he has
damaged them terribly!

BillyB


"Steven M. Scharf" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:YYMnc.15170$(E-Mail Removed) link.net...
> I've updated the site, renamed it, and added the positive aspects of the
> Sigma SD-10 as well. See:
> http://nordicgroup.us/sigma
>
> Thanks for all the suggestions.
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
~ Darrell ~
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2004

"Steven M. Scharf" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:YYMnc.15170$(E-Mail Removed) link.net...
> I've updated the site, renamed it, and added the positive aspects of the
> Sigma SD-10 as well. See:
> http://nordicgroup.us/sigma
>
> Thanks for all the suggestions.
>

I would also add Pentax *istD to the list, now that Pentax has cut the
price.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Don
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-10-2004
An improvement, but I'll bet GP still won't approve

I think you need some help with the story on leakage, however. What you say
is sort of true, but the leakage goes down, not up as size decreases. It
just doesn't go down as fast as the "good" energy. When I reread what you
wrote, I realized that's really what you probably said, but it wasn't
obvious the first time. Also, it really doesn't change exponentially but
more or less linearly. The leakage current will go down linearly with the
detector area, as will the photoelectric current (for a given f:No lens).
However, the parasitic leakage from the peripheral circuitry will not go
down unless the area of those element is also reduced, leading to the effect
you described.

There are also other noise sources, of course, and the modelling of all of
this is not real simple. In particular, since the photoelectric current
goes down with decreasing size, and the shot noise only goes down with the
square root of that current, shot noise, not leakage, is the ultimate enemy.
For example if the photoelectric current is reduced by a factor of 4, the
noise component of it only goes down by a factor of 2.

FWIW, I've seen B&W CCDs in this size range where the photon shot noise,
even in somewhat shadowed areas, was larger than the noise from the leakage
current, even at f:16 1/1000 second, full daylight, and was the dominant
noise source. The focal plane was slightly cooled in that application.

Don


"Steven M. Scharf" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:YYMnc.15170$(E-Mail Removed) link.net...
> I've updated the site, renamed it, and added the positive aspects of the
> Sigma SD-10 as well. See:
> http://nordicgroup.us/sigma
>
> Thanks for all the suggestions.
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2004
"Mikey S." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> Now that's crazy, I have no intention of trading in my Canon gear but if
> someone was to GIVE me a Sigma setup, I'd be more than glad to take it and
> try it out to see for myself. Any rational person would take something for
> nothing, why not?


Here is why...

http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw...00_1328_C1.jpg
http://www.outbackphoto.com/artofraw...0000_00200.jpg
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bart van der Wolf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2004

"George Preddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> "Mikey S." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> > Now that's crazy, I have no intention of trading in my Canon gear but if
> > someone was to GIVE me a Sigma setup, I'd be more than glad to take it

and
> > try it out to see for myself. Any rational person would take something

for
> > nothing, why not?

>
> Here is why...
>

You mean this same Field-of-View comparison:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/main/d...FoV_to_1Ds.jpg
Also consider that the original comparison was designed to "fool" the 1Ds
with an unlikely color combination, and that the 1Ds image was low-pass
filtered to almost half the sampling resolution, whereas the Sigma wasn't,
resulting in horrible aliasing artifacts, especially noticable when output
is 5x7in or larger.

And for a more meaningful resolution comparison, compare:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/orig.../sigma_sd9.jpg
which starts to misrepresent the finer lines above the 12 marker (even
counts only 4 or 5 black lines at the 20 marker instead of 9), with:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samp...non_eos1ds.jpg which has
little trouble resolving the finest detail at the 20 marker (we need more
detailed test cards for this camera), and the Fuji S2 at 12MP output setting
on the same page http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1ds/page21.asp also
reaches a reasonable 18+ mark.

Bart

 
Reply With Quote
 
Steven M. Scharf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-11-2004
"BillyBob" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:_rPnc.57590$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Steven,
>
> Nice to see some substance instead of the illogical rantings and drivel of

GP.

Thanks. I thought that it would be a good idea to take all the pros and cons
and consolidate them in one place.

- If I was Sigma I would consider legal action against the guy - he has
damaged them terribly!

No he hasn't.

No one believes that he speaks for Sigma. I'll bet you can count the number
of lost sales that he's caused on one hand.

The problems with the Sigma D-SLRs would have been aired whether or not this
individual had initiated his disinformation campaign. The whole fiasco
hasn't really cost Sigma much anyway, since I suspect that the development
costs for the SD-9 and SD-10 were paid for by Foveon, and the SD-9 and SD-10
are really just the SA-9 with a digital back added.

I don't know why everyone just doesn't kill-file him, like I have. I still
see all the follow-ups to his posts, and I don't understand why it's so hard
to just ignore his rantings. Though I have to admit that I got a kick out of
the "88,000 e-mails." His explanation for the Canon white lenses was also
rather amusing. Actually part of the reason that they made them white WAS
because they are normally used outdoors and white lenses get less hot. But
it had nothing to do with making the glass brittle.

My other favorite mis-information are his rants about 486 versus Pentium IV
technology. He has so many errors in his logic that it's dizzying. I added
an explanation of sensor size and fabrication technology to my web site,
since I think that there may be people that don't understand the trade-offs,
and are perplexed as to just why the Foveon X3 sensor is so noisy.

The one area where he may have hurt them is in lens sales. I never saw such
in depth discussion of the problems with Sigma lenses in
rec.photo.equipment.35mm. I think that a lot of people with Nikon or Canon
D-SLRs are now going to be very wary of trying to save money by buying
non-OEM lenses.

Steve
A Fair and Balanced View of the Sigma SD-10 Digital SLR Camera
http://nordicgroup.us/sigma/


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon - D70 Digital SLR Camera w/Sigma Two-Lens Kit Phar Phoo Digital Photography 3 06-02-2005 06:03 AM
Sigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLRSigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLR sigmaphotojapan@yahoo.com Digital Photography 6 04-01-2005 05:26 PM
Sigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLRSigma Announces SD-30--30 Megapixel,Universal Lens Mount, Digital SLR sigmaphotojapan@yahoo.com Digital Photography 5 04-01-2005 02:08 PM
Digital Photography RFD: rec.photo.digital.slr vs rec.photo.digital.slr-systems? Lionel Digital Photography 16 09-17-2004 12:48 PM
15 Reasons to Avoid the Sigma SD-10 Digital SLR Camera Steven M. Scharf Digital Photography 185 05-15-2004 08:16 PM



Advertisments