"There is no pixel equivalent to film. Over the years, people have realized that grain and pixels are so different that no direct comparison can be made. Compare the results, not some imagined "equivalents." DSLRs are all cleaner and clearer than film."

Bayer sensored DSLR's blur out noise though its often still visible, in the shadows for instance.
The Foveon X3 has no blur filter and noise in underexposed images that are brightened later in SPP can have noise exactly like film grain.
You obviously are not a Sigma SD user as you would know exactly what I mean.


Quote>"Noise in underexposed Sigma SD10 images is as near to film grain as you will find."

"No it isn't and thankfully so. You don't want a sensor that is as noisy as film grain unless you are looking for special effects.

Its not noisy unless you underexpose badly. If you had read my replies properly you would have already gathered that much.

"Too bad theory and practice don't match. Fovean is a small company without a lot of money to improve their technique. Improvements come very, very slowly. Three layer has potential but what counts is the final result. Fovean doesn't justify the hype."

Then you must be living in dream land....Open your eyes and you will see the Foveon X3 does justify the hype!

All DSLRs have the same effect. The digital image is percieved as clearer and sharper because of the lack of grain. Fovean is, at best, average in this respect. Side by side with MF film, the differences show up.

As do the differences between medium format and the 20D or any other sub 8mp DSLR come to that.
If you had been paying attention you would have seen that is exacly what I said earlierI

"No, it doesn't. Read the tech reviews. For resolution, it was a reasonable match for the 6 MP 10D but not as good as the 20D.

Obviously you have'nt seen the same tests I have then! In direct comparsion tests, conducted by users that have both the SD10 and 20D, the resolution results were practically identical.
ie The 10.2mp Foveon X3 sensor is directly equivalent to a the best modern 8mp Bayer
sensor.
However in at least one particular test the 20D consistantly missfocussed an awfull lot of the time where the SD10 nailed the focus on virtually every shot.

"Again, the potential is there but the glacier-slow progress of Fovean allows other sensor makers to stay ahead."


Lets not forget that the SD10 has been out for around 2 years now and it was as good then as the 20D is now.
So they are hardly staying ahead, more like they are trying to stay neck and neck with the SD10!

"There is NOTHING magical about the Fovean sensor."

I dont believe in magic, I believe in what my eyes show me and they show me that the SD10 is still top of its class.
Anyone can see this clearly when they compare full sized images from the SD10 to any of its Bayer sensored competitors....Buts thats only if you can find any to compare with ones from the SD10 in the first place!

You can rave all day about the technology but when it all comes home, the final image quality counts.

Exactly why I have an SD10!....Image quality matters more to me than anything else.
If I wanted a bigger buffer, faster shot to shot speed and usable very high ISO for taking shots of fast paced sports action shots say then the SD10 would not be the right camera for that job and the 20D would suit that purpose better. Fortunalty for me I have no interest in shooting sport action shots.

"Foveon has MANY problems: softer images as the ISO goes up,

Actually I find there is practically no need to use anything higher than ISO100 99.9 % of the time.

"problems with noise in the red channel,"

???...Can you clarify this and show me a good example to show if your views are justified?

"color bleeding"

???...Can you clarify this and show me a good example to show if your views are justified?

"problems with noise in the red channel"

???...Can you clarify this and show me a good example to show if your views are justified?

" hue shifts"

???...Can you clarify this and show me a good example to show if your views are justified?


, and really bad long exposure properties."

Now that bit is true but what you obviously dont realise is that long exposures of more than ten seconds are really not necessary with the SD10.
Long exposure night shots taken on Bayer sensored DSLR's often look as though they were taken in the daytime, which I am sure you will agree, sort of defeats the object of taking them at night in the first place!
The trick to taking good nightshots with the SD10 is to use the highest aperture and shutter speed you can get away with whilst staying at ISO100.
I can get very good nightshots at 1/2 sec, f8 and ISO100 and they look like they were taken at night as they should!

"The Sigma is just one camera among many good choices. Please don't turn this into some silly Apple-fanatic-like post."

It always makes me wonder why Canon and Nikon DSLR users, are always so touchy?
If the DSLR market is really such a level playing field, why are their users egos so easily bruised when a user of another brand dares to question the lacklustre performance of their camera.
If they are so sure that they have the best camera they could afford and that it is no worse than any of its competitors then what have they got to worry about?
There is a term for this problem, its called "camera snobbery", and for some reason I have'nt been able to fathom it seems to be a bigger problem for Canon users that for users of any other brand.
Hey, even I suffer from it too at times, as when I see how well the SD10 performs in the image quality dept compared to its more expensive rivals its hard not to look down on them as somehow inferior camera's.... Its just human nature I guess and it should'nt be seen as making me a Sigma fanatic or making Michael a Canon fanatic.