Slashdot Mirror

Bzzzt... Actually some very excellent fixed focal length wide angle camera exist. Back in the "film" day most photog's I knew carried around Olympus SylusEpic's with the fixed 3.5 1:2:8 lens. Awesome camera!

Also see this: http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/dp2s-compact-digital-camera

A good fixed lens will beat a good Zoom lens in image quality every time.

Sigma just released another version of their Foveon-based DSLR, but it's using the same 4.6Mpixel sensor they introduced five or more years ago.
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/sd15-digital-slr-camera

They're kind of selling snake oil. They make a big deal about the fact the these cameras deliver true RBG color per pixel, but then go on to advertise the number of sensor sites as the number of pixels, which is totally incorrect. They're falling up against the human eye -- we have about 120M luma-sensitive sensors per eye, but only about 6M chroma-sensitive sensors (and only about 10% of those blue-sensitive). We care a great deal about resolution, less so about color. And the resolution you get from these is 4.6Mpixel. Foveon doesn't seem to have had much of a second act, even after Sigma bought them.

There are other issues. The Foveon design is very clever, but kind of flawed. They're counting on the natural color filtering properties of silicon, and while it's a cool idea, the color filtering is somewhat off. So they have to do lots of image processing and color correction on the final result, anyway. Back when everyone else has 6-8 Mpixel sensors, you could make an argument for the Foveon chip, particularly for portrait photography, where you care more about color than resolution (well, except when shooting crusty old geezers in monochrome). But in a day when you can buy a Canon or Nikon DSLR at $700-$800 with an 18Mpixel sensor and full HD video capabilities, this one makes no sense.

As far as the cameras, the Sigma DSLRs are mighty expensive for an entry-level model with a 4.6Mpixel sensor. Sigma calls them "pro" models, but that's marketing speak for "we don't make anything higher end". Much in the same way Pabst is a "Premium" beer.

The one thing I liked from Sigma is the DP1/DP2. They had issues, but the notion of dropping a full-sized APS sensor, even the Foveon chip, into a roughly pocket-sized P&S is a good one. Of course, today, we have Sony NEX and Panasonic/Olympus doing similar sized cameras, only with interchangeable lenses.

There are some sensors that do this, but they were only used in a few less popular camera models, all of which (to my knowledge) are discontinued.

Nope.

They don't even have a colour for each pixel yet

Actually, they do; see Sigma's foveon sensor for the SD-14, for instance.

That "RPG" around the corner is a camera lens. In fact, it's this camera lens.

To hate millions of people because of the actions of a few is pretty ignorant, Mr. Coward.

Isn't that human nature?

This will cause a huge outcry and more hatred for us, the US of A.

I'm willing to give the soldiers a benefit of the doubt because some camera lenses do in fact look like weapons to the untrained eye and I can understand their mistake - at first glance. Could it have been avoided? Yep! That helicopter pilot flying around should have double checked - he really needs to be court martialed. BUT the fact of the matter is that this is a very political war on both sides and the military is going to have to BIHICA with a case of KY for each member of the chain of command.

That's just the way it is.

Giving gear-heads a hard on? I wouldn't call a lens of that significance frivolous, as I would love to have one... Although the Sigma 400-1000mm F5.6 is a whole lot more affordable... relatively anyway. It even comes in a nice almost Slashdot green too. http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3349&navigator=3 Plus it has f2.8 at the low end which is impressive.

"SLR" stands for Single Lens Reflex. This means that light passes through the lens, off a mirror and/or CCD, and into your eye. It means that there is no parralax error due to you and the camera seeing your subject from different angles. It doesn't necessarily mean you have the ability to change lenses, nor does it mean it's a "professional grade" camera. It doesn't even have to be much more complicated than your average point-and-shoot, though I'm assuming you want to be able to grow as you learn.

In the lower class of Digital SLR bodies with interchangeable lenses, you've got the Nikon D70 and D100, the Canon Digital Rebel, and a few cameras by Sigma and Fuji. These cameras (bodies with interchangeable lenses) will allow you the most flexibility, options, and quality. However, they are also much more expensive, starting at about the $1000 mark. For the moment, I'll assume this is the area you're looking at.

First off, the Canon Digital Rebel is not the only camera in its class. Nikon just released the D70, which seems to kick the Rebel's ass. I spoke to Nikon Digital Support (800-645-6689), and they said the memory buffer was so fast that you could pretty much keep shooting continuously until you ran out of space. Compared to older models that would only do "burst mode" for up to five seconds, that's quite a feat. The D70 is only about 3 frames/second, but the D2H can do 8 frames/second for five seconds before the buffer gets full. Of course, the D2H is about $3K, but I can dream. ;-)

Second, you are not limited to (and may not want) a camera with interchangable lenses. The Nikon Coolpix 5700 and 8700 are pretty decent (the latter being 8 megapixels!), and the Canon PowerShot Pro1, G5, and S1 are also options. One definite advantage the cameras without interchangable lenses have is that they are going to be much smaller and lighter.

As per several recommendations already posted, definitely check out DPReview. Great site, lots of info, full testing, sample shots, menus and interfaces, etc. Think about what your priorities are. How high of a resolution do you need? 6 megapixels is plenty for an 8x10. (4 can actually get you by.) If you aren't printing anything larger than that, you're fine. Do you care if there's a proprietary battery, or do you need the flexibility of "standard"-sized batteries? (AA, AAA, etc.) Do you have a preference for media type? (I prefer CompactFlash, as it tends to give the best cost/size ratio, and the card size options are larger.) Do you need lens interchangeability? Do you want it? Regardless of what you want *right now*, where do you want to take your photography eventually? Make sure your camera choice now will not limit your goals later.

Personally, I'd lean more towards the larger SLR bodies with interchangeable lenses. They're bigger, heavier, and *can be* more expensive... though this is by no means true any more. However, the options you have are incredible. Of course, you may well just be leaving the camera in automatic mode all the time, which makes those options useless, overpriced oversized, etc. However, if you *want* those options later... you may not have to "upgrade" anything other than your lens options. Now that

a 16 megapixel camera is actually only 4 megapixel

That's a ridiculous statement. First of all, my 6.3 megapixel camera outputs images that are perfectly sharp and full of detail right down to the pixel level, at a resolution of 3072 x 2048. How many pixels is that? 6291456. Sounds pretty damn close to 6.3 MP to me.

Your fearmongering about the Bayer pattern (RGBG) interpolation is unjustified. It's not marketing bullshit to have alternating colors (and double green) the way the Bayer pattern does, it's very much intentional. The Bayer pattern is designed to mimic the way our eyes detect light, and for most people, very professional photographers included, it does a superb job. If you are doing serious astronomical work (one of the few places where the interpolation fails to give optimal results, because you don't want to see what the human eye sees, you want to see more) then the Sigma Foveon X3 sensors may be something you're interested in. But other than that, the cones in the eye are not laid out alltogether in little blocks of RGB. If you want to record what a human being would see if standing where you are, there are people who actually prefer Bayer pattern sensors.

even the best real 1920x1080 camera (the Thompson Viper) can take a phot at that res in one 60th of a second exposure at 12 bits of color depth.

That's ridiculous too. The Sigma SD9 and SD10 using Foveon X3 sensors have 3.4 MP, which is significantly more than 1920x1080. And what does exposure length have to do with anything in this discussion? 1/60 sec? Huh?

Wake me up in 20 years when i can finally be impressed.

Don't worry, we'll wake you up when CDs sound better than records, too. Some people just can't get over the fact that we know exactly where the limits of digital technologies are, whereas the limits of analog don't lend themselves to quantification, therefore people assume that they have no limits and are 'perfect'. Just another form of zealotry. I'd prefer to know exactly where my limits are, so I know when I've exceeded them. Helps me avoid situations where I'm asking too much of the camera and have to try something different (multiple exposures, filter, whatever)

Sigma has released two camera bodies based on the Foveon X3 chip: the SD-9 and the SD-10

I haven't seen any reviews of them either. The idea is great, and it seems to cut down on the moire patter.

Although I could not find any information pertaining to the Fuji Finepix 6900 on their website I have been doing research in this area ever since Slashdot ran an article talking about Foveon's new CCD chip that is suppost to revolutionize the industry. Although Sigma's SD9 hasn't hit the market yet, other manufacturers have been lowering the prices on their cameras, binging 5 and 6+ Megapixel cameras closer to reach.

For example, Nikon's Coolpix 5000 is a 5Megapixel camera that retails for $1K US, but can be found on the Internet for closer to $700. It has the ability to add and remove lenses, but it is nothing like the bayonet mounts that you may be used to with a standard 35MM SLR. Canon recently came out with the EOS D60 digital camera with a 6.3Megapixel CCD chip , that retails for approximately twice as much as the Nikon. It is suppost to handle almost exactly like a 35MM SLR, including the ability to switch lenses, which is what a professional photographer would want to work with.

But if you are like me, then you will be waiting with baited breath for the Sigma SD9 and its revolutionary CCD chip. Even though the chip itself is only a 3Megapixel chip, the quality of the photographs taken are said to be comparible with 9+Megapixel cameras. Or you could stick with the tried and true 21+Megapixel analog film and emulsion camera.

Although I could not find any information pertaining to the Fuji Finepix 6900 on their website I have been doing research in this area ever since Slashdot ran an article talking about Foveon's new CCD chip that is suppost to revolutionize the industry. Although Sigma's SD9 hasn't hit the market yet, other manufacturers have been lowering the prices on their cameras, binging 5 and 6+ Megapixel cameras closer to reach.

For example, Nikon's Coolpix 5000 is a 5Megapixel camera that retails for $1K US, but can be found on the Internet for closer to $700. It has the ability to add and remove lenses, but it is nothing like the bayonet mounts that you may be used to with a standard 35MM SLR. Canon recently came out with the EOS D60 digital camera with a 6.3Megapixel CCD chip , that retails for approximately twice as much as the Nikon. It is suppost to handle almost exactly like a 35MM SLR, including the ability to switch lenses, which is what a professional photographer would want to work with.

But if you are like me, then you will be waiting with baited breath for the Sigma SD9 and its revolutionary CCD chip. Even though the chip itself is only a 3Megapixel chip, the quality of the photographs taken are said to be comparible with 9+Megapixel cameras. Or you could stick with the tried and true 21+Megapixel analog film and emulsion camera.