This in order to get a darker sky and lighter greens. In the film days most landscape photographers had a yellow (minus blue) filter on the lens. Normally your model do not want this look, sop maybe you shall not use the top layer for portraits. Here is an example on blue filter photography of skin I found on the net Therefore, using the top layer for skin will exaggerate all skin faults. So - a blue filter will enhance skin contrast and a red filter will remove almost all contrast from the skin. depending on what colors it is you get different contrast when choosing different layers. Should have said, so as to ward off responses like this. The statement applies to the camera with the UV/IR blocker in place. A digital camera is not a human eye and there's no reason to expect it to behave similarly. On that argument, you would get zero contrast when shooting in the Infra Red. I checked part of the sky with ImageJ - won't bother you with the numbers. In my images above, the blue has the best SNR, the red the worst. Merrill raw reds are about 1 EV down in an average scene, so noise would become a factor at higher ISO settings. I'll have to experiment with ISO noise of each layer as well for anything above 100. Just so you know, the above are straight out of the mixer, 100% in each case, no other SPP adjustments at all. I usually adjust the contrast with the slider but this is something I'll take note of. Not too surprising because the middle layer is the best match to human vision, luminous efficacy per CIE. With SPP 5.5.3 and the DP1M, I get a tiny bit more contrast from the middle layer: Foveon has really sparked my technical interest into photography again. Disabling the bottom green and red color layers leaves you with a single layer with no AA or color filter. Zero sharpening needed with zero interpolation. If my main goal was black and white photography I would choose either Foveon or a Monochrome sensor every time and ignore Bayer or X-Trans sensors entirely.īut - since I also shoot color, I must pay attention to all four. With Bayer edging out Foveon for being able to shoot just fine at ISO 6400.īut yes - without a doubt, under good circumstances, Foveon (Sigma) sensors do much better than Bayer sensors. In low light - high ISO or with high dynamic range. In good light - low ISO without a ton of dyanamic range I would rate cameras in this order for monochrome ability. Though they suffer from other issues - such as not being as good at high ISO values. Monochrome sensors (sensors without a color filter array - either the Leica Monochrom or a MaxMax converted camera) will simply count the number of photons that reach any given photo site - also giving them great monochrome rendering.įoveon sensors count - red or green or blue - data at every given photosite. They use how deeply light penetrates into a piece of silicon - "Red" wavelengths being longer than "blue" - depth can be used to extrapolate color data.įoveon sensors are counting "all" of the photons at every photo site giving them great monochrome rendering. That is - the raw sensor just counts how many photons reach it, but to capture full RGB color data, it puts a filter for either Red or Green or Blue above a given photo site.įoveon (Sigma) sensors do not. though for some specialists the Sigma still trumps even those (maybe because of the removable IR cut filter - maybe for some other esoteric reason).īayer sensors use a Color Filter Array to capture RGB data - either Bayer or X-Trans. Those are the ultimate monochrome cameras, of course. So does Phase One, and other manufacturers too. Leica even makes a monochrome camera (no CFA). but there are black-and-white specialists who use Nikons, Canons, Sonys, and other cameras too. That said, there are black-and-white specialists who swear by Sigma cameras. The Quattro cameras are a step toward the speed I'm talking about, but they're a long way from what Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and others offer, as I'm sure you already know. Still, there's something to be said for a camera that can shoot fast, clear its buffer fast, and let you review what you just shot in a just a short moment. In some ways, it seems that Sigma makes cameras for the more creative minds. I don't know of any other camera that you can do that with. One thing there is that is different between Sigma interchangeable lens cameras and others is the fact that you can remove the IR cut filter from the Sigma camera, so you can shoot IR spectrum or full spectrum photos, for conversion to B&W (or not convert them and have weird, alien looking photos). I don't think you'll notice much difference Jay.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |