Q Looses the 3-D of the M?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Scottelly
Senior MemberPosts: 1,762Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to DMillier, 2 months ago

DMillier wrote:

The trouble with this line of argument is intellectual honesty.

For years we have heard people on this forum championing the Merrill "better than the D800e" entirely on the basis of its fierce micro-contrast compared to Bayer based cameras.

Now we have a new Foveon that doesn't seem to have that intense micro-contrast and the fans are championing it because it is more natural and realistic.

You see the problem, it all starts to sound like "we'll champion anything if it has Sigma on the front" and the reasons why start to sound like apologetics...

-- hide signature --

"...while I am tempted to bludgeon you, I would rather have you come away with an improved understanding of how these sensors work" ---- Eric Fossum
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidmillier/

I see where you're coming from, but when the images from the Quattro look better than the images from the Merrill, and they hold slightly more detail, but slightly less micro-contrast, why is it wrong for people to champion it? Some people think it's better and some don't. It seems to capture at least as much detail as the D800E. The SD1 captures as much detail as the D800, but more micro-contrast than the D800E. It makes sense for people to champion the Quattro, when you consider that the Quattro captures at least as much micro-contrast and detail as the D800E and the SD1 captures more micro-contrast than either of the two cameras, but slightly less detail . . . maybe. It could be that the Quattro captures more micro-contrast than the D800E too, so it actually produces superior image quality, because while it matches the detail captured, it captures more micro-contrast, even though it captures less micro-contrast than the SD1. This makes me think even more that Sigma has really made a great decision to not step up very far in resolution with the Quattro sensor. It indicates they may intend to split their line into two camps . . . the Merrill and the Quattro. I hope so, because I think that would be a great idea. It would likely generate a lot of media attention, with comparisons and such . . . just as we see happening now between the DP Merrill and DP Quattro cameras. Even if only 30% of customers prefer the Merrill, it will pay to have two lines. I would guess that a new, slightly higher-resolution Merrill sensor would be another good introduction, especially with a new True-IV processor . . . after the introduction of the SD1 Quattro, with dual True-III processors. Then Sigma can make the full-frame Quattro, with dual True-IV processors!

 Scottelly's gear list:Scottelly's gear list
Sigma SD14 Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Tamron SP AF 10-24mm F/3.5-4.5 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow