Just wondering if anyone has thoughts about the Sigma Quattro cameras, especially in regards to macro.
The distinguishing feature is that they use a Foveon sensor, where instead of an rgb-array each site detects the three colours at different depths. This allows for higher resolution with less pixels and these cameras apparently have "equivalent" resolution to medium format cameras. However there are drawbacks, including poor higher-ISO performance.
Sigma has released an APS-C and APS-H version, at 1.6x and 1.3x full frame crop factor. And they appear to be selling at a relatively decent price. Anyone have any thoughts?
Sigma SD Quattro cameras
Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau
Sigma SD Quattro cameras
Geoff
Hi Geoff,
I don't have the Sigma camera but familiar with the sensor and it's development. Some time ago Carver Mead and company set to develop this sensor based upon detecting the different wavelengths (colors) at a single pixel site by using the idea that silicon with doping profiles tailored to respond to different wavelengths can be stacked within a single pixel. They developed the first sensors on National Semiconductors bipolar silicon process I recall. The use of a bipolar rather than a CMOS process was because of the required doping profiles for the sensor were better fit with the bipolar process.
This is a very clever idea and created an effective pixel with the 3 color outputs, red, green and blue all from a single pixel.
Foveon tried to get Nikon and Canon interested, but weren't successful. Eventually Sigma acquired them and began producing the Quattro cameras.
Today I think the standard CMOS sensors we have from Sony, Nikon and Canon are superior in dynamic range than the Foveon, and at smaller pixel sizes, so they can compete with the Foveon on effective pixel density.
I had thought about getting a camera based upon the Foveon sensor some time ago, but didn't because of cost and compatibility. With all the stuff we have for Nikon, Canon and now Sony cameras, and the CMOS sensor performance and density, the Foveon based camera doesn't seem like a good choice IMO.
Would have been interesting if Nikon or Canon had acquired Foveon, with the resources they have, this sensor might have been developed much further and maybe a major player today.
Anyway, these are just my thoughts on the Foveon sensor and Sigma camera. I'm sure others can provide more information also.
Cheers,
Mike
I don't have the Sigma camera but familiar with the sensor and it's development. Some time ago Carver Mead and company set to develop this sensor based upon detecting the different wavelengths (colors) at a single pixel site by using the idea that silicon with doping profiles tailored to respond to different wavelengths can be stacked within a single pixel. They developed the first sensors on National Semiconductors bipolar silicon process I recall. The use of a bipolar rather than a CMOS process was because of the required doping profiles for the sensor were better fit with the bipolar process.
This is a very clever idea and created an effective pixel with the 3 color outputs, red, green and blue all from a single pixel.
Foveon tried to get Nikon and Canon interested, but weren't successful. Eventually Sigma acquired them and began producing the Quattro cameras.
Today I think the standard CMOS sensors we have from Sony, Nikon and Canon are superior in dynamic range than the Foveon, and at smaller pixel sizes, so they can compete with the Foveon on effective pixel density.
I had thought about getting a camera based upon the Foveon sensor some time ago, but didn't because of cost and compatibility. With all the stuff we have for Nikon, Canon and now Sony cameras, and the CMOS sensor performance and density, the Foveon based camera doesn't seem like a good choice IMO.
Would have been interesting if Nikon or Canon had acquired Foveon, with the resources they have, this sensor might have been developed much further and maybe a major player today.
Anyway, these are just my thoughts on the Foveon sensor and Sigma camera. I'm sure others can provide more information also.
Cheers,
Mike
-
ray_parkhurst
- Posts: 3438
- Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
- Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
- Contact:
I have liked the concept of the Foveon sensor ever since it came out, but I am not so happy with the implementation, or marketing. It's tough to figure out exactly what they have done based on the various reviews. From what I can glean, they have a 6200x4152 (25.7MP) array that provides B and L info, and two arrays of 3348x2232 (7.5MP) each for R and G. They output a 6192x4128 (25.5MP) RAW file, and somehow they "interpolate" this into a 8768x3752 (32.9MP) jpg. They market the sensor a "45MP" and claim it is equivalent in resolution to a 51MP Bayer array sensor. Hmmph.