So - whats your take on DP3 M ?

Nice - a new camera.

Perfect for portraits and medium close ups.

What do you think?

--
/Roland
X3F tools:
http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html
https://github.com/rolkar/x3f

It's the natural completion of the DP range, macro and portrait. I already have a SD15 with a 50mm permanently attached, so I do see the point of this model

I've been sitting on the fence about this upgrade. I have lenses, so really the SD1M makes the most sense, but this is interesting,

--
http://www.johnlindroth.com/
john@johnlindroth.com
My future starts when I wake up every morning ...
Every day I find something creative to do with my life.
--Miles Davis

Well, it is pretty much what I have been wainting for, although I wish the lens was 1:2,0.

I am really looking forward to see some sample shots and I sure hope the new SPP will be a worthwhile update. If SPP does not pick up I would be rather reluctant as I would have to update my Mac in order to make it less frustrating – and I doubt I could justify that for the amount of shooting I get done these days.

I think that DP3M have to be considered in context of all 3 DPM versions.

If three cameras are needed to make the system, so be it. Three focal lengths cover popular focal length choices in rangefinder terms. Of course, unlike in case of interchangeable lens DSLR, there is no choice of telephoto or wide angle option, at least for now.

Buying into DPM system you are making a firm commitment to limit your options to a few fixed focal lengths lenses. You also have to buy 3 camera bodies, each with its own sensor. Even with simplistic approach to their cameras on Sigma part, they are still quite complex devices and something going wrong is multiplied by 3 (in current DPM line-up). Of course, ideal combination of particular sensor+lens cannot be underestimated. DP1M and especially DP2M show clear advantage over SD1 and corresponding lenses. I just don't understand idea of having flagship DSLR system under performing in comparison with its compact siblings. Maybe when Sigma will perfect their DSLR lens line up to at least level of latest 30mm F1.4, each of DPM's can be considered as companion to SD1 or substitute for particular focal length.

I think that the ideal DPM would be super high quality 2, 2.5X (optically stabilized)  fixed zoom lens optimised to the sensor. It would provide enough coverage for typical wide/mid focal length application at not so great loos of quality of prime lens. I won't even touch interchangeable lens concept as this idea is not really popular here, yet top of the line M4/3rd cams are the proof of very good implementation and results.

Richard

I looks really good, Roland.  If the lens is anything as good as the 30mm 2,8 they have on the DP2M it'll be a winner.  There are some downside.  At f2,8 it may be more appropriate to macro photography and outdoor walk around.  Because I'm not sure how much subject separation for portraits there is on an APS/C.  And the longer focal length loses a stop of hand shake for hand holding the camera indoors.  Now we'll need shutter speeds over 1/80s when we could get by with 1/40s on the DP2M.  Hopefully, they can deal with chroma noise better on this model (all for that model with the new SPP release).  A lot for me depends on pricing and availability so we'll see.

Well , let s see

Perfect for portraits  Hardly

1/ First the 70mm  focal length equivalent is a little bit on the short side ( a 80mm or 85mm would have interested a larger audience)

2/ The max aperture is a little bit too small. Probably imposed because of the macro design of the lens. while I am not one of those who think that a VERY large aperture is needed in a portrait lens ( like people demanding a 1.4 or less aperture) . but in this case a 2.0 max aperture would have been more appropriate for a portrait lens

3/ Contrary to the competition all dp cameras allow only 3;2 ratio  and do not allow one of the less oblong image ratios in cameras ( like 5;4  , 4/3 or even 1/1 square). in a camera that has no optical viewfinder it is  very easy to  implement

the 3;2 ratio is not a very good ratio for portraits for most people ESPECIALLY when shooting verticals

4/ and then first and  foremost , there is no sign of  an EVF for that model. it is easier to use LCD or external OVF on slightly wide to normal angle focal lengths

How many serious photographers  are going to be willing to work with the slow paced dp series and its other flaws and NO other way to compose the image than on the LCD

despite what the press release claims , the dp3m is more a macro oriented camera than a portrait one

Harold

--
www.harold-glit.com
www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

I dunno,

ILC or zoom will put DP series right out from price range at least for me.

To tell the truth i bought broken dp1s for DIY conversion to ILC but i fixed it and now afraid to do that

;-( . Just can't ruin good camera.

Setting aside wishes for a very different product, the main issue seems to be the 50mm (equiv. to 75mm) focal length. The debate has been whether it is too short (and secondarily, whether the depth of field difference between f/2.8 and f/2 is crucial).

The DP3M lens adds 21 mm to the front of the camera compared with the DP2M. (That's also the amount added by a cheap metal lens hood attached to a DP2M.) The question seems to be, would a longer focal length make the whole object unwieldy? And would a lens of longer focal length have a diameter too wide for the body? Perhaps those who know the physics of lenses could comment.

As someone who crops much more often than I wish a wider lens had been available, I will buy the camera at a DP2M price, after the usual issues are vetted.

And Richard, you now have a bigger market for your wonderful grip!

--
Please visit my galleries at :
http://www.flickr.com/photos/yoicz/
or
http://www.naturephotos.dk/NaturePhotos_ejergalleri.php?menu=3&_Ejer=57
http://www.pbase.com/yoicz/image/37473139/small.jpg

Same slow write times, same tiny buffer, 50mm lens too short for portraits, 1/3 lifesize too small for macro. Not sure what it's for.  Add a DP4 with a 70mm lens, a DP5 with a 100mm lens, a DP etc..., and at $1,000 per lens an all DP series collection starts to get expensive real fast. Thanks, but I'll just continue to wait for the (hopefully) new SDX.

Always nice to something new coming from the DP line, but when oh when will they introduce something with either optical or in-body stabilization. I have a DP1S and wouldn't dream of taking serious pictures without a tripod. As someone mentioned earlier the medium telephoto will magnify camera shake pushing minimum shutter speed up to 1/80th. And that's for young guys with steady hands. Trouble is many of the best images present themselves in low-light situations, think of those overcast days with saturated colors. Sigma has given us potentially the best image quality currently available in the digital world, but if you lose a fair percentage of the resolution because of hand/camera movement, what's the point?

...in the heyday of the Rolleiflex TLRs, when they had a line-up of three fixed-lens cameras: wide, standard, and medium telephoto.  To me, the DP3 Merrill looks pretty good.  I probably would have chosen a slightly longer lens in the 85-105mm equivalent range as my ideal...

Joe

There is, it's called the SD-1M.

But you also decrease your chances of being without a camera by a substantial degree if anything does go wrong with one.  That is why I LOVE traveling with DP cameras and an SD-1 with a small selection of lenses.

I'm not really sure it does - between the 70mm, the 85mm and now the 35mm f/1.4 the SD-1M really doesn't under-perform.  Even the 8-16mm is pretty close to what you can do with the DP-1M, Sigma has an awesome 40x36" print (I think it's that large, larger than the 30x48" prints I have been doing) using the 8-16mm.  I can say it's awesome because even though it's my image they did all the work in conversion to B&W + printing and that's 90% of the battle.

Again, they have except for the very lowest end and the 8-16mm is only marginally less good than the DP-1M.

Despite my disagreeing with the other things you said, I really agree with this statement.  The reason is that the DP-3M is again, a stellar lens/body combo - but It's not as compact as the other DP-M cameras.  So to my mind even though a DP-M zoom would have to be larger, it wouldn't matter so much now that we have one of the models that cannot be held in a pocket comfortably. So a zoom DP-M makes a ton of sense to me, far more sense than an ILC camera...

The only thing against a DP-ZooM would be, would people still purchase the fixed lens models if they could just reach for the lazy option of the zoom that would not be quite as good?  That would take away from the magic of the system I think.  So from that angle it may not be a good idea to "cheapen" the niche Sigma has taken over with a range of fixed-lens cameras.

--
---> Kendall
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kigiphoto/
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

I disagree with this.  After having done a fair amount of model shooting, some studio and some outdoor, I find 24-70 is a great focal range for models.  I've used the 85mm because f/1.4, but it can require an awkward shooting position because of the length (think against the wall in studios or in the middle of the underbrush outdoors).

I do agree with that, for portraits at least f/2.0 would have been really nice.

I personally prefer the longer aspect ratio.

Totally disagree, it just requires change of composition.

Hoodman loupe, Done.  Far better than an EVF (I know, I've just seen the best today that Sony has to offer).

It doesn't matter as long as Sigma keeps making them.  Photographers are willing to go through a lot for a quality shot, the image lasts forever, any pain in making an image transient (unless you step off a ledge.  Don't do that).

I think I agree with that, but it will still yield nice portraits.  Perhaps it could be said it's good for closer portrait work where you often want f/2.8 or more anyway.

--
---> Kendall
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kigiphoto/
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

The SD-1 buffer is tiny.

The DP buffer is better, even though theoretically just one more shot.  That shot helps a LOT.  I almost never run into buffer limits shooting the DP cameras, but I have on the SD-1.

In practice it means two bracketed bursts and you still have the option of another shot before the buffer is filled, by that time enough writing maybe complete to get a few more.

I disagree, it's  great length.  Longer gets to be problematic in practice.

I'll wait and see about that myself.

An SD-1x is obviously more versatile, the DP-M series is not about versatility but about a fine photographic tool.  It remains to be seen just what kind of tool the DP-3M will become as it is.

--
---> Kendall
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kigiphoto/
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

But the sensor is 1.5 crop, so the subject fills the image like a 1:2 macro on full frame - not too bad...

Hi John,

that's very close to my thoughts. 90% of my 1/80s images shot with a DP1 are fine. But for a camera with an increased resolution like the DP1M the shutter time should roughly be 60% lower, so for my hands a sharp image would require 1/125s at 28mm focal length. I have no experience with the 75mm focal length, but my gut feeling is that you need 1/300s to prevent motion blur. So the lack of image stabilization might be problematic with the DP3M.

Joerg

I'm not going to buy it, I'm that not much into portrait photography that requires a special camera.  I'm set for the DP2M as an all round camera.  What the DPxM series lack is lenses with big apertures.  That's the main reason I will stick to dSLR (SD15 in my case).  Having lenses with 1.4 aperture is great, especially if they are tack sharp wide open, let alone stopped down one stop.  I'm thinking of swapping my 30mm f1.4 for the new 35mm.

--
Halldor
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eirod/

It really depends on what you're wanting it for. 90% of my work is done with the 70mm macro: pano stitching, portrait and macro, so a compact camera that could duplicate that would be ideal for me. And I've tried portraits with a 50mm lens on the 1.7x chip and found it too wide, so a 50mm lens on a 1.5x chip would be even worse, but then I like tight head shots.

I would also love a portable body that could do pano stitching work, which the 50mm lens would be OK for, but that requires a large buffer and fast processing times like the SD15 has and the DP3 doesn't. And 1/3 lifesize is borderline for much of my macro work, though I suppose a high quality close-up diopter would improve on that limitation.

So as a whole the DP3 has no use or value for my work, especially not at $1,000. But if it does for you then that's great.