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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com, The
PhAnToM wrote: 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. Because it's crappy technology? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Peter A. Stavrakoglou
wrote: "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. I don't have to step in a pile of dog crap to know it's something I don't want to do. I guess the Foveon is OK if you like 3.42MP cameras with Homer Simpson skin tones. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
The PhAnToM wrote:
[] Can someone again summarize why the lingering hatred of Foveon? Thanks. Perhaps because there was once a guy called Steve who's answer for everything was "Sigma/Foveon DSLRs"..... The poor resolution and colour rendering didn't help. David |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
... In article , Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote: "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. I don't have to step in a pile of dog crap to know it's something I don't want to do. I guess the Foveon is OK if you like 3.42MP cameras with Homer Simpson skin tones. Careful about stepping in that pile of crap since your foot always winds up in your mouth. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Larry" wrote in message
T... In article .com, says... 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. I wouldn't call it hatred, just a lack of repect for a good idea that didn't work, but still gets promoted and sold as if it did work. The photos from that sensor are pretty bad. -- Larry Lynch Mystic, Ct. You've obviously never used a Foveon sensor camera or have seen the photos. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
In message ,
"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote: You've obviously never used a Foveon sensor camera or have seen the photos. Every image I've seen from a Sigma DSLR that I've liked has been due to the composition, not the technology. The green/blue discrimination is poor and hue-noisy , and there is too much aliasing when sharp optics are used. -- John P Sheehy |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Peter A. Stavrakoglou
wrote: Careful about stepping in that pile of crap since your foot always winds up in your mouth. Instead of bashing me, how about defending this mediocre technology you're so hot on. No, I've never touched a Sigma camera. But I have seen them and seen the images that come out of them. Spin it any way you will, but they're still 3.42MP with downright crappy color rendition. And, they're outrageously priced for what they are. I'm sory that you can't see reality. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Polaroid x530 w/Foveon sensor will ship - finally. | True211 | Digital Photography | 35 | March 3rd 05 06:20 PM |
Polaroid / Foveon x530 ... anyone else anxiously waiting to get one? | Owen Coors | Digital Photography | 102 | October 26th 04 08:45 PM |