SD9 Firmware v2 Night Shots, compared to dpreview's Beta SD9

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by George Preddy, Nov 19, 2003.

  1. George Preddy, Nov 19, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. George Preddy wrote:

    > Taken using the just-released v2 firmware plus SPP v2 with 0.2 X3 Fill
    > Light...
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675


    Good picture! I think the combo of Foveon and SPP v.2 makes very
    nice images.

    I do have to hand it to you, George, you put your money (put your
    images up) where your mouth is -- despite the vomit of such lights
    as George Smegma-Kirby, Ray Moron-Fischer, et al.

    I'll reiterate what I said a week or so ago (after looking at lots
    and lots of Foveon and Bayer images): The Sigma SD9/10, with however
    many mega whatevers it has, produces better images than 6 meg
    Bayers, and I think it's obvious.
     
    Edward Seabass, Nov 20, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. George Preddy

    PhotoMan Guest

    "Charlie Tuna" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > George Preddy wrote:
    >
    > > Taken using the just-released v2 firmware plus SPP v2 with 0.2 X3 Fill
    > > Light...
    > > http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675

    >
    > Good picture! I think the combo of Foveon and SPP v.2 makes very
    > nice images.
    >
    > I do have to hand it to you, George, you put your money (put your
    > images up) where your mouth is -- despite the vomit of such lights
    > as George Smegma-Kirby, Ray Moron-Fischer, et al.
    >
    > I'll reiterate what I said a week or so ago (after looking at lots
    > and lots of Foveon and Bayer images): The Sigma SD9/10, with however
    > many mega whatevers it has, produces better images than 6 meg
    > Bayers, and I think it's obvious.
    >
    >

    Yeah - and pigs can fly.
     
    PhotoMan, Nov 20, 2003
    #3
  4. Unfortunately I'm working on a laptop, so I can't check basic image quality
    very well, until after the fact. A much better production of that same
    picture is now linked below.

    Thanks for the kind words. You are right it is obvious the SD9 produces
    much better pictures than the Bayers. In a way it's a shame that Bayer
    users here can no longer link full sized out of camera images here, for fear
    of comparison, because it really makes things one-sided. I'm beside myself
    that I didn't switch sooner, and suck up yesterdays higher pricetag. But I
    didn't know at the time, the camera was so new and there weren't very many
    SD9 images available then.

    The few review samples that were posted, were actually hatchet pieces
    written by a few who still don't want to ruin their livelyhood of welching
    of the masses, for example dpreview.com's Beta-version SD9 hatchet piece,
    which is, unbelievably, still posted. Compare the dpreview.com's SD9
    "sample" to the production camera below. It is clear dpreview is doing
    everything they can to protect their big money sponsors, but the word is
    getting out, and when they can only post images like the one below, it makes
    it all too obvious that they are a fundamentally incompetent review site ...

    http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675
    http://img.dpreview.com/reviews/SigmaSD9/Samples/Night/IMG01299.jpg



    "Edward Seabass" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > George Preddy wrote:
    >
    > > Taken using the just-released v2 firmware plus SPP v2 with 0.2 X3 Fill
    > > Light...
    > > http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675

    >
    > Good picture! I think the combo of Foveon and SPP v.2 makes very
    > nice images.
    >
    > I do have to hand it to you, George, you put your money (put your
    > images up) where your mouth is -- despite the vomit of such lights
    > as George Smegma-Kirby, Ray Moron-Fischer, et al.
    >
    > I'll reiterate what I said a week or so ago (after looking at lots
    > and lots of Foveon and Bayer images): The Sigma SD9/10, with however
    > many mega whatevers it has, produces better images than 6 meg
    > Bayers, and I think it's obvious.
    >
    >
    >
     
    George Preddy, Nov 20, 2003
    #4
  5. George Preddy

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Edward Seabass <> wrote:
    >George Preddy wrote:
    >
    >> Taken using the just-released v2 firmware plus SPP v2 with 0.2 X3 Fill
    >> Light...
    >> http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675

    >
    >Good picture! I think the combo of Foveon and SPP v.2 makes very
    >nice images.


    Interesting that so much processing is needed just to get a decent
    image. Maybe the folks at Sigma will get it right soon.

