Mark Roberts wrote:
Robert Gonzalez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
....is a 3Mp or so chip right now with Ithink a 1.6 factor.
It's a 1.7 factor, which is just too much for a lot of people, myself included.
Dang, that IS pretty bad. I can live with 1.5, but 1.7 is too much.
That's just it though, if Foveon had the resources Canon does, they would already have a 1.5x or better 5-6Mp non-bayer chip. Consumer forces might kill bayer technology if and when Foveon gets into the mainstream, it will depend on the market dynamics. The lack of deep resources is one of the few things thats preventing the Foveon technology from getting a stronger presence. The other reason is that they have the intellectual property (patents) locked up and it might take until the patents expire before it becomes more common. I don't know why there isn't any type of licensing going on with the big names, it may be that Sigma wanted an exclusive license for a couple of years. One other possible reason that Bayer remains popular may just be simply that it is a much cheaper technology to produce at any scale. If this is the case, then we may end up like you say, with a situation where they coexist.
Only time will tell which technology will win out, Bayer or Foveon.
I don't think either one has to "win out" - they can probably coexist. Because of the 3.4 megapixel resolution and 1.7x conversion factor I'm not interested in current Foveon products, but I hope enough other people are to keep them in business! I think their initial product was dazzling for a first effort. If they keep improving it they'll have something amazing in a few years.
