Q Looses the 3-D of the M?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
Erational
Regular MemberPosts: 179
Like?
Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
2 months ago

Shortly I will be driving myself crazy comparing my old M to the new Q.  I can't keep them both. It is dizzying how some folks shots from the Q will definitely look better than the Q and vise-versa.

My anxiety comes in the form of wondering if I will loose that ethereal 3-D-ness I cherish so much with my M-series camera.  Perhaps a better question would be 'How much flatter do the images look'?  Do you new Quattro owners feel it's 80% what you had with your Merrill ?  50%?  Perhaps you feel the image is just as 'Flat' as that of a Bayer camera.

Do tell.

jennyrae
Senior MemberPosts: 1,630Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Erational, 2 months ago

I do not have Quattro yet, but basing from pictures so far, it's 80-90%.  the resolution, color and detail rendering in Quattro just made it stand out from typical Bayer. micro-contrast of Merrill is special feature, but do not compose of large amount of what Foveon is.

if you worry much of this, then buy another Merrill body than Quattro.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Johan Borg
Senior MemberPosts: 1,902
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Erational, 2 months ago

I'd say the DP2Q is more of a natural replacement for the original DP2 which had a unique balance between sharp detail and delicate transitions. The Merrill is special in its texture rendering, which is great with some subjects, complicated with others.

3-D effect means different things to different people but may require different processing for different cameras. Oh, and a bit of that magic X3F fill light

Quattro shot, 3-D or not

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marcodadofoto
Contributing MemberPosts: 911
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Johan Borg, 2 months ago

Stoppitt.... this has become the Quattro forum, the trouble is that every possibile question about the Q has its thread (see my: Q is the normalization of Foveon (?) of some days ago)

Will this forum go endlessy repeating the same things about the little new machine....? ...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PRISCILLA TURNER
Senior MemberPosts: 1,008
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to marcodadofoto, 2 months ago

Too much loose talk? And writing?

My mnemonic is "If you regularly loose your dog in the wilderness, you are likely to lose him."

-- hide signature --

'To see, not with, but through the eye.' [William Blake]
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22905474@N06/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roland Karlsson
Forum ProPosts: 20,739Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to marcodadofoto, 2 months ago

marcodadofoto wrote:

Stoppitt.... this has become the Quattro forum, the trouble is that every possibile question about the Q has its thread (see my: Q is the normalization of Foveon (?) of some days ago)

Will this forum go endlessy repeating the same things about the little new machine....? ...

It is only natural. This is the new thing from Sigma. Many people have not bought any Quattro yet and want to know if it is a good idea.

Moreover, the Merrill has confused the situation. It has added some pre processing that makes the images unique - something that Q do not. And, the Q lacking this makes for lots of discussions. Not fun losing stuff.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma DP2 Quattro RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PrebenR
Senior MemberPosts: 2,706
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Erational, 2 months ago

My experience is that the flatness is all in the head, not in the photo. But you must choose what you like with M and Q.

-- hide signature --

Out lightwriting with Sigma
«Kaos»

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Raist3d
Forum ProPosts: 32,997Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Erational, 2 months ago

Erational wrote:

Shortly I will be driving myself crazy comparing my old M to the new Q. I can't keep them both. It is dizzying how some folks shots from the Q will definitely look better than the Q and vise-versa.

My anxiety comes in the form of wondering if I will loose that ethereal 3-D-ness I cherish so much with my M-series camera. