Is the $9700 price tag of the Sigma SD1 a typo? Sigma advertises on their website a SD1 kit with the 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM lens for $7,819.00. The 85mm f/1.4 lens alone is listed for $1400 (street price is $969). I talked to a major photo equipment retailer today and they were waiting on some clarifications from Sigma on the price of the SD1 before they officially publish it online and start taking pre-orders. In fact, currently all SD1 kits are listed with a price lower than $9700:
Maybe Sigma wanted to just "test the water" and will come up with an official statement on Monday indicating there was a typo in the last press release.
Related posts:
50 Comments
Looks like the price of the camera is supposed to be around $7000. Still $7000 more than I would pay for a sigma camera.
Sigma, if your testing the water and google this page, I’d give 1,500 for the body and $500 for the lens.
did anybody at all look and the sample and blew them up to 45mp in photoshop?
they look like SHIT!
there isnt even 24mp of resolution in the files!
download the sigma sample and bring them up to 24mp and just compare them with some nikon d3x sample photos from photozone http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/606-nikkorafs8514ff?start=2
By the way, I didn’t research Sigma — I’m a Nikon guy — but is this really a 45MP camera? Looking at the sample images, I agree it doesn’t appear so.
How do we find the added value compared to other cameras?
sigma says it is a 45mp camera
from the specs “Effective Pixels 46MP (4,800×3,200×3 layers)”
“We enlarged the sensor to APS-C size (1.5x focal length equivalent), while narrowing pixel pitch, thereby dramatically raising the pixel count to 46MP (4,800 x 3,200 x 3).”
“The luminance resolution of this sensor is, in fact, equivalent to that of a 30MP CFA sensor as measured on the standard B&W resolution chart used in conventional digital camera resolution testing.”
i think this is very misleading.. sure the native resolution looks nice but it falls apart if you blew it up to 24mp or even the 45mp they claim.
this is simply a 15mp camera for over 5000$ and it is not even fullframe lol
Ah, you’ve run into the old Foveon X3 pixel count vs resolution chestnut. Some say Foveon called their technology ‘X3′ because they overstate their resolution by three times.
Foveon’s argument is that Bayer sensors count one sensor element (each of which are monochrome, but tuned to red, green, or blue) as one pixel, so Foveon counts each sensor element as one pixel, even though red, blue and green are stacked on top of each other. In terms of file size alone, this is true.
However, it’s a count of resolution as we know it. To most people, resolution represents how finely the image grid is laid out. By this measure, Foveon overstates their resolution by three times. The additional colour information is nice because it avoids certain colour artefacts, but it doesn’t represent extra resolution.
The reason it’s less than perfectly clear cut is that Foveon is less susceptible to moiré and the sensor has no anti-aliasing filter. AA filters reduce moiré by slightly averaging out detail, so the sensor is a little sharper without it. Some people claim to be able to see 2/3 of the resolution that Foveon claim. On the other hand, it is a matter of scientific fact that the difference of adding/removing the AA filter does not reduce/increase the resolution by a factor of two, let alone three times, so I think this claim of superior sensor resolution is bunkum. Indeed, many Bayer sensors have no AA filter these days; none of the Super Compacts have one. The X1 does not, the X100 does not. The M8 and M9 do not either. I have never read a complaint about these cameras having moiré issues. These cameras have great resolving power, but I wouldn’t claim that my X100 had 18MP, let alone 36MP.
Furthermore, at this level of pricing, the SD1 system goes against not only the best cameras but the best lenses available. Sigma lenses are notorious for quality issues, back-focussing, corner drop off and lack of corner sharpness compared to top pro lenses. They are not compatible with the other systems; Canon won’t work without serious surgery and while you can adapt a Nikon lens on, you can only do so if you are prepared to give up all electrical functions. If the lens simply isn’t as sharp, it won’t resolve the detail onto the small 23.5×15.7mm sensor at such a high resolution (15.4MP). Simply, the SD1 has 1.7 times the pixel density per area (based on 15.4MP) as the 5D Mark II and 2.9x the pixel density of a D700 or D3S. This will have an impact on optical resolving power, not to mention signal to noise ratio.
Speaking of noise, the Foveon sensors are known to be noisier than Bayer sensors on most entry level cameras. Increase the pixel count without increasing the sensor size and you have the recipe for disaster. Whether done in camera or on a PC, noise reduction squashes detail, potentially a lot more than the AA filter would. You might also argue that as the Foveon has not already had some detail taken out by an AA filter, the detail lost in noise cancelling will be all the more apparent.
In summary, while I would agree that if you count the number of individual sensor elements in the SD-1, you will probably come up with a number of 46MP. However, I expect the actual detail resolving power to be at best commensurate with a camera of 15.3MP, which is nothing special at all.
Look at it this way, if Foveon has simply taken a 15-20MP Sony APS-C sensor and built the camera around that, then would you buy it for even the price of a consumer-grade camera? I probably wouldn’t. The build quality on past bodies has been poor, the control systems clunky, AF poor, processor slow, metering unremarkable and system compatibility is an issue. It’d be trash. You need a super trump card to pull it out of the garbage can.
The only trump card remaining is the colour rendition – not the lovely Kodachrome-esque colours of the JPEGs that really sell the DP line, but the technical limit of what actual RAW files could be processed to. I think a lot of Foveon’s colour reputation is based on what their JPEGs look like or the skill of the user in post processing. I think that most people are not capable of technically identifying the colour difference of the Foveon vs a Bayer, because Bayer interpolation works rather well. I think the only people that can technically justify the SD-1 are people trying to show patterns of colour in very fine detail – possibly scientific and industrial applications. In most cases, including fashion photography and macro photography, the increased sensor resolving power and sensitivity of the high-end Bayer sensors more than outweighs the three layer colour technology of the Foveon X3.
Still way too high. It doesn’t appear to have even half of the features of a Nikon or Canon pro bodies. In my mind this would be in the Olympus E5/Sony A900 range. Their fuzzy 46mp marketing math has gone to their heads.
Then you have take off another 35% from the MSRP to get the street price (the 85mm f/1.4 lens has a MSRP of $1400, sells for $969).
Based on the pricing of other Sigma cameras it should be in the $2000 to $3000 range. I’d pay no more than $2200 myself though. I really like the results I get from my DP2s so to get 3x the resolution is worth something to me but not $7000 and certainly not $10,000.
typo? could be.
789
456
123
perhaps “$9700″ is supposed to be $6400….
someone must have been very careless in their typing.
$1700 is more realistic for a 15Mpix APS-C sensor camera …
Except that it’s not 15mp. It’s 3 layers of 15mp each. That makes it more expensive.
As you say 3 layers should be a bit more expensive if the results can justify it, but not 6 times more expensive for same image quality …
This is a great opportunity for Sigma to listen the people and cut the prices and pretend like it was a typo.
To everyone complaining about the price.. Sigma’s MSRP price is always around 35-40% over of what the street price is. So if we do the math the price will be around 3500-4000 dollars.
This is very true.
Everyone’s MSRP prices are.
Also, if a manufacturer makes a typo or intro price, better to be high than low — you can always discount — but you can never bring prices up once youve established a floor *COUGH* except for Nikon *COUGH* with their funny endless rebates (came in useful for them politically once the disaster hit though).
I think I’d buy it if it was around $3000. $3500 if high ISO performance is really good.
I am interested for 970 $
I would gladly go for it for 3000 if it had nikon bayonet. As i have d300s and it is superb for all except my exhibition prints of macro around 60×90 cm
the samples looks fuzzy even if you look at the native resolution of 15mp
No. You’re most likely looking at out of focus regions. The in-focus regions are… dare I say… medium format-sharp (at least the low end ones).
Plus the samples are only given at the 15MP resolution. So you have no other option.
The detail is definitely 46MP-like.
Admin:
We need a direct comparison of the 5DMII vs. D3x vs. Sigma46MP. If the Sigma beats the 5DMII and D3x in core ways, but lacks some features, then the pricing is in line with the updated price notice.
(Downside is why buy into a Sigma system, unless it uses a Nikon or Canon bayonet?)
I can try to get the Sigma SD1 for a review.
Which one?
If you were talking about the cropped sample above, you need to download the original file because the focus point is probably around her lips. You would almost wanna kiss her until you see her mustache though.
Even though I find the price is too high, the SAMPLE pictures are pretty much on par with D3x or 1D III.
…ah this is for Chris
Though SD-1 would be 1500-1900 usd camera.
Well, it seems developing and building those things is damn expensive. Wonder how many they’ll sell… It’s now fighting with mefium format cameras and latest FF Canikons.
I realize that and even then it is $2,000 higher than what a 15-18mp, medicore AF, metering, flash control, lack of weather sealing, shutter life, bla bla bla for this to make a viable run into photographers hands. Maybe some still life/ studio pros but even at that the need increases for high quality 48″+ prints all the time. Consider that a 85, 50, 150 macro are their best lenses and that would set someone back another $3k. Even if one went the zoom route or other primes (30, 12-24ish, 24-70, 70-200, 105) even with these lenses a whole system upgrade would be at least $10-15k assuming you don’t need lighting. They are not going to sway many with that kind of investment.
It’s shame really – the Foveon sensor has fanomnial image quality and could make a run at the big boys if they had more resources to put into body development. They have designed and priced it into such a small nich market that the viability for the company to continue with this technology could be very difficult.
Imagine that sensor in a rangefinder (M-mount) body or at least with Cannon/Nikon/m42 manual focus mounts.
“Fanomnial.”
Chalk that one up to IPhone spell check.
Yeah, iPhone seems to attack everyone with itself. Best of luck in the never-ending fight against it’s clueless corrections!
Aggghhh! Its, not “it’s”. LOL. And I call myself spellcheck. Well, at least that mistake was grammar, not spelling. I’ll let myself off the hook for that, though others might not.
Waiting for the reviews, but it’s still too expensive. I don’t understand why it’s more expensive than a full frame…
Damn, I was waiting for this thing for so long, but for this price I would buy a medium format camera instead.
Come to think again…it’s better than buying a Leica
http://leicarumors.com/2011/05/19/leica-ebay-madness-3.aspx/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LeicaRumors+%28LeicaRumors.com%29
I was talking to a Leica uber-fanboy. He told me that a customer ready to pay EUR200,000 for a Black rangefinder but asked to inspect the lens “wasn’t ready for it yet because he hadn’t reached the sufficient level.”
I think he meant level of exhalation, but it came across as indoctrination.
maybe $3700 or $6700 still mucho dinero amigo
i will gladly take it for a test run sigma
I was under the impression that every Sigma price is a typo.
It’s not a word with easily guessed spelling, but it is spelled phenomenal (re. “fanomnial” above, which I assume was supposed to be “fanominal”). Comes from the noun “phenom”.
Google dictionary results:
phe·nom·e·nal/fəˈnämənəl/Adjective
1. Very remarkable; extraordinary.
2. Perceptible by the senses or through immediate experience.
+ 1
The user’s spelling was too cute though.
Not intended – see above.
C’mon people, do not defend this craze. Even at 3000 dollars it would be crazy expensive. No matter how good the sensor is supposed to be, Sigma’s cameras always fail to deliver, at least before 3 or 4 upgrades (both in software and new models).
Sigma: yeasterday’s cameras with tomorrow’s prices.
An, huh, it would be great if someone invented a “SD1 bell”, meaning: every time a real customer actually buys one, my phone beeps, or a message allerts me of the fact. I would then drink a beer in Sigma’s honour. I wonder if, in that case, my life would become alcohol-free…
“SD1 bell”… LOL!!!
Great suggestion, the SD-1 drinking game. Everyone goes home dry.
Sigma’s recipe for dslr success:
1. overstate specs and camera ability
2. use marginal and proprietary lens mount (Sigma’s own!)
3. questionable lens quality control and durability (backfocus, etc.)
4. small sensor format aimed for amateur use
5. amateur build and quality
6. price camera into stratosphere
Good job. I’d hire their marketing geniuses as well.
It’s not a typo. It’s on dpreview now. I predict they will sell precisely zero units if this camera.
I suggest a poll :
who are the bigger idiots –
sigma ?
rapture people ?
only time will tell how many units sell, at those prices i will skip it
It make sense to price kits less than the body.
The people will say Wow to the sigma lenses too, sigma sell more lenses than serious camera’s so will make thier money back on these.
Of maybe the kit lens is pre micro adjusted to get the optimum match before shipping?
Way out my budget but smaller sigma camera’s have been great in my opinion.
You can’t polish a turd, and you can only roll in in a limited amount of glitter.