"But at low ISO nothing can beat this camera." - CEO SIGMA

Started 8 months ago | Discussions thread
Wayne Larmon
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,268
Like?
Re: Sigma cameras are for camera heroes.
In reply to Basalite, 8 months ago

Basalite wrote:

Wayne Larmon wrote:

...Michael Reichmann reviewed a DP2M on Luminous Landscape and was very favorably impressed with the image quality. From the review summary:

In the context of the DP2 Merrill the only photographers who are going to be happy with this camera are ones who can ignore its few faults and rejoice in the remarkable image quality that the camera is capable of. To get the most from the DP2M will require not just patience (hesitant AF, slow buffer writes, lousy raw software, wobbly screen image, etc) but the willingness to put these aside in exchange for what is delivered – _the highest image quality from any camera this side of a 36MP+ DSLR or Medium format camera or back._ No mincing words. That's what I see.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sigma_dp2m_review.shtml
(Emphasis added.)

Sigma cameras are for camera heroes. (You need to read the review summary to understand this. It is in reference to a NSFW phrase that I can't repeat here. "Definately Not for Camera Wimps" is a Bowdlerized version of what MR wrote.)

Basalite, do you agree with MR's review?

I agree with the "not for camera wimps" part. Most people that complain about the Sigmas never even shot film. Such people don't seem to realize that back in the film days ISO 100-400 was the norm and photographers did just fine.

I snipped your complaints with the review, below. I think that they amount to saying what you just said, above: if somebody has a mindset that has no problem shooting film at ISO 100-400 then they should have no problem with the Sigmas. I'll add that they also used one of the many fine fixed focal length, non-interchangeable lens 35mm film cameras. (I experimented with a Canon Sure Shot last year and I sort of have the mind set.  I'm not enough of a hero to commit to the SDs.  Instead, I just got a Canon 6D to mount my 40mm pancake lens on.  I hedged my bet.)

I don't agree with a lot of his criticisms and his claim that the Sigmas compare to "more like a 26MP camera in terms of image quality" when the Sigmas easily have better image quality than the 24MP cameras out there.

Quoting from the MR review again

Sigma made things problematic until recently by claiming that their sensor was 46 Megapixels. Yes, it is, but not when compared to a Bayer. With this new generation of cameras though Sigma needs to be given credit for, for the first time in their promotional literature, instead of just boldly stating 46MP, _the (sic) say that this sensor is equivalent to a 30 Megapixel Bayer.
-ibid. (Emphasis added again.)

Unless MR is misquoting Sigma, it is Sigma themselves that state that the SD sensor is equivalent to a 30 Megapixel Bayer sensor.

(Which is 10 megapixels more than my 6D.)

Wayne

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
110New
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow