What happened to Foveon?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Guest, Mar 15, 2005.

  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years ago.
    Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?

    Thanks,

    Norm Strong
     
    Guest, Mar 15, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Guest

    Guest

    Try Google searching on the magic words "Sigma SD9", "Sigma SD10" (or
    "George Preddy").

    Executive summary?

    Nice idea. Ahead of it's time. But seems to have too many practical
    issues to work as well as it could.. in theory. Sensor is noisy at
    high ISOs, has some color issues, is expensive to produce, and has been
    pretty much left in the dust by development of the Bayer type of
    sensor. And.. maybe it might have got further if some *other* company
    had picked it up...


    (heheh)
     
    , Mar 15, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    DJ Guest

    On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:25:35 -0800, <> wrote:

    >It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years ago.
    >Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?


    The Prediot killed what little credibility it might have had.
     
    DJ, Mar 15, 2005
    #3
  4. In article <>,
    <> wrote:

    > It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years ago.
    > Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?


    The technology ended up sucking.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Mar 15, 2005
    #4
  5. wrote:
    > It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years ago.
    > Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?


    Hi Norm -

    It was overcome by events - namely, Canon! It was a great 3mp camera,
    but a somewhat clumsy body and only able to shoot in RAW. The actual
    results from some Bayer cameras quickly outdistanced the Foveon, because
    of brute force megapixels and terrific noise processing and great camera
    bodies. And those Canon (and Nikon) lenses.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Mar 15, 2005
    #5
  6. "DJ" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:25:35 -0800, <> wrote:


    > The Prediot killed what little credibility it might have had.


    .... and guess what? Doing a clear out I came across a 3 year old news
    article saying that Microsoft had given it their blessing or some such.

    --
    M Stewart
    Milton Keynes, UK
    http://www.megalith.freeserve.co.uk/oddimage.htm
     
    Malcolm Stewart, Mar 15, 2005
    #6
  7. Guest

    Guest

    "It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years
    ago.
    Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?"

    Interesting sensor technology, not quite ready for prime time*,
    embedded
    in a camera that does not do enough things well to overcome the
    onslaught
    of Canon and Nikon cameras that seeming do pretty much everything well.

    [*] the spectral discrimination of the verticle RGB wells is not
    sensitive enough
    to render colors accurately in anything other than perfectly well
    exposed images.
     
    , Mar 15, 2005
    #7
  8. Guest

    Bill Hilton Guest

    > Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?

    1) Not enough megapixels to compete with Canon and Nikon 6 Mpixel
    models.

    2) They needed a partner with more credibility than Sigma.

    3) Misleading advertising put off a lot of folks.
     
    Bill Hilton, Mar 15, 2005
    #8
  9. Guest

    Jim Townsend Guest

    wrote:

    > "It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years
    > ago.
    > Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?"


    It was 5 years ago that Carver Mead, (one of Foveon's co-founders),
    did a series of press interviews, with some major papers and magazines.

    He reported that Foveon technology would not only do away with traditional
    bayer sensors, but it would replace film as well because per square inch,
    a foveon sensor had double the resolution of 35mm film :)

    At least the technology got off the ground and a camera with the Foveon
    sensor could be purchased. It really is too bad it didn't live up to Mead's
    claims. It would be nice to own a digicam with double the resolution
    of 35mm film.
     
    Jim Townsend, Mar 15, 2005
    #9
  10. Guest

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    Jim Townsend <> wrote:
    >
    >He reported that Foveon technology would not only do away with traditional
    >bayer sensors, but it would replace film as well because per square inch,
    >a foveon sensor had double the resolution of 35mm film :)


    Shame that the only one to make it into an SLR had less than half the area
    of 35mm film then, isn't it? ;-)
     
    Chris Brown, Mar 15, 2005
    #10
  11. Guest

    rafeb Guest

    Chris Brown wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Jim Townsend <> wrote:
    >
    >>He reported that Foveon technology would not only do away with traditional
    >>bayer sensors, but it would replace film as well because per square inch,
    >>a foveon sensor had double the resolution of 35mm film :)

    >
    >
    > Shame that the only one to make it into an SLR had less than half the area
    > of 35mm film then, isn't it? ;-)



    Half the area of 35 mm would be generous.
    The APS-C sensor (10D, 20D) covers only 40% of that area.
    The Sigma SD-10 sensor (13.8 x 20.7 mm) covers 33% of that area.


    rafe b.
    http://www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    rafeb, Mar 15, 2005
    #11
  12. Guest

    Crownfield Guest

    Jim Townsend wrote:
    >
    > wrote:
    >
    > > "It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years
    > > ago.
    > > Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?"

    >
    > It was 5 years ago that Carver Mead, (one of Foveon's co-founders),
    > did a series of press interviews, with some major papers and magazines.
    >
    > He reported that Foveon technology would not only do away with traditional
    > bayer sensors, but it would replace film as well because per square inch,
    > a foveon sensor had double the resolution of 35mm film :)


    a mere 135 mp to meet 125 lpmm, to capture something like printed text.

    both sides of the foveon argument were intelltually dishonest.

    >
    > At least the technology got off the ground and a camera with the Foveon
    > sensor could be purchased. It really is too bad it didn't live up to Mead's
    > claims. It would be nice to own a digicam with double the resolution
    > of 35mm film.
     
    Crownfield, Mar 15, 2005
    #12
  13. Guest

    Tony Guest

    Tony, Mar 15, 2005
    #13
  14. <> wrote in news:NaGdnSYtb8lD4qvfRVn-
    :

    > It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years ago.
    > Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?


    They made a chip. It was rather good. Very impressive
    for a small company with an oddball technology. But ...
    it was not better than what already was existing. And ...
    you could only find it in Sigma SLR cameras. And ...
    it was only 3 MPixels. And ... it was only one chip.

    The competition made lots and lots and lots of chips.
    They were larger, more pixels, better color rendition,
    etc, etc ....

    So -- it died.


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Mar 15, 2005
    #14
  15. Guest

    Guest Guest

    "DJ" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:25:35 -0800, <> wrote:
    >
    >>It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years ago.
    >>Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?

    >
    > The Prediot killed what little credibility it might have had.


    Thanks all for bringing me out into the light. I now have to ask the
    definition of 2 new words: Bayer and Prediot. Could I get a definition of
    those?

    I'll lay my cards on the table: I was an avid amateur photographer in the
    40's and 50's, the days of the twin-lens reflex. I was into other things by
    the time the photo world was taken over by the 35mm SLR. I know essentially
    nothing about digital photography per se. Because of my lack of knowledge,
    I've hesitated buying a digital camera. I'd like to tack on the digital
    aspects to my existing knowledge of optics and film photography, so that I
    can make an intelligent choice of a digital camera.

    Will someone please direct me to a place where I can read up on sensors,
    both CCD and CMOS, and find out what the tradeoffs are in choice of sensor
    size, ISO speed, etc?

    Thanks once again.

    Norm
     
    Guest, Mar 16, 2005
    #15
  16. wrote:

    > Thanks all for bringing me out into the light. I now have to ask the
    > definition of 2 new words: Bayer and Prediot. Could I get a definition of
    > those?
    >
    > I'll lay my cards on the table: I was an avid amateur photographer in the
    > 40's and 50's, the days of the twin-lens reflex. I was into other things by
    > the time the photo world was taken over by the 35mm SLR. I know essentially
    > nothing about digital photography per se. Because of my lack of knowledge,
    > I've hesitated buying a digital camera. I'd like to tack on the digital
    > aspects to my existing knowledge of optics and film photography, so that I
    > can make an intelligent choice of a digital camera.
    >
    > Will someone please direct me to a place where I can read up on sensors,
    > both CCD and CMOS, and find out what the tradeoffs are in choice of sensor
    > size, ISO speed, etc?
    >
    > Thanks once again.



    Just get a 20D.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Mar 16, 2005
    #16
  17. Guest

    Paul J Gans Guest

    Malcolm Stewart <> wrote:
    >"DJ" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:25:35 -0800, <> wrote:


    >> The Prediot killed what little credibility it might have had.


    >... and guess what? Doing a clear out I came across a 3 year old news
    >article saying that Microsoft had given it their blessing or some such.


    Is *that* what killed it?

    ----- Paul J. Gans
     
    Paul J Gans, Mar 16, 2005
    #17
  18. Guest

    DJ Guest

    On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:43:29 -0800, <> wrote:

    >
    >"DJ" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 22:25:35 -0800, <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>It seems to have dropped out of view since its announcement 3 years ago.
    >>>Foveon was supposed to take over the industry. What happened?

    >>
    >> The Prediot killed what little credibility it might have had.

    >
    >Thanks all for bringing me out into the light. I now have to ask the
    >definition of 2 new words: Bayer and Prediot. Could I get a definition of
    >those?
    >
    >I'll lay my cards on the table: I was an avid amateur photographer in the
    >40's and 50's, the days of the twin-lens reflex. I was into other things by
    >the time the photo world was taken over by the 35mm SLR. I know essentially
    >nothing about digital photography per se. Because of my lack of knowledge,
    >I've hesitated buying a digital camera. I'd like to tack on the digital
    >aspects to my existing knowledge of optics and film photography, so that I
    >can make an intelligent choice of a digital camera.
    >
    >Will someone please direct me to a place where I can read up on sensors,
    >both CCD and CMOS, and find out what the tradeoffs are in choice of sensor
    >size, ISO speed, etc?
    >
    >Thanks once again.
    >
    >Norm


    Norm, sorry about the initial flip response. "The Prediot" was a frequent poster
    on this group calling himself George Preddy, who for ages persisted with
    one-eyed posts about the benefits of Foveon technology. He was generally
    regarded as a nutter.

    Foveon is/was a technology with a lot of promise and a very seductive logic, but
    in practice it failed to deliver. It may have been like the Beta/VHS argument.
    Beta is the superior technology but VHS won out commercially. In the case of
    Foveon vs Bayer, Bayer is the dominant technology, maybe because it has had the
    most R&D effort invested in it, but the state of the art is that it is way
    superior.

    It is generally agreed that right now Canon make the best sensors, at least in
    the APS-C format (22x15mm). Nikon and Konica-Minolta are close behind, making up
    some of the difference with smart support electronics.

    If you are serious about getting into digital, look closely at the digital SLRs,
    Canon 350D or 20D, Nikon D70 etc. Unless you are looking for something very
    compact and all-in-one, or lack the budget, dSLR is the only way to go. The
    feature sets can be very confusing to compare so you may need to spend a lot of
    time comparing, learning what all the terms mean and evaluating what's important
    to you. One of the very good resources is www.dpreview.com. They review a lot of
    cameras and explain a lot of the terminology they use.

    I am a little younger than you but also was an avid photographer in my younger
    years, using Roleiflexes, Hasselblad, SLRs (my father was a professional
    photographer, and I had access to a range of equipment - I grew up with a
    permanent darkroom in the house and D76 in my veins). Then I migrated to
    Australia and ceased photography for about 35 years. Now I'm back, combining my
    computer skills with a resurrected passion for photography, and having a ball.
    My Canon 300D is capable of things I could only dream of with my old Minolta
    SR1 (sic) and anything from Pan-F to Tri-X pushed to 1600 or HPS pushed to 3200
    or 6400. Take a look at this: http://www.splatco.com/david/RS_CRW_7977-03.jpg
    That was shot at 1600ASA then pushed 2 more stops in the computer. That's
    6400ASA! At the "slow end" the cameras are equally awesome, with the most
    amazing definition (at least with a good lens), good for poster-sized
    enlargements (IMHO).

    My one sadness is that my father never lived to see this revolution!

    So, hang out on dpreview. Google for "digital camera reviews", "sensor size"
    etc. Learn about the importance of sensor size (physical surface area) for low
    noise and the relative "unimportance" of pixel count. As you surf around you
    will initially discover more questions than you are answering.

    Good luck, and enjoy!

    David
     
    DJ, Mar 16, 2005
    #18
  19. Guest

    Big Bill Guest

    On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:43:29 -0800, <> wrote:

    >Thanks all for bringing me out into the light. I now have to ask the
    >definition of 2 new words: Bayer and Prediot. Could I get a definition of
    >those?


    Bayer filter:
    http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/digital-camera12.htm

    Others have covered prediot.
    --
    Bill Funk
    Change "g" to "a"
     
    Big Bill, Mar 16, 2005
    #19
  20. Guest

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    rafeb <> wrote:
    >
    > Half the area of 35 mm would be generous.
    > The APS-C sensor (10D, 20D) covers only 40% of that area.
    > The Sigma SD-10 sensor (13.8 x 20.7 mm) covers 33% of that area.


    Yup. The new Kodak CCD for the Pentax 645 medium format digital
    is almost twice the area of a 35mm film frame!

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0503/05031502pentax645digital.asp
     
    Bill Tuthill, Mar 16, 2005
    #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. jriegle

    Re: Sigma Foveon

    jriegle, Aug 31, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    366
    jriegle
    Sep 1, 2003
  2. OlEnSh

    Foveon X3 chip

    OlEnSh, Sep 4, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    27
    Views:
    906
    W Bauske
    Sep 10, 2003
  3. ThomasH

    Has Foveon future?

    ThomasH, Oct 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    617
    Views:
    10,683
    Best Record
    Sep 25, 2008
  4. George Preddy

    Foveon vs 3.2MP Bayer

    George Preddy, Oct 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    1,431
    Ray Fischer
    Oct 30, 2003
  5. zeitgeist

    Speaking of Foveon, whatever happened to

    zeitgeist, Oct 24, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    880
    Joe Butts
    Sep 19, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page