Used Sigma SD-9 body

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Mike Tuthill, Feb 1, 2004.

  1. Mike Tuthill

    Mike Tuthill Guest

    Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    shop that would have such an animal?

    Thanks.
     
    Mike Tuthill, Feb 1, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Mike Tuthill wrote:
    > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > shop that would have such an animal?
    >


    There's a guy on this group named George Preddy trying to get rid of his.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Feb 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > shop that would have such an animal?
    >
    > Thanks.


    The SD-9 is a very poor camera. The SD-10 is still not great, but it
    corrects many of the flaws of the SD-9. In short, don't waste your money on
    an SD-9. Sigma was virtually giving them away.
     
    Steven M. Scharf, Feb 2, 2004
    #3
  4. "Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    news:p_jTb.8224$...
    >
    > "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > > shop that would have such an animal?


    They are very hard to find used. But at the $629 mark new for a 10.3MP pro
    bodied DSLR, going used seems a little hard to justify...

    http://www.digitalliquidators.com/detail.asp?id=sgsd9

    I've never ordered from them, but I know one person who bought an SD9 there
    with no problems.

    > > Thanks.

    >
    > The SD-9 is a very poor camera. The SD-10 is still not great, but it
    > corrects many of the flaws of the SD-9. In short, don't waste your money

    on
    > an SD-9. Sigma was virtually giving them away.


    The 10.3MP SD9 (14MP-interpolated) is the best DSLR made, nothing comes
    close to its medium format film quality non-interpolated output. In fact,
    no other digital camera can even produce a non-interpolated true photograph.
    Film is the only other option.

    The SD9 is arguably better than the SD10, but that all depends on what you
    value most. The 14MP-interpolated Kodak 14n has massive artifacting
    problems, and the $8000 Canon 1Ds is too low res in full color at only
    2.76MP.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 2, 2004
    #4
  5. Mike Tuthill

    CBM Guest

    Just goes to show that they are going for more on ebay. Fools.


    "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:bvkg9l$17o$...
    >
    > "Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    > news:p_jTb.8224$...
    > >
    > > "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > > > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > > > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > > > shop that would have such an animal?

    >
    > They are very hard to find used. But at the $629 mark new for a 10.3MP

    pro
    > bodied DSLR, going used seems a little hard to justify...
    >
    > http://www.digitalliquidators.com/detail.asp?id=sgsd9
    >
    > I've never ordered from them, but I know one person who bought an SD9

    there
    > with no problems.
    >
    > > > Thanks.

    > >
    > > The SD-9 is a very poor camera. The SD-10 is still not great, but it
    > > corrects many of the flaws of the SD-9. In short, don't waste your money

    > on
    > > an SD-9. Sigma was virtually giving them away.

    >
    > The 10.3MP SD9 (14MP-interpolated) is the best DSLR made, nothing comes
    > close to its medium format film quality non-interpolated output. In

    fact,
    > no other digital camera can even produce a non-interpolated true

    photograph.
    > Film is the only other option.
    >
    > The SD9 is arguably better than the SD10, but that all depends on what you
    > value most. The 14MP-interpolated Kodak 14n has massive artifacting
    > problems, and the $8000 Canon 1Ds is too low res in full color at only
    > 2.76MP.
    >
    >
     
    CBM, Feb 2, 2004
    #5
  6. Mike Tuthill

    CBM Guest

    Just checked out some of their prices, and canon is holding its price no
    drop.
    The SD9 is only 30 bucks higher than a Minolta A1
    Hummm, might go with the A1.


    "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:bvkg9l$17o$...
    >
    > "Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    > news:p_jTb.8224$...
    > >
    > > "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > > > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > > > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > > > shop that would have such an animal?

    >
    > They are very hard to find used. But at the $629 mark new for a 10.3MP

    pro
    > bodied DSLR, going used seems a little hard to justify...
    >
    > http://www.digitalliquidators.com/detail.asp?id=sgsd9
    >
    > I've never ordered from them, but I know one person who bought an SD9

    there
    > with no problems.
    >
    > > > Thanks.

    > >
    > > The SD-9 is a very poor camera. The SD-10 is still not great, but it
    > > corrects many of the flaws of the SD-9. In short, don't waste your money

    > on
    > > an SD-9. Sigma was virtually giving them away.

    >
    > The 10.3MP SD9 (14MP-interpolated) is the best DSLR made, nothing comes
    > close to its medium format film quality non-interpolated output. In

    fact,
    > no other digital camera can even produce a non-interpolated true

    photograph.
    > Film is the only other option.
    >
    > The SD9 is arguably better than the SD10, but that all depends on what you
    > value most. The 14MP-interpolated Kodak 14n has massive artifacting
    > problems, and the $8000 Canon 1Ds is too low res in full color at only
    > 2.76MP.
    >
    >
     
    CBM, Feb 2, 2004
    #6
  7. "CBM" <> wrote in message
    news:OVkTb.202391$I06.2229895@attbi_s01...

    > The SD9 is only 30 bucks higher than a Minolta A1
    > Hummm, might go with the A1.


    Good one.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 2, 2004
    #7
  8. Mike Tuthill

    Lionel Guest

    Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    that:

    >"Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    >news:p_jTb.8224$...
    >>
    >> "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    >> > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    >> > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    >> > shop that would have such an animal?

    >
    >They are very hard to find used. But at the $629 mark new for a 10.3MP pro
    >bodied DSLR, going used seems a little hard to justify...
    >
    >http://www.digitalliquidators.com/detail.asp?id=sgsd9


    Heh. Half the price of the 10D, & Sigma still can't get rid of them.
    Crappy though the SD9 colour is, at that throwaway price you'd think
    that people would be willing to take a chance on them. I guess that even
    the most unfussy types don't think 3.4 megapixels is worth bothering
    with.

    >The SD9 is arguably better than the SD10, but that all depends on what you
    >value most. The 14MP-interpolated Kodak 14n has massive artifacting
    >problems, and the $8000 Canon 1Ds is too low res in full color at only
    >2.76MP.


    From the same website you just quoted above:
    "CanonĀ EOS-1DS, 11.1 Megapixel SLR Digital Camera"

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Feb 2, 2004
    #8
  9. "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > shop that would have such an animal?


    One more thing. Don't let an existing lens collection force a bad buying
    decision. You're better off starting over with a Canon Digital Rebel or 10D,
    and building up a new lens collection. The Sigma lenses are nothing to write
    home about.All the experts agree that the Sigma digital SLRs should be
    avoided due to their poor quality images. The Canon D-SLRs are acknowledges
    as the best amateur and prosumer digital SLRs on the market. This may change
    with new introductions by other manufacturers, but it's safe to say that
    Sigma's offerings will remain the worst choice you can make.

    The SD9 was discontinued for a very good reason!
     
    Steven M. Scharf, Feb 2, 2004
    #9
  10. Mike Tuthill

    Bill Guest

    Acknowledged by???

    Bill

    "Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    news:FNuTb.9233$...
    >
    > "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > > shop that would have such an animal?

    >
    > One more thing. Don't let an existing lens collection force a bad buying
    > decision. You're better off starting over with a Canon Digital Rebel or

    10D,
    > and building up a new lens collection. The Sigma lenses are nothing to

    write
    > home about.All the experts agree that the Sigma digital SLRs should be
    > avoided due to their poor quality images. The Canon D-SLRs are

    acknowledges
    > as the best amateur and prosumer digital SLRs on the market. This may

    change
    > with new introductions by other manufacturers, but it's safe to say that
    > Sigma's offerings will remain the worst choice you can make.
    >
    > The SD9 was discontinued for a very good reason!
    >
    >
     
    Bill, Feb 2, 2004
    #10
  11. "Lionel" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    > that:
    >
    > >"Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    > >news:p_jTb.8224$...
    > >>
    > >> "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:...
    > >> > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > >> > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > >> > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an

    online
    > >> > shop that would have such an animal?

    > >
    > >They are very hard to find used. But at the $629 mark new for a 10.3MP

    pro
    > >bodied DSLR, going used seems a little hard to justify...
    > >
    > >http://www.digitalliquidators.com/detail.asp?id=sgsd9

    >
    > Heh. Half the price of the 10D, & Sigma still can't get rid of them.


    They are sold out.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 2, 2004
    #11
  12. "Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    news:FNuTb.9233$...
    >
    > "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > > shop that would have such an animal?

    >
    > One more thing. Don't let an existing lens collection force a bad buying
    > decision. You're better off starting over with a Canon Digital Rebel or

    10D,
    > and building up a new lens collection. The Sigma lenses are nothing to

    write
    > home about.


    The new ones are much better than Canon L on value. On absolute performance
    the Sigma EXs are gernerally better, but Canon does make a few good
    performers.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 2, 2004
    #12
  13. "Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:ZHxTb.9828$Ii2.7360@lakeread03...
    > Acknowledged by???
    >
    > Bill
    >
    > "Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    > news:FNuTb.9233$...
    > >
    > > "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > > > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > > > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > > > shop that would have such an animal?

    > >
    > > One more thing. Don't let an existing lens collection force a bad buying
    > > decision. You're better off starting over with a Canon Digital Rebel or

    > 10D,
    > > and building up a new lens collection. The Sigma lenses are nothing to

    > write
    > > home about.All the experts agree that the Sigma digital SLRs should be
    > > avoided due to their poor quality images. The Canon D-SLRs are

    > acknowledges
    > > as the best amateur and prosumer digital SLRs on the market. This may

    > change
    > > with new introductions by other manufacturers, but it's safe to say that
    > > Sigma's offerings will remain the worst choice you can make.
    > >
    > > The SD9 was discontinued for a very good reason!


    Yes, the SD10 replaced it. The two are about the same, the 10 increases
    sensitivity by a stop in exchange for a hair less sharpness. In good light
    the 9 is better, in poor light the 10 is better, both are close. Both will
    carry 3 to 4X the color resolution of a 6MP-interpolated Bayer, and 2X the
    color resolution of a 1Ds. The SD10 also has a single battery source, but
    as a result a little less power too. The Power Pack is good for 2000 shots
    with CRV3s or 1000 shots with AA NiMHs with both, so its hard to care.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 2, 2004
    #13
  14. Mike Tuthill

    Lionel Guest

    Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    that:

    >
    >"Lionel" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    >> that:
    >>
    >> >"Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    >> >news:p_jTb.8224$...
    >> >>
    >> >> "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    >> >> news:...
    >> >> > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    >> >> > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    >> >> > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an

    >online
    >> >> > shop that would have such an animal?
    >> >
    >> >They are very hard to find used. But at the $629 mark new for a 10.3MP

    >pro
    >> >bodied DSLR, going used seems a little hard to justify...
    >> >
    >> >http://www.digitalliquidators.com/detail.asp?id=sgsd9

    >>
    >> Heh. Half the price of the 10D, & Sigma still can't get rid of them.

    >
    >They are sold out.


    Yeah, sure.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Feb 3, 2004
    #14
  15. On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 13:16:49 +0900, "George Preddy"
    <> wrote:

    >They are very hard to find used. But at the $629 mark new for a 10.3MP pro
    >bodied DSLR, going used seems a little hard to justify...
    >
    >http://www.digitalliquidators.com/detail.asp?id=sgsd9
    >
    >I've never ordered from them, but I know one person who bought an SD9 there
    >with no problems.


    http://www.resellerratings.com/seller2375.html

    --
    Michael Benveniste --
    Spam and UCE professionally evaluated for $250. Use this email
    address only to submit mail for evaluation.
     
    Michael Benveniste, Feb 3, 2004
    #15
  16. Mike Tuthill

    Mike Tuthill Guest

    "George Preddy" <> wrote in message news:<bvkg9l$17o$>...
    > "Steven M. Scharf" <> wrote in message
    > news:p_jTb.8224$...
    > >
    > > "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Seeing as I already have an SA lens collection I'm interested in a
    > > > SD-9 body. The "new" price is still a little steep so I'm interested
    > > > in seeing if I can pick up a used body. Does anyone know of an online
    > > > shop that would have such an animal?

    >
    > They are very hard to find used. But at the $629 mark new for a 10.3MP pro
    > bodied DSLR, going used seems a little hard to justify...
    >
    > http://www.digitalliquidators.com/detail.asp?id=sgsd9
    >
    > I've never ordered from them, but I know one person who bought an SD9 there
    > with no problems.
    >
    > > > Thanks.

    > >
    > > The SD-9 is a very poor camera. The SD-10 is still not great, but it
    > > corrects many of the flaws of the SD-9. In short, don't waste your money

    > on
    > > an SD-9. Sigma was virtually giving them away.

    >
    > The 10.3MP SD9 (14MP-interpolated) is the best DSLR made, nothing comes
    > close to its medium format film quality non-interpolated output. In fact,
    > no other digital camera can even produce a non-interpolated true photograph.
    > Film is the only other option.
    >
    > The SD9 is arguably better than the SD10, but that all depends on what you
    > value most. The 14MP-interpolated Kodak 14n has massive artifacting
    > problems, and the $8000 Canon 1Ds is too low res in full color at only
    > 2.76MP.


    Thanks for the info. As I expected a fair number of people (well
    meaning I'm sure) are advising against buying the SD9 however, I've
    seen many images from the SD9 and I'm sure that a typical consumer
    digicam can't approach the image quality of this camera. Sure, it
    would be nice to be able to justify the cost of replacing lenses and
    buying a Canon but I'm not a pro and I'm not rich so I'll just have to
    settle for an SD9 when the right price comes along. And it will come
    along if the camera is truly as bad as some would let on.
     
    Mike Tuthill, Feb 3, 2004
    #16
  17. "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > > The SD9 is arguably better than the SD10, but that all depends on what

    you
    > > value most. The 14MP-interpolated Kodak 14n has massive artifacting
    > > problems, and the $8000 Canon 1Ds is too low res in full color at only
    > > 2.76MP.

    >
    > Thanks for the info. As I expected a fair number of people


    ....who've never used a Foveon camera...

    > (well
    > meaning I'm sure) are advising against buying the SD9 however, I've
    > seen many images from the SD9 and I'm sure that a typical consumer
    > digicam can't approach the image quality of this camera. Sure, it
    > would be nice to be able to justify the cost of replacing lenses and
    > buying a Canon but I'm not a pro and I'm not rich so I'll just have to
    > settle for an SD9 when the right price comes along. And it will come
    > along if the camera is truly as bad as some would let on.


    "Settling" for not having Canon printed on a really lousy, low res, blurry
    DSLR is not a big deal. Canon makes some decent DSLR bodies (i.e.
    everything but the dRebel), but their sensors are the worst on value. The
    only Canon I would consider is the 11MP-interpolated, 2.7MP-non-interpolated
    $8000 1Ds. It has enough optical sensors that even after Bayer
    inefficiencies and required downscaling and sharening, you can print a
    decent photo. But the SD9's 14MP-interpolated, 3.4MP-non-interpolated
    prints are noticably better, so at $630 its a pretty easy choice.

    The SD10 is a great machine too, its easer to shoot in low light because
    there is no need to -EV on the body and +EV in RAW, but I would argue that
    the microlenses that make that possible also make the image just a tiny bit
    softer. Still, no where near as soft (read: very blurry) as Bayer DSLR, but
    a hair softer than the 9. If you value the ultimate in well lit image
    quality, get the 9. If you value a little more low light convenience, get
    the 10. But even that is too oversimplified, for example the money saved on
    the 9 may facilitates buying brighter pro lenses.

    As you'll see in the link below, Canon gets a lot of charity and tact in
    exchange for their continued sponsorship.

    http://www.adamtow.com/photogallery/20021009_coba/

    "The prints that were displayed of both the Canon 1Ds and the SD9 were quite
    impressive. I was particularly impressed by the sharpness and color quality
    exhibited by the Foveon prints."

    "Adam, thanks for having the Foveon people come down. And yes, the 1Ds is an
    awesome machine. If it had a Foveon chip in it, I wouldn't be sleeping."

    "The Foveon presentation by Dick Merrill was an eye-opener. I understood the
    concept of the Foveon sensor, but when he indicated that it had no problem
    "seeing" colors as narrow as only 1 pixel as opposed to the way every other
    sensor kind of falls apart and guesses (creating color fringes and
    what-not), I was amazed. Looking at the results, seeing the clarity of the
    prints, makes me want to not wait till Canon wakes up. The SD-9 felt like a
    brick, and feel is very important in a tool that's meant to be responsive,
    but if I have to use a brick to produce images like the ones I saw at the
    meeting, so be it. That might be the only way to send a message to Canon.
    Vote with my money."

    "Outstanding, highly interactive meeting...it's always interesting watching
    a fledgling technology emerging into the harsh reality of "tunnel vision"
    and "legacy methodolgy". It will be interesting to see if, after the
    discussions that Foveon has with Canon, Nikon, and others, and if, after the
    SD-9 has been out a while, the CCD and CMOS technolgies fade away to the
    vertical sensor approach. I was truly amazed with the clarity of the
    pictures...Truly incredible. I certainly understand it a lot better than I
    did. And it was great catcing up with an old friend of mine, Eric Zarakov
    (Apple days...well gone by). As for the 1Ds, it's a great looking machine,
    but I don't think it's on my list...For $9K, they OUGHT to have a FOVEON
    chip inside. ;)"

    "Adam, as usual I really enjoyed this meeting. I was so happy to have the X3
    presented in a more technical lecture style. This fit really well with the
    auditorium setting, and of course the right public speakers. It's pretty
    clear that the X3 sensor is here to stay. I don't characterize it as a
    Foveon versus Canon issue. Foveon sells sensors. Canon sells cameras. Sure
    they make their own sensors, but I'm sure they'll buy X3 sensors when they
    feel the time is right. All in all, an exciting and educational evening."
    "Adam, It was a terrific meeting. The interaction between the audience and
    feedback from Jim from Canon and Dick and the others from Foveon and Sigma
    were excellent. Dick Merril's presentation was great and made the
    differences between the "old" technology (CCD and CMOS) and the potential of
    Foveon X3 abundantly clear. The Sigma X3 photos were amazing for a so-called
    only 3MP sensor. It truly deserves to be recognized as a 6-10MP sensor. If,
    or more likely, when X3 gets into the lens and camera body quality of
    Canon/Nikon type systems and gets some of the additional development from
    them and others that it deserves, it seems that it will be hard to beat!"

    I even got to look at some comparison prints done from a D60, D100, S2, and
    SD9. Guess which ones looked the best? OK, a bit baited but I was impressed
    nonetheless. BTW, Foveon did not produce the shots. It was done by a private
    photographer (Hmm... Independent lab).

    "As I left, I ended up in a conversation with Jim Rose and a few others
    about various Canon 1Ds subjects and even a few concerns about the D60 CF
    card and Microdrive problems. I also mentioned I thought the 1Ds prints in
    the non-gloss paper (Ilford) were quite soft and didn't show the camera in a
    good light. It seems that perhaps the ink may have migrated across the paper
    surface."

    Note: There were no positive remarks about the Canon 1Ds that was shown.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 3, 2004
    #17
  18. Mike Tuthill

    Lionel Guest

    Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    that:

    >As you'll see in the link below, Canon gets a lot of charity and tact in
    >exchange for their continued sponsorship.


    Not that it has anything to do with the excellence of their equipment...

    >http://www.adamtow.com/photogallery/20021009_coba/


    "also led Foveon and Sigma to limit the camera's sensitivity from ISO100
    to ISO400 (ISO800 was too noisy)"

    >Note: There were no positive remarks about the Canon 1Ds that was shown.


    "The prints that were displayed of both the Canon 1Ds and the SD9 were
    quite impressive. "

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Feb 3, 2004
    #18
  19. "Mike Tuthill" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > Thanks for the info. As I expected a fair number of people (well
    > meaning I'm sure) are advising against buying the SD9 however, I've
    > seen many images from the SD9 and I'm sure that a typical consumer
    > digicam can't approach the image quality of this camera. Sure, it
    > would be nice to be able to justify the cost of replacing lenses and
    > buying a Canon but I'm not a pro and I'm not rich so I'll just have to
    > settle for an SD9 when the right price comes along. And it will come
    > along if the camera is truly as bad as some would let on.


    It is not a horrible camera when compared against other 3Mp cameras. Some
    people compare it against true 6Mp cameras, and of course it comes up short.
    Of course Sigma is partially responsible for this unfair comparison, since
    they've attempted to redefine the meaning of a pixel! Not many people were
    fooled by the whole X3 schtick, which is why Sigma failed with their digital
    line.

    When you can pick up an SD-9 in the $200-250 range then it will be
    worthwhile. However I think the people that bought them at $600-650 did so
    because they have a collection of Sigma lenses, and hence they may not be so
    quick to sell it for one-third to one-half of what they paid. With the
    updated firmware, the
    SD-9 is an adequate SLR if you already have lenses. Certainly no one is
    going to buy one if they are already invested in Canon or Nikon lenses, and
    few people are going to buy them if they have no lenses at all yet (which is
    of course why Sigma has had such a tough time selling them).

    The big question is what's next for Sigma. If Foveon comes up with a 6Mp or
    8Mp sensor then Sigma might continue with their D-SLR business, but at 3Mp
    they're just going to go into harvest mode. Of course unless Foveon comes up
    with something on the high end, they're history too.
     
    Steven M. Scharf, Feb 3, 2004
    #19
  20. "Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:ZHxTb.9828$Ii2.7360@lakeread03...
    > Acknowledged by???
    >


    The experts.
     
    Steven M. Scharf, Feb 3, 2004
    #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. rolento

    Sigma 24-60 DG compare with sigma 24-70 DG

    rolento, Nov 11, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    485
    rolento
    Nov 13, 2004
  2. Harry

    Anyone Used A Sigma 10-20 Lense yet?

    Harry, Oct 28, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    473
    Dirty Harry
    Nov 2, 2005
  3. friglob
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    503
    Michel Souris
    Feb 6, 2006
  4. Mikevt1

    Sigma or OEM Sigma as Quantaray

    Mikevt1, Oct 16, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,417
    Graham Fountain
    Oct 17, 2006
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    529
    PeterN
    May 27, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page