Sigma jumping into full frame mirrorless! (Page 4): Sigma has teased that the next one Will have a Foveon sensor.

Soul Dr. Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley

MT Shooter wrote:

Same reason everyone else builds mirrorless camera... (show quote)

Sigma has teased that the next one Will have a Foveon sensor.

StevenG Loc: Long Island, NY

burkphoto wrote:

The only way to save significant weight when switching to mirrorless is to switch sensor formats. Camera body weight is a small part of a full kit. Most of the weight is in the lenses!

Yes! The total weight of this camera is intriguing. But too many negatives (at least according to the specs).
Steve

AntonioReyna Loc: Los Angeles, California

It has no viewfinder. Shoot like a cell phone? Not for me. Otherwise, an interesting camera.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

CO wrote:

The Foveon sensor technology never seemed to really take off. Maybe because Sigma has patented the technology and no one else can manufacture it? It seems like a good idea.

Sigma has not patented that technologly (they have nothing to do with it)! Foveon did, its their technology and they had it on the market for a long time, before Sigma bought it! Foveon had its own 50mp camera on the market in 2000!

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Bill_de wrote:

That news is from Canon, not the SEC. It is known as the Annual Report put out by the company. You should try reading it. And if you think the camera companies are putting out fake news, don't you think (that's a question in itself) they would make themselves look better?

--

Believe what you want, and I will believe what I know. Thanks for the comeback.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

billnikon wrote:

No thanks. I have faith in friendship. No misleading SEC fake news.

Just pointing out that THE COMPANY produces their own annual report, not the SEC. The company has zero incentive to downplay their sales results. Individual salespersons, depending on their territory and yearly target, may be doing fine, but the annual report tells the truth about the company as a whole. All the successful salesmen I know carefully read their company’s annual report (so they can plan their future).

bertloomis Loc: Fort Worth, Texas

I don't see an electronic viewfinder. Did I just miss it?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

TriX wrote:

Just pointing out that THE COMPANY produces their own annual report, not the SEC. The company has zero incentive to downplay their sales results. Individual salespersons, depending on their territory and yearly target, may be doing fine, but the annual report tells the truth about the company as a whole. All the successful salesmen I know carefully read their company’s annual report (so they can plan their future).

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

TriX wrote:

Just pointing out that THE COMPANY produces their own annual report, not the SEC. The company has zero incentive to downplay their sales results. Individual salespersons, depending on their territory and yearly target, may be doing fine, but the annual report tells the truth about the company as a whole. All the successful salesmen I know carefully read their company’s annual report (so they can plan their future).

I will agree to kindly disagree. My folks tell me a different story. Maybe they are the only ones reaching their sales goals, maybe many others are not. How knows. All I know is the guys I talk to tell me they are reaching their sales goals.

tinwhistle

Awful lot of talk about Canon and Nikon for a topic about Sigma, and then there is the usual name calling and petty pouting. Not a whole lot on the new Sigma camera. I shot Sigma for many years and stayed with it when I made the switch to digital, working my way through the first two versions of Sigma digital cameras. Finally had to admit that Sigma made an OK lens, but their camera was a bust. I could see no advantage to Foveon. Anything shot at more that 200 ISO was horribly noisy. The camera was a monster weight wise, and on and on. Personally, I wouldn't bother reading their literature.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

tinwhistle wrote:

Awful lot of talk about Canon and Nikon for a topi... (show quote)

So, basically your trashing early Sigma camera's. One of the reason's their lenses were OK is because some or their early camera lenses were made by Nikon.

Bill_de Loc: US

billnikon wrote:

I will agree to kindly disagree. My folks tell me a different story. Maybe they are the only ones reaching their sales goals, maybe many others are not. How knows. All I know is the guys I talk to tell me they are reaching their sales goals.

Could be that in a declining market their sales goals have been reduced. So they meet their goals while still selling less product. Canon CEO said he expects the market to shrink 50%, so it's unlikely they are setting goals at the levels they once were.

---

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

I think it is a brilliant move to get more folks into FF at a hopefully reasonable cost. L lens users will have the ability to move up to Panasonic and Leica products if they wish... Kind of like the 6D with Canon; entry level to get you into the system. On another note I realize this is not really a Foveon site but I have been a big fan of the Foveon sensor for years. The Quattro took away some of the early magic of the sensor and if you really want to experience the Foveon look try and find a DP2 Merrill and shoot a few on a tripod in good light, put up with its slowness and quirkiness, and you will create an image with gorgeous color and the detail and sharpness only a world class optic can deliver. The look is something you can not get with a Canon or Nikon. As a matter of fact I am pulling the trigger on a mint condition DP2 Merrill with low shutter count from Tokyo for less than $500. Been thinking of this for years and I really want to explore the early Foveon look. Will post some images soon....

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

Apologies to the Sigma discussion.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

MrBob wrote:

I think it is a brilliant move to get more folks i... (show quote)

"a brilliant move to get more folks into FF at a hopefully reasonable cost" The only flaw in your statement.