Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

New Sigma SD1 - soon
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Official News and Announcements
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:07 am    Post subject: New Sigma SD1 - soon Reply with quote
SIGMA announced a new top cam - the SD1 - which should be come to the market soon with 46 MP sensor. OK in fact 15,3 MP but this sensor would be a real improvement against actual versions.

Unfortunately nobody knows what "soon" means. "Soon" were 2 years for the new SD15.

Here a link

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10092129sigmasd1.asp

Wink


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Even 3 years wouldn't surprise me, but if they'll launch this during 2011, they'll me miles ahead any competitor in terms of color resolution. It's also possible, that during 2013 it will be nice mainstream Smile

Anyway, I hope they won't screw up this time...


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a surprise for you guys (actually surprised myself). According to Engadget, the SD1 goes on sale next February!! 8-o


http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/21/sigma-sd1-has-a-15-3mp-sensor-weather-sealed-magnesium-alloy-bo/


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
according to Popphoto, Sigma said that they are going to release it in February (2011 is their 50th anniversary)... but they often released a camera 12-18 months before real availabilty Neutral

anyway, forum members can expect to see more lenses in marketplace around that time Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
What a great surprise this announcement was from Sigma Very Happy

I have been saving for another body and was heading towards a secondhand 1Ds or the like.

The rumour i saw indicated a price similar to the Canon 7D, if this is even close to accurate it will be a great alternative to canon/nikon.

It won't have video, and i bet its ISO wont come close to what canon/nikon now offer, but as long as it has great ISO 1600 i'd be very happy.

Now all they need to do is make it and start shipping, based on their history, i'm not holding my breath for Feb 2011...


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Will they make a SD1s with a full frame sensor? Wink


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rpo83 wrote:
What a great surprise this announcement was from Sigma Very Happy

I have been saving for another body and was heading towards a secondhand 1Ds or the like.

The rumour i saw indicated a price similar to the Canon 7D, if this is even close to accurate it will be a great alternative to canon/nikon.

It won't have video, and i bet its ISO wont come close to what canon/nikon now offer, but as long as it has great ISO 1600 i'd be very happy.

Now all they need to do is make it and start shipping, based on their history, i'm not holding my breath for Feb 2011...


I agree, that the announcement came out of nowhere. Interesting developement in the camera technology.

Now, regarding high ISO performance - it simply can not give that; the three layer technology is in it's nature very badly suited for shooting in low light due to high sensor generated noise (for several reasons I won't go into in this short reply).

I am however sure that it can perform well in good light, as long as you have the paticence to work the colours - very hight resolution, very inadequate colour accuracy. It is a friek, but for many a pleasant one. I'd be intrested in trying it out for a day or two.

One nice thing is the increased size to proper APS-C level.7


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
Will they make a SD1s with a full frame sensor? Wink


No, probably not. The edeges and corner are even more problemetic with stacked photosite-pixels than with conventional bayer-array based sensors. This is probably the reasoon why it took so long to bring the sensor size up to 1.5x crop and downsize the pixels into what they are now.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Microlenses can address the mentioned issue quite well. The reason for smaller sensor was primarily manufacturing cost.

Foveon with such resolution for FF format would be nonutilisable. There's no optics with such resolving power.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X wrote:
Foveon with such resolution for FF format would be nonutilisable. There's no optics with such resolving power

Laughing Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X wrote:

Foveon with such resolution for FF format would be nonutilisable. There's no optics with such resolving power.


hm... I'm no lens scientist, but still I would bet a beer or two that what you just said above is not true.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
poilu wrote:
Laughing Laughing Laughing

SD1 will feature APS-C 1.5-crop sensor with 46 megapixels (15.3). 1.5 crop APS-C is 43% of FF sensor, that means that full-frame Foveon would feature 107 megapixels (35.7).

That would be 7,6-times higher resolution, than SD14/SD15 offers. Given that how hard is to find a lens, which is able to outresolve the 4,7MP Foveon from edge to edge, I really cannot imagine a lens, that could outresolve a sensor with almost 8-times higher resolution Smile

Another problem is diffraction. The best lenses combined with SD14 offers peak resolution around f/5-f/5.6. At f/8 (ar above) per pixel details isn't as good due to diffraction. SD1 with the smaller pixel will be more limited by diffraction - at f/4 the diffraction disc has the same diameter as a pixel on 15MP APS-C camera. Many lenses perform best around f/5.6-f/8, but diffraction will already impact resolution in a negative way.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hm but you are making a sum of the three layers to calculate the resolution, but the the resolvance of the image is given by the combined result, not by the three layers separately. if I have a one micron wide light ray, of grey colour, this means that the one micron blue layer, one micron red layer, and one micron green layer, will combine into one single gray micron space in the final image.
So the resolvance will equal one micron not three. Resolvance is given by a luminance value not by colour values. And the luminance is the result of the addition of the three colours RGB, which -important to remember - are one and the same in nature, it's digital cameras that split them.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X wrote:
Microlenses can address the mentioned issue quite well. The reason for smaller sensor was primarily manufacturing cost.

Foveon with such resolution for FF format would be nonutilisable. There's no optics with such resolving power.


Actually the microlenses can only do so much - offsetting htem in the edges can guide the light better towards the surface of the photosite, but you're now forgetting that the photosite is not a 2d-surface, but a 3d-object, and even more so with the Foveon. There are significant problems when the light hits the sensor at an angle - the deeper the photosite, and the further away from the center it is, the more problems are created.

Also your claim of a Foveon FF sensor being too much for lenses is nonsense. Once we reach a hundred or two megapixels we can start talking about diminishing returns.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X wrote:
poilu wrote:
Laughing Laughing Laughing

SD1 will feature APS-C 1.5-crop sensor with 46 megapixels (15.3). 1.5 crop APS-C is 43% of FF sensor, that means that full-frame Foveon would feature 107 megapixels (35.7).


The new Foveon sensor has 15 or so megapixels. You are confusing pixels and photosites. If you make such a basic mistake,...


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 8:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Any relations to Fujis SSD sensor? I mean how it works.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
someone said they'd be happy if it performed well at iso 1600--as a former sd14 owner, i'd be happy if it performed well at iso 400! and if the vf was something more than a dark tunnel! and if it's focus confirmation actually confirmed somewhere near the proper focus!

but oh those images--when you hit it, pure joy and at it's best, better than my 5d.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Anu wrote:
no-X wrote:
poilu wrote:
Laughing Laughing Laughing

SD1 will feature APS-C 1.5-crop sensor with 46 megapixels (15.3). 1.5 crop APS-C is 43% of FF sensor, that means that full-frame Foveon would feature 107 megapixels (35.7).


The new Foveon sensor has 15 or so megapixels. You are confusing pixels and photosites. If you make such a basic mistake,...


Actually, I think that what he does is multiply by 3 the count of megapixels, since the camera has three sensor layers each of 15,x megapixels.

Which, to my untechnical mind, makes sense when you want to calculate the colour resolution, but, fails to make sense when we speak of the image resloution, because like I wrote before, three colour pixels get combined to form only one image pixel.
So in the end, the result is still 15,x megapixels.
The difference with a 15,x megapixel Beyer camera is in the way the Sigma processes the colours. But once the processing is done, the final output is still that of a 15,x megapixel camera.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The microlens at the edage in larger sensor has been designed to reduce the crosstalk in the sensor such as the FinePix X100. (Crosstalk occurs when the light falling on one pixel are mistakenly sensed by another pixel around it.) This is done by shifting the optical centre of the microlens.

I just found something interesting: The design of the X3 sensor seems has close connection to the Chromatic Aberration of the microlens(as the CA caused by lens in traditional fim).





Last edited by calvin83 on Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:36 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:

I just found something interesting: The design of the X3 sensor seems has close connection to the Chromatic Aberration of the microlens.


Do you think that this is the reason why the 5D Mark II constantly gives me more lateral CA than the original 5D mounting the same lens?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
calvin83 wrote:

I just found something interesting: The design of the X3 sensor seems has close connection to the Chromatic Aberration of the microlens.


Do you think that this is the reason why the 5D Mark II constantly gives me more lateral CA than the original 5D mounting the same lens?

The X3 sensor has a similar structure to the traditional film. In my opinion, the order of the blue-green-red sensitive layer is designed to reduce the longitudinal CA caused by the camera lens.

The CA problem on digital cameras is related to many factors so I am not sure this is the cause of more CA in 5D2.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Anu: Please read technical details beyond sensors used in Leica's recent cameras. Adjusted microlenses can refract askewed light rays to achieve desired angle, which is in tolerance of the sensor.

As for megapixels - if e.g. canon can market 18 megapixels for 7D, there is no reason why Sigma couldn't market 46 megapixels for SD1. In both situations these numbers are in fact color subpixels, not pixels.

7D's sensor collects 18 milions of color subpixels. It can be said, that each of the photodiode captures one-third of brightness data. So if you refuse to call Foveon 46 megapixel sensor, you should also refuse to use similar naming regarding common cameras.

calvin83: The order of color layers is determinated by physical character of silicon. Its natural character is, that wavelength matching the blue color is absorbed firstly and the rest passes deeper through the substrate (etc.). The order cannot be switched.

Orio: I'd say, that stronger lateral CA of 5D-II is related just to its higher resolution and less agressive low-pass filter. If the CA would be about 0.5-1 pixel thick on the 5D, the low-pass filter with the debayering process would remove it mostly. But the same amount of CA is projected over more pixels in 5D-II, so it isn't "lost" during capturing of the image by cameras sensor and additional processing.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X wrote:
calvin83: The order of color layers is determinated by physical character of silicon. Its natural character is, that wavelength matching the blue color is absorbed firstly and the rest passes deeper through the substrate (etc.). The order cannot be switched.


You are right. I found the follwing in the patent document of the X3 sensor(US Patent 5965875):

"It is well known that the greater the wavelength of light incident upon a silicon substrate, the deeper the light will penetrate into the silicon before it is absorbed...."

Since he blue light has the shortest wavelength and the red light has the longest wavelength, the order of the sensitive layer should be blue, green and red.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
calvin83 wrote:

I just found something interesting: The design of the X3 sensor seems has close connection to the Chromatic Aberration of the microlens.


Do you think that this is the reason why the 5D Mark II constantly gives me more lateral CA than the original 5D mounting the same lens?


How do you measure CA? Relativce to the image or relativce to pixel?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
no-X wrote:
Anu: Please read technical details beyond sensors used in Leica's recent cameras. Adjusted microlenses can refract askewed light rays to achieve desired angle, which is in tolerance of the sensor.

I am aware of quite a bit of the technology of behind Leica M9 etc. If you compare a film Leica with M9, you'll notice that the M9 vignettes more with the same lens and shot. The photosites record light less efficiently near the edges that the ones in the middle. The off-center microlenses to help, but they are not a full fix to the problem.

Quote:

As for megapixels - if e.g. canon can market 18 megapixels for 7D, there is no reason why Sigma couldn't market 46 megapixels for SD1. In
both situations these numbers are in fact color subpixels, not pixels.

This is where you are totally lost, sorry. 7D is a 18 megapixel camera, Sigma is a 15 megapixel camera. Photosite and pixel are different. While the 7D photosites only record about half the light that hits them (the other half is blocked by they bayer filter as you know - I say about half since Canon has notoriously weak color separation), the Foveon pixels don't record too much more more data (or to be more precise, signal/noise) in normal photographic conditions.

Quote:

7D's sensor collects 18 milions of color subpixels. It can be said, that each of the photodiode captures one-third of brightness data. So if you refuse to call Foveon 46 megapixel sensor, you should also refuse to use similar naming regarding common cameras.


There are no such thing as color subpixel. The Canon, as the other bayer-filtered cameras record imperfect data for all the pixels, in this case for 18Mp. The Foveon also records imperfect data, though for different reasons - for example the three photosites stacked on top of each other do not capture different wavelenghts anywhere near perfectly - the colour separation is actually worse than it is with the bayer sensors - I think the fellows behind the Foveon sensor said there would be needed about 6 layers of photosites for similar coolour accuracy to typical Bayer-separates sensor. You conviniently igonore this and other sources of imperfectioin for Foveon pixels and give each of them a imaginary weight of 3 units and each imperfect Canon pixel weight of 1 unit - what I mean that you somehow think that a Foveon pixel is three times "better", or more valuable than a Canon pixel, therefor you can calll Foveon a 46Mp (or whatever). But this is just silly, as in reality a Foveon pixel may be even less information containing than a Canon pixel (depending on shooting conditions and ISO used). Using your logic the number of pixels in a sensor should change with the used ISO etc. Smile

Quote:

calvin83: The order of color layers is determinated by physical character of silicon. Its natural character is, that wavelength matching the blue color is absorbed firstly and the rest passes deeper through the substrate (etc.). The order cannot be switched.


This is right. However you must understant the nature of light - the photosites of different layers do not gather the intended wavelenght correctly. Also they do also catch the "wrong" photons (that were meant for another photosite). Some photons hit any of the nine transistors (compared to 3 or 4 of a typical bayer sensor photosite), some fall tooo deep and others are recorded on a photosite too close to the surface. And then the nine transistors are there to generate noise - yet another source of imperfection.

In short - I don't understand your logic of claiming the Foveon a 46Mp sensor when it outputs 15 Mp images, or a Canon a non-18 Mp sensor when it outputs 18 Mp images. In both cases the raw-data is imperfect. In most low ISO-conditions the Canon data is less perfect, while under low light the Canon photosites contain far superior data.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Official News and Announcements
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2