the $10,000 dSRL

I watched the development of this camera on the web, thought I might check it out. Well, I guess not, hehe... They claim its for the medium format pros. I'm not sure what their smoking. Sigma's glass is not up to to snuff, the sensor is to small, etc... They won't sell many to the rich or prosumer crowd who would likely buy a Leica. If this camera was a full frame Foveon M rangefinder, then MAYBE.... But a 1.5 crop sensor dslr??? They can't be that clueless. 3000 USD and I would have tried it....
 
Interesting that in some blurb I read they claim it produces the highest quality digital image in any format ... how is that defined? Are they talking resolution, dynamic range?
 
$10,000 seems much to high for a 1.5x crop factor sensor. I suspect that many will get sold until the price gets reasonable. If this was 2000, sure. 10 years too late for this price-point on a crop factor camera.

As far as image quality- I'm sure it's good, and it's color, and it's something a marketing team is going to say about their latest camera.
 
I have a feeling this price point won't hold, just like the $9,000 price of the D3X quickly dropped down to $6,000.

Comparing apples to apples, I feel that most of Sigma's lenses are lacking in quality when compared to the Nikon and Canon lenses of the same focal length and aperture. Granted, they have some well-respected APO lenses, but overall I think that if I can already see reduced quality on a Sigma lens vs a Nikon lens on a 12mp sensor of the D700, then the assumed 46mp of the foveon will most certainly be wasted on those lenses.

edit-

Not only that, but it doesn't look to be a proper size to balance out some of the larger pro lenses.
 
Last edited:
small sensor and lenses that just are not good enough will ensure that this camera is close to a total waste of time and money. Talk about barking up the wrong tree...
 
jaredangle said:
I think that if I can already see reduced quality on a Sigma lens vs a Nikon lens on a 12mp sensor of the D700, then the assumed 46mp of the foveon will most certainly be wasted on those lenses.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you know this, but you do not get a 45/ 46mp image, but rather that 3 15mp sensors (3 x 15 = 45) are used to generate a single 15mp image.
 
Y'know, there are wise camera makers, and there are stubborn camera makers.

The stubborn ones think that they can hoodwink people to spend a bunch for a crop-sensor or half-hearted products that are neither here nor there.

The wise ones tried the same tactic, but soon learn that they can make even bigger profit by releasing potent full-frame cameras.

Sigma and Olympus are stubborn. At least Olympus has *some* success from their innovations. Sigma can't even claim that.

I don't know what they are drinking over there at Sigma HQ, but they need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Produce a full-frame (or bigger) foveon with the best *fast* Sigma lenses. Then we can start talking.
 
shadowfox said:
I don't know what they are drinking over there at Sigma HQ, but they need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Click to expand...


They probably roast some tea beans and brew them in a green cup. Then they flatten some coffee beans and soak them in a red cup. Then they churn some butter, and melt it in a blue cup.

Now, the marketing department drinks each one of them. The lens designing department mix them all in one lackluster black cup, but the liquid pours slower than you can drink it. The R&D department drinks castor oil because they keep on getting shafted by the rest of the company.
 
I wonder how much they'll be on the used market.

Yet, I'm not thrilled at the prospect of using only Sigma's lenses. I dared try a few of them a few times. Never again. Even if I did like the images out of the 15mm f/2.8, the autofocus was slower than Canon's or Nikon's slowest lenses.
 
jaredangle said:
I have a feeling this price point won't hold, just like the $9,000 price of the D3X quickly dropped down to $6,000.

Comparing apples to apples, I feel that most of Sigma's lenses are lacking in quality when compared to the Nikon and Canon lenses of the same focal length and aperture. Granted, they have some well-respected APO lenses, but overall I think that if I can already see reduced quality on a Sigma lens vs a Nikon lens on a 12mp sensor of the D700, then the assumed 46mp of the foveon will most certainly be wasted on those lenses.

edit-

Not only that, but it doesn't look to be a proper size to balance out some of the larger pro lenses.
Click to expand...

You're right about the price not holding. It's already down to $7000, which is still way too much, but a lot better than 10k.

As for the lens issue, which Sigma lenses were you using and which Nikon lenses? Sigma's EX line is just as good as the Canon and Nikon equivalents when it comes to the lenses most DSLR users will use (30/50/85 f1.4s, 17-50/2.8, Ultrawide zoom.).
 
Last edited:
Gabriel M.A. said:
I wonder how much they'll be on the used market.

Yet, I'm not thrilled at the prospect of using only Sigma's lenses. I dared try a few of them a few times. Never again. Even if I did like the images out of the 15mm f/2.8, the autofocus was slower than Canon's or Nikon's slowest lenses.
Click to expand...

Some of sigmas lenses are duds. They can make fantastic lenses though... I have a 50mm f1.4 'sigmalux' and it's a brilliant lens - better than any of the manufacturers 50mm lenses and on a par with the much more expensive 1.2L by canon. The new 85mm f1.4 sigma is also optically fantastic. Then you've got the 12-24mm which is ridiculously good for the widest lens available for full frame bodies, the 24-70mm f2.8 is very good too.

It's just a matter of picking what you want I think...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom