Foveon or CCD

[meltdowninaz]

I want the best picture quality available (color, contrast and sharpness). Does anyone have an opinion regarding the performance of a 10mp CCD found in the Nikon D200 vs. the 10 or 14mp Foveon Sensors on the Sigma SD10 & upcoming SD14?

[drg]

There are multiple issues involved in your questions. If you are an experienced photographer not the least of them is these cameras have a learning curve to get the most out of them.

Disclaimer:
I wrote a professional review of the Sigma SD10 for photographyreview.com
[ Sigma SD10 Review ] last year and still own one and use it for some items. I also don't use Nikon very often now. I am primarily a Canon user in the DSLR format of camera. That all being said -

The D200 is a much newer generation of camera than the Sigma SD10. These two cameras have/had a very different market. The sensor rating is also not directly comparable. We have not seen real world testing yet on the SD14 ( I am waiting to get a production model to test by the way) so many things cannot be compared yet, to say nothing of what the images are really like. For reasons beyond a quick post, the pixel count and sensor size doesn't equate with these cameras. It is apples and candy bars.

The D200 has lots of professional features including a heavy duty durable body that is weatherproofed. The Nikon image is a known quantity. Lots of commentary has been made regarding this camera already. I have shot in a studio about a half a dozen times with the D200 (a borrowed camera, another photogs studio, and I primarily just composed and shot). I have no complaints, but wasn't wowed by the photographs. They were fine in terms of what the camera delivered. Very consistent but some were going to take a bit of work to get the color as needed.

The Sigma SD10 is a pretty basic camera that happens to produce very unique images in the right hands. The photographs are hard to beat in their category, certainly in print. That is what drew me to the Sigma at the start. You really need to know what you are doing with one of these to get the most out of the sensor. You can see my review if you are interested, but I'd wait for a SD14 at this point. Post processing of the images is a necessity and is much more time consuming than many photographers can justify with the Sigma.

The lens chosen for a photo will have a tremendous effect on the color, contrast and sharpness, perhaps even more in digital than ever before. Much of the color and perceived sharpness in a digital photo is a result of processing, either in-camera or in post processing, external to the camera and prior to display or printing.

I find it interesting that you are looking at this pairing of cameras. For studio work the cameras in the DSLR range that come to mind are definitly the Full Frame Canon's both the MkII 1Ds and 5d currently, and the Nikon D2x.

I will say again, the lens you choose will have as much of an effect as anything in the criteria you stated. I also wonder what other factors including the type of photography you are involved with that may influence the final decision? Do you need a backup camera might be one issue. Weatherproofing has been mentioned. Do you need a high frame rate.The list goes on.

Best of luck, feel free to PM or email me with any questions you might have. There are several Sigma photos in my gallery in you are interested.

Best wishes!

[mwfanelli]

I want the best picture quality available (color, contrast and sharpness). Does anyone have an opinion regarding the performance of a 10mp CCD found in the Nikon D200 vs. the 10 or 14mp Foveon Sensors on the Sigma SD10 & upcoming SD14?

Here's a shorter answer (although less complete)! The sensor is only one part of a chain that creates image quality. The Fovean design is a good idea but the implimentation has been less than stellar. It's not bad, just not great, sort of middle of the road. The new SD14 has an updated sensor but it looks pretty much the same as the old ones.

The bottom line is that any quality DSLR will give you great photos regardless of the sensor type, Fovean, CCD, or CMOS. Don't become paralyzed by technical specs. Choose a camera based on how it works with you and how the entire system you are buying into fits your needs. The technical stuff is great but photography doesn't come from pixels, it comes from you.

[Ronnoco]

The really short answer is that the Foveon chip uses 3 layers of overlapping pixels versus one layer containing all the pixels. The result is that the Sigma 10 tests out on the optical bench as producing 6.5 megapixels and the Sigma 14 tests out as producing 9.2 megapixels.

Ronnoco

[SmartWombat]

So the Foveon doesn't have a low pass filter, or the anti-aliasing to remove moire fringing then? Seems to me that it would be significantly different in image character from the Beyer RGB matrix cameras.

Not better perhaps, just different.

The post processing required would be different I expect, where the DSLR images form my Canon are soft and require sharpening to undo what the filters in front of the sensor do, I would expect the Foveon images to be sharper out of the camera in comparison.

Is my guess right ?

[drg]

So the Foveon doesn't have a low pass filter, or the anti-aliasing to remove moire fringing then? Seems to me that it would be significantly different in image character from the Beyer RGB matrix cameras.

Not better perhaps, just different.

The post processing required would be different I expect, where the DSLR images form my Canon are soft and require sharpening to undo what the filters in front of the sensor do, I would expect the Foveon images to be sharper out of the camera in comparison.

Is my guess right ?

I characterize the Foveon images from the SD10 as cleaner. The lack of artifacts though can give the impression of what is often called a softer image. As a result of this the images can be sharpened a lot more than any Bayer camera. There is no sharpening of noise and edge artifacts. The real test will be with how Sigma decides to decode the files for 'in-camera' JPEGs in the new SD14. There is a new version of the Software coming as well which will be interesting to see if it offers noticeable improvements with older RAW files. I was never real pleased with the ADOBE Photoshop conversions of the Foveon images under anything other than optimum shooting conditions.

There are white papers at X3 Technology and White Papers which is at the website www.foveon.com . Very interesting theoretical comparisons of the the two technologies.

There are other benefits, such as resizing the Foveon derived photographs. It generally is more successful again as a result of the cleaner image. That is one reason I originally started using a SD10. The prints from these can be astounding.

Some previous comments about sensor size and equivalence are part of the myth and lore about this chip that are floating about. We don't have a real long term hands on test of the new SD14 yet. Comparing the SD10(and SD9) to a 6.x megapixel camera just does not work very well the more you look at the overall Image quality of the Foveon output. They are very different.

Are they better or worse than other cameras? The file you get out of the camera when converted to a TIFF format via the Sigma Photo Pro software can render some of the best color available.

My previous response to this also has a link to the pro review I did on the camera and there are some samples there as well as in my gallery of what the sensor will produce. The riverboat photos are some of the most revealing for one aspect and the piper is certainly representative of color production.

[JohnWolff]

I want the best picture quality available (color, contrast and sharpness). Does anyone have an opinion regarding the performance of a 10mp CCD found in the Nikon D200 vs. the 10 or 14mp Foveon Sensors on the Sigma SD10 & upcoming SD14?

I have owned both an SD-9 and now a D200. There was very little difference in picture detail but there is a world of difference in the way these two cameras were designed and made. There are also differences in the way they render colour. For my purposes, the D200 has proved somewhat better here.

The SD-9 felt like a heavy brick in your hand with a very awkward placement of the aperture control. And there are the little things like extracting the Compact Flash Card. It's a breeze on the D200 but was much more awkward on the SD-9. Battery life was also a weak point for the SD-9 but I believe this was improved on the SD-10,

Unless Sigma have made a number of significant improvements in the camera body design for their latest model, then I believe the D200 will remain a better overall camera.

Just my opinion -- of course.

John Wolff
Hamilton, New Zealand