FF Foveon Delayed Indefinitely

[Samouraï]

Sigma is indefinitely delaying the release (development?) of the teased upcoming full-frame Foveon camera.

https://petapixel.com/2020/02/10/si...-delayed-indefinitely/?share=jetpack-whatsapp

Any ideas about what this might mean? Perhaps cancelled? Technical design issues? Apparently they may be redesigning the whole thing from the ground up rather than delaying it, which might end up being a good thing in the long run, if Sigma is being honest about new development. What a bummer for 2020, I was expecting a pre-order announcement.

 

[benlees]

I'm guessing processing speed and battery capabilities can't support full frame Foveon as yet in an economical (and ergonomic way). Very limited market as well.


I wanted to love my Merrill but couldn't. Insanely slow and cumbersome to use, and if there was magic in the sensor I couldn't see it in any prints...ymmv

 

[Samouraï]

Surprising to hear, as there are many in-depth reviews of the Merrill cameras and the ways in which they compete with medium format cameras from that era.

In ideal conditions, the acuity of fine detail should resemble the Leica M Monochrom. In fact you might remember the blue-channel trick that turned them into sorts of cheap, mini Monochroms (and with very impressive sensitivity in the pale blue channel, too).

In my experience, they're the closest thing to film in terms of color, texture, and visual acuity.

 

[jarski]

tbh, when I read original full frame Foveon announcement and following the company now some time, it felt sales guy pitching, momentum building behind L-mount alliance, and attempt to be at the same line with Panasonic and Leica.

I read "indefinitely" here so that what takes Panasonic 1-2 years, will take Sigma maybe 4, but am trusting they will get there eventually.

 

[Michael Markey]

In ideal conditions, the acuity of fine detail should resemble the Leica M Monochrom. In fact you might remember the blue-channel trick that turned them into sorts of cheap, mini Monochroms (and with very impressive sensitivity in the pale blue channel, too).

In my experience, they're the closest thing to film in terms of color, texture, and visual acuity.

Blue channel trick ?
I missed that .

 

[Black]

I'm not sure I understand why Sigma don't see this as an opportunity to release a new range of mirrorless APS-C Merrill's, at least as an interim measure to unease the Foveon faithful.
They know that Merrill's outputs are way beyond the Quattro range, so why don't they apply what they have learned with engineering the Quattro's and the fp to a new range of Merrill's?

For the DP's - faster lenses, better UI, perhaps image stabilisation and larger batteries and maybe weather sealing.

The SD's could be the same but L mount instead of SA - the SD Quattro was a beautiful camera but that throat was fugly. There wouldn't be a need for that with L mount.

OLED EVF's? For both. It's entirely doable. The sd Quattro's was serviceable, but terrible versus other manufacturers.

Why try to run before they can walk?

They could even work on SPP to make it faster and more user friendly (I didn't mind it tbh - just slow, but I don't have huge issues with that). A more complete package all around. Fuji haven't done too badly with APS-C.

 

[benlees]

Surprising to hear, as there are many in-depth reviews of the Merrill cameras and the ways in which they compete with medium format cameras from that era.

In ideal conditions, the acuity of fine detail should resemble the Leica M Monochrom. In fact you might remember the blue-channel trick that turned them into sorts of cheap, mini Monochroms (and with very impressive sensitivity in the pale blue channel, too).

In my experience, they're the closest thing to film in terms of color, texture, and visual acuity.

I took the opportunity to revisit my old Merrill files and do some pixel peeping while comparing to ones from my X-pro1. They're basically the same. Of course, at the end of the day, if you go pixel peeping then you generally find...pixels. Little electronic squares! Funny that. Anyway, at least Sigma seems to have interesting ideas and marketing. Whether that represents a real difference appears to be subjective.

Another con, which I forgot to mention, was inferior low light results. In this current arms race of ISO capability this would represent a serious problem.

 

[Samouraï]

I took the opportunity to revisit my old Merrill files and do some pixel peeping while comparing to ones from my X-pro1. They're basically the same. Of course, at the end of the day, if you go pixel peeping then you generally find...pixels. Little electronic squares! Funny that. Anyway, at least Sigma seems to have interesting ideas and marketing. Whether that represents a real difference appears to be subjective.

Another con, which I forgot to mention, was inferior low light results. In this current arms race of ISO capability this would represent a serious problem.

They're basically the same? I see a lot of difference. Fuji's files (used to, I haven't played with them in a long time) look like oil paintings, nice rendering but smooth and sometimes you could see odd artifacting due to the x-trans subpixel filter. The Sigma files tend to have that really striking micro-contrast heavy look, almost has a look of film with grain. Who said pixel-peeping? Foveon photos have a unique look, and the amount of control one has over the image in SPP is astounding.

I don't know what arms race you're talking about, but Sigma isn't a part of it. That's some oddball groupthink marketing-speak if I've ever heard it. The Foveon cameras aren't about low-light capture. Treat them like a field camera and you'll be astounded. But as I said before, by isolating the blue channel in SPP, one can get get clean, high-iso black & white files.

That's not even to speak of the superior philosophy of the 1:1:1 Foveon stacked sensor, where pixels needn't be interpolated.

 

[benlees]

The irony is the images from their 36x24mm Bayer sensor in the FP look really good. Perhaps a new avenue for Sigma.

 

[pyeh]

Is the consensus with Foveon sensors that Merrell gives more pleasing results than Quattro? and if Quattro, APS-C or APS-H?

With the indefinite delay of Foveon in L mount I'm wondering whether to go for an existing Sigma. I have tried a DP2M which I found fantastic.

 

[Black]

Is the consensus with Foveon sensors that Merrell gives more pleasing results than Quattro? and if Quattro, APS-C or APS-H?

With the indefinite delay of Foveon in L mount I'm wondering whether to go for an existing Sigma. I have tried a DP2M which I found fantastic.

They're different animals, for sure.

Personally, I prefer the output from Merrill's. I still love how Quattro's (and Merrill's for that matter) handle luminescence and I think that its a trait that not many people talk about regarding Foveon sensors, but Merrill's have less of a "digital" look (and by that, I mean least similar to a Bayer sensor).

I've never seen figures for the total sales (or any) of Sigma's cameras, but I'm assuming all of them are fairly small batches. I think this makes them all the more special and all the more affordable. Why not eventually get both, if that is ever an affordable option - just pick which you'd like first.

 

[pyeh]

Thanks, Black. Nice info and good advice to try both.

 

[Samouraï]

The Merrill cameras have a more special look, and handle blown highlights incredibly well, plus you can shoot high-iso and isolate the blue channel in SPP for great looking B&W photos. That said, you often have to shoot a little hot to get a good image. I hope the 1:1:1 is the future of Foveon.

The Quattros handle shadows incredibly well, so I can often expose at -0.7 stops (on the older firmware before DMG RAW anyway). You have cleaner high ISO and can get away with underexposure, so these are pretty flexible cameras. They have a smoother look (but still look like film, not bayer or xtrans), but I have gotten more consistent results with the look, plus the cameras themselves are much more enjoyable to operate.

I would say the Quattros offer a more pleasing look, but the Merrils are unique. Try shooting the Quattros in low-res mode as Gary always used to recommend (where is that guy?) for a 1:1:1 resolution/look...though I'm not 100% on how the Quattros handle that mode.

Any fans of CCD sensors? For some reason I want to say that the look of the older CCD cameras reminds me a bit of the Foveon cameras.

 

[pyeh]

Thanks for your thoughts on Merrill vs Quattro, Samourai. More to think about.
I indulged myself, as usual, and bought a DP2 Merrill and a DP3 Merrill. I love them already. I have a kind loan of a DP1 Merrill as well, so for now I have the triumvirate. I am looking for a DP1M of my own. I think the set would make a fantastic travel kit.The tiny battery problem is real though.
I have an RD1 and M9s too, so the CCD visual connection to the Foveon sensor was foremost in my mind when I got hooked on the Foveons. The Merrills' resolution is though is way more than the CCD cameras I have. If and when Sigma put out their Foveon FP it will be a thing to behold.

 

[shawn]

The Merrill cameras have a more special look, and handle blown highlights incredibly well, plus you can shoot high-iso and isolate the blue channel in SPP for great looking B&W photos. That said, you often have to shoot a little hot to get a good image. I hope the 1:1:1 is the future of Foveon.

The Quattros handle shadows incredibly well, so I can often expose at -0.7 stops (on the older firmware before DMG RAW anyway). You have cleaner high ISO and can get away with underexposure, so these are pretty flexible cameras. They have a smoother look (but still look like film, not bayer or xtrans), but I have gotten more consistent results with the look, plus the cameras themselves are much more enjoyable to operate.

I would say the Quattros offer a more pleasing look, but the Merrils are unique. Try shooting the Quattros in low-res mode as Gary always used to recommend (where is that guy?) for a 1:1:1 resolution/look...though I'm not 100% on how the Quattros handle that mode.

Any fans of CCD sensors? For some reason I want to say that the look of the older CCD cameras reminds me a bit of the Foveon cameras.

You can get some of the Merrill look with Quattro too though. Put a Quattro Tiff through DXO Photolab and use Clearview Plus and it gives a look that is like the Merrills. The Merrill look really looks like it is all about microcontrast processing and dehaze processing looks similar.

For example:

Or a Quattro cloud shot...

Trying to look like a Merrill cloud shot...

Like you said the Quattro cameras are considerably more functional than the earlier cameras. Battery life is much better, buffer behavior is better, AF is quicker and the ability to shoot DNG makes dealing with the files dramatically quicker and easier.

The way the Foveon's deal with light does remind me of CCD cameras. Might just be the reduced dynamic range though.

Pretty sure when you shoot a Quattro in low resolution mode it just bins the top layer to make the camera 1:1:1. Interestingly the SQ Quattro seems to do this a little differently than the DP Quattro. On the SD putting it into low resolution mode makes all three layers handle luminance info, it doesn't seem to do that on the DP Quattro.

Shawn