    --
    Ray Fischer
     
    Ray Fischer, Nov 20, 2003
    #5
  6. "Ray Fischer" <> wrote in message
    news:bphiuq$koc$...
    > Edward Seabass <> wrote:
    > >George Preddy wrote:
    > >
    > >> Taken using the just-released v2 firmware plus SPP v2 with 0.2 X3 Fill
    > >> Light...
    > >> http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675

    > >
    > >Good picture! I think the combo of Foveon and SPP v.2 makes very
    > >nice images.

    >
    > Interesting that so much processing is needed just to get a decent
    > image. Maybe the folks at Sigma will get it right soon.


    That's called "the beauty of shooting RAW." Here is the latest version...
    http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675
     
    George Preddy, Nov 20, 2003
    #6
  7. George Preddy

    Annika1980 Guest

    >From: "George Preddy"

    >That's called "the beauty of shooting RAW." Here is the latest version...
    >http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675


    Hmm, only 3.4 MP.
    Has that pic been downsampled?
     
    Annika1980, Nov 20, 2003
    #7
  8. Update (Re: SD9 Firmware v2 Night Shots, compared to dpreview's Beta SD9)

    "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >From: "George Preddy"

    >
    > >That's called "the beauty of shooting RAW." Here is the latest

    version...
    > >http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675

    >
    > Hmm, only 3.4 MP.
    > Has that pic been downsampled?


    I had to delete and replace it for some reason, pbase broke for a little
    while I guess, the non-laptop-monitor rendition is here now:
    http://www.pbase.com/image/23467595

    As for downsampling, in simple Bayer terms, yes, Foveon images are already
    "downsampled" (no need to change them, since they are never up-sampled like
    Bayers are, by default), they are presented using the exact number of full
    color pixels supported by their RGB sensor count. So, yes, a 3.43MP Foevon
    image has the same amount of RGB sensor data per output pixel as a 1.58MP
    downsampled Canon 10D image. That amount being, 100%.
     
    George Preddy, Nov 20, 2003
    #8
  9. George Preddy

    Guest Guest

    I particularly like the extremeley sharp 9 lines the SD9 resolves to 5 lines
    in this image.
    http://img.dpreview.com/reviews/SigmaSD9/Samples/Compared/4way/crop_sigma_sd
    9.jpg


    SD9/SD10 produces incorrect images full of jaggies. If you like that in a
    camera, good luck to you enjoy your Sigma. I personally will wait for a
    Foveon chip which actually produces good colour and has an anti alias filter
    before I'll consider one. Preferably in a camera that will produce a
    jpeg/tif.



    "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:bpfupk$9af$...
    > Taken using the just-released v2 firmware plus SPP v2 with 0.2 X3 Fill
    > Light...
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675
    >
    > The SD9's initial production firmware was fine at night too...
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/21306844
    >
    > Dpreview.com's insistance upon leaving only Beta-firmware SD9 samples

    posted
    > is becoming increasingly ridiculous...
    > http://img.dpreview.com/reviews/SigmaSD9/Samples/Night/IMG01299.jpg
    >
    >
     
    Guest, Nov 20, 2003
    #9
  10. George Preddy

    Guest Guest

    All DSLRs can shoot RAW. The SD9/SD10 is the only one that absoultely has to
    shoot in RAW.



    "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:bphgu5$a0d$...
    >
    > "Ray Fischer" <> wrote in message
    > news:bphiuq$koc$...
    > > Edward Seabass <> wrote:
    > > >George Preddy wrote:
    > > >
    > > >> Taken using the just-released v2 firmware plus SPP v2 with 0.2 X3

    Fill
    > > >> Light...
    > > >> http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675
    > > >
    > > >Good picture! I think the combo of Foveon and SPP v.2 makes very
    > > >nice images.

    > >
    > > Interesting that so much processing is needed just to get a decent
    > > image. Maybe the folks at Sigma will get it right soon.

    >
    > That's called "the beauty of shooting RAW." Here is the latest version...
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675
    >
    >
     
    Guest, Nov 20, 2003
    #10
  11. George Preddy

    Ray Fischer Guest

    George Preddy <> wrote:
    >"Ray Fischer" <> wrote in message
    >> Edward Seabass <> wrote:
    >> >George Preddy wrote:
    >> >
    >> >> Taken using the just-released v2 firmware plus SPP v2 with 0.2 X3 Fill
    >> >> Light...
    >> >> http://www.pbase.com/image/23448675
    >> >
    >> >Good picture! I think the combo of Foveon and SPP v.2 makes very
    >> >nice images.

