Why only 4.6MP?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Processing Program
Next: curanzia versicherung, berufsunf�higkeits versicherung, berufsunf�higkeitsversicherung f�r selbst�ndige, berufsunf�higkeitsversicherung preis, versicherung vergleich,
From: Pete Stavrakoglou on 24 Feb 2010 16:32 It's no secret that they are not good high-ISO cameras. That's where the development has to be improved. The sensor development is still in its infancy, there's a long way to go. "Rich" <rander3127(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:57d1f090-321d-4069-86d9-134ba8bf8fc1(a)e19g2000prn.googlegroups.com... On Feb 24, 9:57 am, "Mr. Strat" <r...(a)nospam.techline.com> wrote: > In article <MPG.25eee8cf5471cc2598c...(a)news.supernews.com>, Alfred > > Molon <alfred_mo...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > Current 4/3 cameras have 12MP and the 4.6MP of the Foveon should be on > > the same level of a 7MP Bayer sensor camera, but not more than that. If > > Foveon brought out a 10MP model they would be competitive. > > The bottom line is that Foveon is just crappy technology...unless > you're fond of Homer Simpson skin tones. That, and the colour seems to fade the higher up in ISO you go.
From: Bruce on 24 Feb 2010 16:42 On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 16:32:34 -0500, "Pete Stavrakoglou" <ntotrr(a)optonline.net> wrote: > >It's no secret that they are not good high-ISO cameras. That's where the >development has to be improved. The sensor development is still in its >infancy, there's a long way to go. On the other hand, they may have reached a physical limit and it isn't worth developing them any further. And guess what? Foveon hasn't shown any sign of further development of these sensors for a couple of years now. I got the impression that Foveon's original owners gave up and sold the company to Sigma.
From: nospam on 24 Feb 2010 16:47 In article <hm45tj$pjh$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Pete Stavrakoglou <ntotrr(a)optonline.net> wrote: > It's no secret that they are not good high-ISO cameras. That's where the > development has to be improved. The sensor development is still in its > infancy, there's a long way to go. except that bayer isn't standing still. sigma is far behind and falling further behind with each passing day.
From: nospam on 24 Feb 2010 17:01 In article <j57bo5pfdlfonnqqee9pd82dls0u6o3oj8(a)4ax.com>, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote: > And guess what? Foveon hasn't shown any sign of further development > of these sensors for a couple of years now. sigma claims they're working on a sensor for a future high end camera. > I got the impression that > Foveon's original owners gave up and sold the company to Sigma. what actually happened is that foveon wasn't profitable after nearly a decade and the venture capitalists bailed. with foveon facing bankruptcy, sigma *had* to buy them, or sigma would have been stuck with cameras and no sensors. it was the cheaper of the two options.
From: nospam on 24 Feb 2010 17:02
In article <hm385d$38h$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Pete Stavrakoglou <ntotrr(a)optonline.net> wrote: > I diasgree. The older 3.4 MP Foveon was on par with 6 MP, some say 8 MP > cameras. The current sensor is on the same level as a 10 - 12 MP sensors. bullshit. most reviews claimed that the current 4.6 mp sensor is comparable to 'roughly 8 megapixels'. dpreview said it's not even close to 10 mp. |