Mate...Beta was a better product!
AndrewF
On 21/12/2005, at 8:32 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> If Foveon had a better product I'm sure they wouldn't have any trouble
> getting Oly to buy it. Who needs a better sensor than Oly?
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
> Andrew Dacey wrote:
>
>
>> On 12/20/05, Bill Pearce <bs.pearce@xxxxxxx> 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?
>>>
>>
>>
>> I agree. The product had/has great potential but a bad business
>> partnership and bad marketing has made it a non-event.
>>
>> On the business partnership side, very little research would have
>> revealed that Sigma's main business has been, and probably always
>> will
>> be, 3rd-party lenses not camera bodies. Now they probably ran into
>> some issues with the big players already having their own sensors
>> (like C*n*n) or possibly existing contracts committing them to a
>> particular manufacturer.
>>
>> So they end up in an exclusive agreement with a company who's not
>> known for making SLRs and who aren't particularly interested in
>> pushing the body since it's not their main product line.
>>
>> As for marketing, well the whole argument about how the way every
>> other manufacturer counts megapixels is wrong doesn't work very well.
>> It's a situation where explaining how it's technologically better
>> takes too long for the average person. So instead they're saddled
>> with
>> overcoming the perceived problem of a low resolution sensor (I think
>> the Sigma bodies topped out at 3mp). Note that I said perceived
>> problem, it's the same thing as Olympus' "noise problem", it doesn't
>> matter whether or not there's a problem with noise, what matters is
>> that enough people believe that there's a problem with noise.
>>
>> It would be nice to see what they could do if they were working
>> with a
>> manufacturer who could produce a quality body and push the technology
>> (such as the resolution).
>> ==============================================
>> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>> ==============================================
>>
>>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|