PDA

View Full Version : EOS 20D vs Sigma SD10??



TheObiJuan
12-14-2004, 02:35 AM
I have given both of the cameras a lot of thought, other than the build quality, limited lenses, and poor ISO performance, the SD10 still compels me.

I will be making my purchase in the coming months. Please provide any pertinent viewpoints.
Regards,
Juan Manuel

-EDIT: I did not consider the option of waiting for the X3 technology to be utilized by another manufacturer, say Canon, Sony, or etc...

D70FAN
12-14-2004, 05:18 AM
I have given both of the cameras a lot of thought, other than the build quality, limited lenses, and poor ISO performance, the SD10 still compels me.

I will be making my purchase in the coming months. Please provide any pertinent viewpoints.
Regards,
Juan Manuel

Read Jeffs final review and that may further convince you. I like Sigma lenses, but their camera needs some work. Yes the sensor technology is intreguing, but, If you are going to drop $1500+ then buy the best in that price range. The SD10 is not it.

TenD
12-25-2004, 11:32 AM
I am really interested in the Foveon sensor, but in my opinion Sigma doesn't have the lens selection or quality that Canon does. The camera itself looks a little on the un-finished side, kind of blocky and clunky. If Canon had a camera with Foveon technology, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. I had the same debate when I bought my 10D 9 months ago. It would have been a really close race if the price of the Sigma was significantly lower than the Canon.

Rhys
12-25-2004, 12:23 PM
I am really interested in the Foveon sensor, but in my opinion Sigma doesn't have the lens selection or quality that Canon does. The camera itself looks a little on the un-finished side, kind of blocky and clunky. If Canon had a camera with Foveon technology, I wouldn't hesitate to buy it. I had the same debate when I bought my 10D 9 months ago. It would have been a really close race if the price of the Sigma was significantly lower than the Canon.

I looked at the SD-10. I was intreagued by the Foveon technology. I was distinctly unimpressed by the 3 megapixel images. Sure they were free of aberations but for the same money you can get more megapixels. In the end I had a Canon S1 IS which is superior - 3 megapixels plus video plus Compact Flash plus AA batteries plus a 10x zoom. And it cost a lot less.

I looked also at the D10. In the end I decided that all I wanted was 3 megapixels. I was unlikely to need more than a 10x zoom and the S1 IS seemed perfect for me. In fact, there's very little that it doesn't do well.

I'd say, quite honestly, that the SD-10 needs a few improvements. Firstly I would hate to have a newsworthy photo that I couldn't sell because the camera stores all its images in its own proprietry format (Sigma RAW). Secondly I see that Sigma lenses can be very variable in their quality. Look at the review photos and you'll see there's an aberation in the review lens. One area that should be in focus is not - the rest of the photo's sharp - just one patch isn't. That's a bad lens. Thirdly, the SD-10 is based on ancient technology that nobody else wants to take.

I think you'll find that in 5 years your SD10 will have curiosity value but will be unsalable. Buy a Canon and you'll still get a few coins for it when you want to upgrade (even in 10 years time).

John_Reed
12-25-2004, 03:58 PM
Look at Jeff's review of the SD10 - you'll see that noise starts creeping in at ISO 200 for the SD10. Even though it's "speced" to ISO 1600, image quality starts crapping out along the same curve as most fixed-lens cameras. On the other hand, the SD20 gives useable output at ISO 1600. This gives the latter the same fundamental advantage over the SD10 that it has over fixed-lens cameras. So why pay that much more for a clunky machine when you can get a smaller, lighter one with competitive photo quality? Yes, the Foveon 3-layer technology is indeed intriguing, but even Foveon themselves are scratching their heads right now to figure out how to achieve high ISO performance. Meanwhile, the 20D is already doing it in a walk, with an impressive array of lenses and attachments already available. This is one case where the "early adopter" loses?