Sigma SD1- $9700?

Sigma just announced the pricing of the SD1, the 15.3mp x 3 Foveon sensored DSLR. $9700... that's more than the 1Ds Mk III and D3X. With resolution equivalent Bayer sensor of about 30mp, it is the highest effective resolution APS-C DSLR out there. It'd be interesting to see how the color resolution churns out the intricate colors and textures of the marine world.

I have a friend who is a lens designer. Several years ago I asked him what he thought that the resolution limit of a 1.5x crop sensor camera would be. He did a 'back of the fag packet' calculation and suggested that a practical limit would probably be around 15MPixels. H suggested that this was a limit simply because, whilst both sensors and lenses could potentially resolve more in the future, actually building lenses to the quality control standards needed to ensure that they could put this amount of resolution onto sensors would start to climb, and would quickly become prohibitively expensive.

Looking at both Canon and Leica's latest offerings in terms of their lenses and I am starting to think that he was right. Canon's latest 600mm is supposed to be around £11k. Leica's revised 35mm f/1.4M with a floating element is £3.5k. These are very expensive lenses indeed. Perhaps/maybe optical technology will advance so that these prices will drop, but I also wonder how many people actually really need such extraordinarily high resolution. I have to say that both my 5D2 and Leica M8 work very well for me at present - I don't even see a need to upgrade from the M8 (10MPiexl) to the M9 (18MPixel) even though I would like to move away from the 1.3x crop factor. This Sigma looks interesting but what sector of the market can it really compete in I wonder? Are there many people who will be swayed by the (underwhelming) success of the existing Foveon-sensored cameras? An odd move IMHO.

The studio images on the Sigma website are quite impressive; really have a medium format look to them. I'm still a little confused though in terms of resolution and lens ability, if this is effectively a tri-layer 15MP sensor, will lens resolving power as calculated actually NOT be a limiting factor in this case with present lenses. If it works as well as advertised this could be a pretty amazing camera for studio, pool, underwater and wildlife (though frame rate is only 3fps) with the cropped sensor format.

The studio images on the Sigma website are quite impressive; really have a medium format look to them. I'm still a little confused though in terms of resolution and lens ability, if this is effectively a tri-layer 15MP sensor, will lens resolving power as calculated actually NOT be a limiting factor in this case with present lenses. If it works as well as advertised this could be a pretty amazing camera for studio, pool, underwater and wildlife (though frame rate is only 3fps) with the cropped sensor format.

Whilst you have a point, their claim is that its 46MPixel! But they state "Today's digital cameras have already reached impressive pixel counts. ..... sufficient to generate high-resolution images ..... withstand scrutiny in enlarged prints. A plausible case is often made that the mega-pixel wars are meaningless because digital cameras already have enough pixels. The claim gains further support from an understanding that resolution is not determined by pixel count alone. In a photograph, resolution also depends on interactions among many other factors, including lens characteristics, low-pass filter response, noise reduction, and processing of contrast and sharpness parameters. By itself, elevating the pixel count doesn't necessarily lead to an appreciable improvement in picture quality" and "The luminance resolution of this sensor is, in fact, equivalent to that of a 30MP CFA sensor".

I think that what they are trying to say is that that the response of their sensor should be 'better' than Bayer sensors - but Foveon sensors haven't set the world alight previously. I would say that there are differences in the image quality output from my M8 (Kodak sensor with no anti-aliasing filter) and my 5D2. They are subtle though and a lot is to do with the lenses (the Leica are more reliable in terms of predictability, but again we are talking of subtleties). I would suspect the SD1 will be subtly different too - it does use a different type of sensor after all, but I would strongly suggest that its not going to be as substantially different as a 46 MPixel claim would indicate.

The $9700.00 price tag posted on DP Review and in other locations seems to conflict with Sigma's own web site which has KIT systems with some of the better lenses which are a bit less pricey, http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/sd1-kits

Phil Rudin

The studio images on the Sigma website are quite impressive; really have a medium format look to them. I'm still a little confused though in terms of resolution and lens ability, if this is effectively a tri-layer 15MP sensor, will lens resolving power as calculated actually NOT be a limiting factor in this case with present lenses. If it works as well as advertised this could be a pretty amazing camera for studio, pool, underwater and wildlife (though frame rate is only 3fps) with the cropped sensor format.

I think the look of the Foveon is in the 3x Sensor layering which means color resolution should be way ahead of bayer sensors. Of course, The older sensors were like 3-5mp, so ultimately the higher resolution sensors (12mp and up) made up significantly for any color shortcoming. However, with 15mp, it's now in the realm of high resolution. Add that to the same color resolution performance and it should look great.

I think that what they are trying to say is that that the response of their sensor should be 'better' than Bayer sensors - but Foveon sensors haven't set the world alight previously. I would say that there are differences in the image quality output from my M8 (Kodak sensor with no anti-aliasing filter) and my 5D2. They are subtle though and a lot is to do with the lenses (the Leica are more reliable in terms of predictability, but again we are talking of subtleties). I would suspect the SD1 will be subtly different too - it does use a different type of sensor after all, but I would strongly suggest that its not going to be as substantially different as a 46 MPixel claim would indicate.

I'm not sure that'll be true here. With 15mp the resolution is high enough to negate high resolution Bayer sensor image's superior resolution. I remember looking at the DP1 pics and the colors were amazing, but ultimate resolution was "merely" 5mp... thus it lost out to 21mp images.

The $9700.00 price tag posted on DP Review and in other locations seems to conflict with Sigma's own web site which has KIT systems with some of the better lenses which are a bit less pricey, http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/sd1-kits

Talk about right and left hand not talking... the marketing dept must be getting flogged for that. Or they could be just willing to take a hit with lenses just to push the camera.

I'm not sure that'll be true here. With 15mp the resolution is high enough to negate high resolution Bayer sensor image's superior resolution. I remember looking at the DP1 pics and the colors were amazing, but ultimate resolution was "merely" 5mp... thus it lost out to 21mp images.

So why do Sigma state it as being 15MPixel, but quote an equivalence of 46MPixel and then explain the MPixels aren't everything? It 30MPixel luminance equivalence is also commented on. Its either slightly bizarre marketing or it really hasn't any equivalence to 46 MPixels. I'm also still intrigued as to whether at 15MPixel it is at the limit of most lenses abilities so whether the sensor's superior abilities will translate into better image quality remains to be seen.

It's simple Paul. They have 3x 15.x mp sensors, so when the image is finally output, it's around 45-6mp. There's your marketing "fact."

So, on conversion to B&W, any advantage, greater dynamic range, or just a regular 15MP image?

The $9700.00 price tag posted on DP Review and in other locations seems to conflict with Sigma's own web site which has KIT systems with some of the better lenses which are a bit less pricey, http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/sd1-kits

 

Phil Rudin

You may be interested in Michael Reichmann's musing on the SD1 price.

$150,000 Ford Focus

Bob

So, on conversion to B&W, any advantage, greater dynamic range, or just a regular 15MP image?

i would assume the resolution should be still there. I can't say until I see the output from the camera.

It's simple Paul. They have 3x 15.x mp sensors, so when the image is finally output, it's around 45-6mp. There's your marketing "fact."

Oh. Silly me. Its a marketing "fact" type fact. Of course now I understand .

So to recap, this has a 15MPixel resolution but 3 x better image quality for 5 x the price of other 15MPixel cameras . As Michael Reichmann points out, its a bargain.

Now Sigma is saying that the street price for this camera should be $6899.00, keep bitching and it may drop below $5000.00.

Phil, I think most of the cameras has a MSRP/Street Price discrepancy. Sigma just has a bigger one than normal

Phil, I think most of the cameras has a MSRP/Street Price discrepancy. Sigma just has a bigger one than normal

Here's how to save $6,800 - read Thom Hogan's slam of the SD1 IQ.

TH 2011-05-26 SD1

Bob

Well there sure is a lot of anger with Sigma's pricing, especially from those who'd never buy it anyways. The cool thing about the internets!

If Sigma never sold any of their SD cameras, then I'm pretty sure they'd have folded their DSLR department long ago. Obviously it's part of their product range and it must be making some money or at least not bleeding too much. The relevancy to underwater would be how that extra color info would look. I'd be interested in a side by side shootout... but then it would bring up another issue... lenses!

I'm not sure how Sigma lenses will hold up. I've had Sigma lenses for Nikon and Canon. Other than the 120-300mm and 14mm, none of the lenses I've had were as sharp as the Canon equivalents wide open. I haven't tried the 50 f1.4 or 85 f1.4, the 2 lenses that apparently perform very well wide open. And also their QC is a bit suspect at times in my experience. Sigma makes great lenses @ focal lengths and f stops that Nikon and Canon don't have (the 120-300 f2.8 and 12-24mm FF etc) but their QC problems can be pretty bad.

Of course, the biggest issue for uw is whether one can get a housing made for it. Now that there are housing makers who basically have enclosures that fit pretty much every camera and just controls need to be fitted, the idea isn't that far removed. The promise of Foveon video has yet to appear though (7 years after they demoed it!) and that's a bummer!

. but then it would bring up another issue... lenses!

 

I'm not sure how Sigma lenses will hold up.

Just to defend sigma, they have recently some good lenses, especially for UW use (the pricing of SD1 is insane otherwise). Their fisheye lenses are excellent and many wetpixel users (even pros) prefer them over canikon versions. Some cheaper zooms are also highly regarded (17-70) and their macros are excellent (regarding optical quality, not the focusing speed). The sigma 70mm macro is easily the sharpest macro lens according to the test results.

The QC is another question but they have matching lenses for the higher resolution sensor for sure.

(I don't think there will be any UW housing for SD1 though)

Cheers

Marcell

I had posted some time ago (Gear Lust forum?) about being curious about the Foveon chip underwater. Hypothetically, having all colors at all spatial locations might make for clearer images of highly reticulated undersea critters, barring of course the optical blurring from dome ports, non-perfectly-clear water, etc.

Even the lack of an AA filter might help a hair. I seem to remember craig (whatever happened to him?) crowing about removing an aa filter from a Nikon for underwater use. I knew just being 'curious' meant I'd pay a camera body premium, a housing premium (BS-Kinetics was the only manufacturer who had pre-committed to making one), and be stuck with non-TTL flashes, most likely. But I was still sufficiently curious to start hanging out extensively at the dpreview Sigma forum eagerly drinking in every single little tiny nugget of pre-release info.

But at $9700..fuggetaboutit. I can see paying $2k - $2.5k for the novelty and economy of scale - Sigma can't sell quite so near the manufacturing margin as the big guns, and has to pay higher per-sensor premiums for smaller quantity buys as well. But that price was just a spanking. For that matter, the difference between the $9700 list and more realistic $6800 street price is still too much to pay.

So much for that brief episode of gear lust. Why can't I just buy CaNikon and stop fighting? Dunno.....

I've already dropped less than $900 on a Sony A55 to play around with and check out as an alternative. May end up housing it, may wait for the A77, but so far, color me impressed. All the liveview upsides I liked in my E330 with practically no downside (viewfinder is large and bright - amplified even). May still give Sigma a little money, but only for a lens or two. Their 150-500 OS or 50-500 OS would make good topside zoom lens choices, their 105 macro is still nice, and I might end up housing the A55 or A77 with one of their 17-7 lenses vs. the Sony kit 18-55 or with the new 8-16 as my WA selection. But no SA mount in my future, unless I magically win the SD1 drawing this weekend.