If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Polaroid x530 w/Foveon sensor will ship - finally.
Remember this little "work of art"?
Foveon technology in a compact point & shoot body. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...x530_avail.asp |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"True211" wrote:
Remember this little "work of art"? Foveon technology in a compact point & shoot body. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...x530_avail.asp $398.46 at Walmart, for what is essentially a 1.5 megapixel camera? I'll pass. http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...uct_id=3340264 -- Bill |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
In article , True211
wrote: Just what the photographic world needs...more junky hardware. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Randall Ainsworth wrote:
Just what the photographic world needs...more junky hardware. It will still be interesting to read the technical reviews. Rose Parchen |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"True211" wrote in message
... Remember this little "work of art"? Foveon technology in a compact point & shoot body. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...x530_avail.asp It'll be interesting to see the "Bayer equivalency" for the x530. Reviews of the 3.4 Megapixel Sigma SD10 state that it compares to a 6 megapixel Bayer based D-SLR, in terms of resolution. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In article , ittsy
wrote: Randall Ainsworth wrote: Just what the photographic world needs...more junky hardware. It will still be interesting to read the technical reviews. If it has the Polaroid name attached and uses Foveon technology...really...who cares at this point? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Randall Ainsworth wrote: In article , ittsy wrote: Randall Ainsworth wrote: Just what the photographic world needs...more junky hardware. It will still be interesting to read the technical reviews. If it has the Polaroid name attached and uses Foveon technology...really...who cares at this point? Can someone again summarize why the lingering hatred of Foveon? Thanks. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"The PhAnToM" wrote in message
oups.com... Randall Ainsworth wrote: In article , ittsy wrote: Randall Ainsworth wrote: Just what the photographic world needs...more junky hardware. It will still be interesting to read the technical reviews. If it has the Polaroid name attached and uses Foveon technology...really...who cares at this point? Can someone again summarize why the lingering hatred of Foveon? Thanks. Those of us who use Foveon sensor cameras quite like them. There's honest criticism of the sensor and then there's dishonest crtiticism from the likes of Randall and Steven Scharf who never used the camera. Sort of like telling someone how a steak tastes without ever tasting one for themselves. It's best to discount what they say and stick to the posts from those who are more objective even if they don't like the Foveon sensor. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"The PhAnToM" wrote in message
oups.com... Can someone again summarize why the lingering hatred of Foveon? Thanks. There is no hatred. There was a lot of disappointment when the Sigma D-SLRs, produced relatively mediocre results compared to all other digital SLRs (and compared to many compact digital cameras for that matter). This has translated into healthy skepticism that the 1.5 megapixel sensor in the Polaroid x530 will produce good results (this camera is nearly a year late, with no explanation ever provided for the delay, making many people very nervous about it, but who knows, it could be a sleeper). What upset a lot of people about Foveon was how the 3.4 megapixel X10 sensor somehow morphed into a 10.2 megapixel sensor. This stemmed from an attempt to re-define a pixel from a spatial input element into a photo-detector. Terms such as "pixel sensor" were invented, in an attempt to confuse the consumer. Foveon decided not to adhere to the JCIA GLA03 standard regarding the definition of a pixel, claiming that the standard did not adequately address X3 technology (it actually does). Fujitsu, who has a non-standard sensor design, takes great pains to be accurate in terms of the JCIA GLA03 standard, even noting the standard in their specifications (i.e. see "http://home.fujifilm.com/products/digital/lineup/f810/performance.html"). Now we have the 1.5 megapixel Polaroid x530 being marketed as a 4.5 megapixel camera. But what can WWL do, since if they tried marketing it as a 1.5 megapixel camera it would surely fail. This camera will likely be about as good as a current 3 megapixel compact camera, but it isn't 3 megapixels either, it's a 1.5 megapixel, 4.5 megasensor camera. The problem is that many consumers look only at megapixels, just as when buying computers many look only at megahertz; this is unfortunate, but it requires education of the consumer into accepting a different standard for product selection (can you imagine if a company tried to redefine megahertz?!). Some ill will may have been created by a few people, posting under many aliases, on rec.photo.digital, who promulgated a tremendous amount of mis-information about Foveon and Sigma. But most people realized that these individuals were not speaking on behalf of Sigma or Foveon, so their actions didn't have a lot of effect (and of course, in the big scheme of things, Usenet means nothing). These people were basically trying to justify their purchase of a specific product, and got extremely upset whenever anyone pointed out any flaws (I'll never understand this attitude, yet it certainly is not limited to digital cameras). They've disappeared from Usenet for the most part, and we all want to believe that they didn't represent the majority of Sigma camera owners! Personally, I have many excellent photographs in my home that were taken with Foveon technology, and they are indistinguishable from 35mm (at least to me). But these were all taken with the Foveon studio camera, which is a very different animal (and in most cases I don't know how much time the photographer spent on post-processing). So "hatred" is definitely not the right word. Disappointment that what appeared to be a great concept hasn't worken out commercially, at least on the high end, is more like it. (you'll probably soon see Foveon sensors in a lot of new applications, since they do have some inherent advantages). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Polaroid / Foveon x530 ... anyone else anxiously waiting to get one? | Owen Coors | Digital Photography | 102 | October 26th 04 08:45 PM |