I agree. For all intents and purposes it seems to be dead with not
even the rumor of a new, more competitive resolution camera in the
offing. I really don't get it, actually. It seems like an elegant
design, but its potential asset of accurate color is the area in
which it is weakest according to reports I have seen.
Maybe if we do not continue to slide into an economic depression
someone with deep pockets will decide to take a risk on it.
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Dec 20, 2005, at 11:51 AM, Bill Pearce wrote:
>
> Am I the only one that thinks that we will never know the validity
> of the
> Foveon sensor, due to their inability to involve a real camera
> manufaturer
> in their product? I can imagine that they had a difficult time
> getting one
> of the "real" camera companies to even meet with them, but imagine if
> someone like Nikon had offered a camera with this sensor in the
> beginning,
> and sold enough and had deep enough pockets to be able to fund
> develpoment
> as Canon has their sensors?
>
> Of course, it could still be a total flop, but we'll never know.
>
> And who buys Sigma cameras? Has Sigma ever made a dime in the
> camera body
> business?
>
> Bill Pearce
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|