    >>
    >> Interesting that so much processing is needed just to get a decent
    >> image. Maybe the folks at Sigma will get it right soon.

    >
    >That's called "the beauty of shooting RAW."


    Software can only go so far in fixing bad data.

    --
    Ray Fischer
     
    Ray Fischer, Nov 22, 2003
    #11
  12. George Preddy

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Ray Fischer wrote:

    > Software can only go so far in fixing bad data.


    Right, the usual GIGO rule applies...:)
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Nov 23, 2003
    #12
  13. "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message
    news:%HYvb.41309$...
    > Ray Fischer wrote:
    >
    > > Software can only go so far in fixing bad data.

    >
    > Right, the usual GIGO rule applies...:)


    Funny you should say that, it sounds a bit like Carver Mead's own account of
    why he pioneered Foveon after inventing the CCD elements used in bastardized
    Bayer mosiacs long ago...

    "A slender, energetic man with a trim Vandyke beard, Mead has a disarming,
    gentle speaking voice and a face that recalls both David Carradine in Kung
    Fu and Richard Kiley in Man of La Mancha. He rarely raises his voice, but
    when something gets under his skin, you'll know it. "The more I learned
    about human vision," he says, "the more it was clear that what mosaic
    sensors were doing was introducing artifacts into the image. It was one of
    those things that becomes so massively annoying that after a while you think
    you ought to go do something about it. It was clear that the way image
    sensors worked was brain-dead. I talked to a lot of people, and nobody got
    it. So I finally said: 'That's not a problem. That's an
    portunity.'" --Discover Magazine, Dec 2002
     
    George Preddy, Nov 23, 2003
    #13
  14. George Preddy

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    George Preddy wrote:
    > "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message
    > news:%HYvb.41309$...
    >> Ray Fischer wrote:
    >>
    >>> Software can only go so far in fixing bad data.

    >>
    >> Right, the usual GIGO rule applies...:)

    >
    > Funny you should say that, it sounds a bit like Carver Mead's own
    > account of why he pioneered Foveon


    Well, with a significant difference: I was talking in
    *artistic* terms...Sorry if I might sound old-fashioned,
    but I still believe that it's the photographer that makes
    the picture, not the camera.

    And BTW, I will not call you names or be rude like
    others, but you have completely failed to convince me
    that the Sigma SD9/10 is better than my D100. From
    what I've seen, the drawbacks of Foveon (especially
    the faulty color rendering) far outweight any possible
    benefit of the technology.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Nov 23, 2003
    #14
  15. "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message
    news:Ln_vb.41750$...
    > George Preddy wrote:
    > > "Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message
    > > news:%HYvb.41309$...
    > >> Ray Fischer wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> Software can only go so far in fixing bad data.
    > >>
    > >> Right, the usual GIGO rule applies...:)

    > >
    > > Funny you should say that, it sounds a bit like Carver Mead's own
    > > account of why he pioneered Foveon

    >
    > Well, with a significant difference: I was talking in
    > *artistic* terms...Sorry if I might sound old-fashioned,
    > but I still believe that it's the photographer that makes
    > the picture, not the camera.
    >
    > And BTW, I will not call you names or be rude like
    > others, but you have completely failed to convince me
    > that the Sigma SD9/10 is better than my D100.


    I never said it was. I have said that a 10.3MP camera has better optical
    color resolution than a 6MP camera (marginal implementation differences
    aside), and that the SD9 is a 10.3MP camera by the Bayer standard of
    counting 1/3rd color sensors and the only considering interpolated
    resolutions.

    > From
    > what I've seen, the drawbacks of Foveon (especially
    > the faulty color rendering) far outweight any possible
    > benefit of the technology.


    Maybe you are referring to the pre-production samples still languishing on
    dpreview's web site.
     
    George Preddy, Nov 23, 2003
    #15
  16. George Preddy

    Alan Guest

    In article <bppq2l$675$> "George Preddy" <> writes:

    >"Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message


    >> From
    >> what I've seen, the drawbacks of Foveon (especially
    >> the faulty color rendering) far outweight any possible
    >> benefit of the technology.

    >
    >Maybe you are referring to the pre-production samples still languishing on
    >dpreview's web site.


    I don't know what he was referring to, but the pictures I found were from other
    places.

    As far as I can tell, the color is still 'off'.


    Alan
     
    Alan, Nov 27, 2003
    #16
  17. George Preddy

    Guest Guest

    >
    > I never said it was. I have said that a 10.3MP camera has better optical
    > color resolution than a 6MP camera (marginal implementation differences
    > aside), and that the SD9 is a 10.3MP camera by the Bayer standard of
    > counting 1/3rd color sensors and the only considering interpolated
    > resolutions.


    The SD9 has 10M sensors and is a 3MP camera. A 6MP bayer has 6M sensors and
    is a 6MP camera.
    Not hard is it?
     
    Guest, Nov 27, 2003
    #17
  18. "<Enter Your Full Name>" <> wrote in message
    news:bq4lav$hgv$...
    > >
    > > I never said it was. I have said that a 10.3MP camera has better

    optical
    > > color resolution than a 6MP camera (marginal implementation differences
    > > aside), and that the SD9 is a 10.3MP camera by the Bayer standard of
    > > counting 1/3rd color sensors and the only considering interpolated
    > > resolutions.

    >
    > The SD9 has 10M sensors and is a 3MP camera. A 6MP bayer has 6M sensors

    and
    > is a 6MP camera.
    > Not hard is it?


    Sounds like the number of output pixels is your only criteria, right?
    Doesn't matter that the pixels are only interpolated, right? Ok, you win...
    the SD9 is 13.72 MP. That's the interpolated file size it outputs.
     
    George Preddy, Nov 27, 2003
    #18
  19. "Alan" <> wrote in message
    news:bq49r8$9uo$...
    > In article <bppq2l$675$> "George Preddy"

    <> writes:
    >
    > >"Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message

    >
    > >> From
    > >> what I've seen, the drawbacks of Foveon (especially
    > >> the faulty color rendering) far outweight any possible
    > >> benefit of the technology.

    > >
    > >Maybe you are referring to the pre-production samples still languishing

    on
    > >dpreview's web site.

    >
    > I don't know what he was referring to, but the pictures I found were

    from other
    > places.
    >
    > As far as I can tell, the color is still 'off'.


    The color of every SD9 picture is set by the photographer, not the camera.
     
    George Preddy, Nov 27, 2003
    #19
  20. George Preddy

    imbsysop Guest

    On Thu, 27 Nov 2003 21:05:14 +0900, "George Preddy"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"Alan" <> wrote in message
    >news:bq49r8$9uo$...
    >> In article <bppq2l$675$> "George Preddy"

    ><> writes:
    >>
    >> >"Paolo Pizzi" <> wrote in message

    >>
    >> >> From
    >> >> what I've seen, the drawbacks of Foveon (especially
    >> >> the faulty color rendering) far outweight any possible
    >> >> benefit of the technology.
    >> >
    >> >Maybe you are referring to the pre-production samples still languishing

    >on
    >> >dpreview's web site.

    >>
    >> I don't know what he was referring to, but the pictures I found were

    >from other
    >> places.
    >>
    >> As far as I can tell, the color is still 'off'.

    >
    >The color of every SD9 picture is set by the photographer, not the camera.


    ha .. that's why you get those funny yellow people .. or did you slip
    out of the lines while handcoloring those nice color artefacts ? ..
    difficult to color with a steady hand when so excited ! LOL !!
     
    imbsysop, Nov 27, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. George Preddy

    Canon D60 - Sigma SD9, more Moon shots

    George Preddy, Dec 4, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    92
    Views:
    1,882
    Gherry Bender
    Jan 15, 2004
  2. S.

    dpreview Forum Poll 20D Firmware Update

    S., Oct 6, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    320
    Chuck
    Oct 6, 2004
  3. DaveS

    DPreView Comparison Shots

    DaveS, Mar 10, 2011, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    738
    DaveS
    Mar 10, 2011
  4. RichA
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    244
    RichA
    Jun 22, 2011
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    849
    Grimly Curmudgeon
    May 16, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page