03-24-2015, 07:50 AM
"fake sharpness/false detail" is really one of the most stupid judgements I heard about those Sigma camera output. 
At least, it's a unique and original one and you don't have to share that opinion with many others. :lol:
I could understand the term "overly sharp", but what makes you say fake and false - and what is in you definition then "true and righr"? Foveon is a different type of light perception. Anyway, it's just one of BC's statements when everything he doesn't use himself can't be good, so I'd be a fool to take it seriously.
It would be so easy to find tons of disadvantages of the Sigma concept, but the one thing they have a clear advantage is what you're critizising. Just poor. It doens't add more sharpness than there is. But hey, even camera dealers who are unfamiliar with Sigma, mumble something about "in camera sharpening", yeah, sure, there must be some trick when it takes 5...10 seconds to save this 50MB RAW.
You're of course the big specialist in true sharpness with your Canons. B)
At least, it's a unique and original one and you don't have to share that opinion with many others. :lol:I could understand the term "overly sharp", but what makes you say fake and false - and what is in you definition then "true and righr"? Foveon is a different type of light perception. Anyway, it's just one of BC's statements when everything he doesn't use himself can't be good, so I'd be a fool to take it seriously.
It would be so easy to find tons of disadvantages of the Sigma concept, but the one thing they have a clear advantage is what you're critizising. Just poor. It doens't add more sharpness than there is. But hey, even camera dealers who are unfamiliar with Sigma, mumble something about "in camera sharpening", yeah, sure, there must be some trick when it takes 5...10 seconds to save this 50MB RAW.You're of course the big specialist in true sharpness with your Canons. B)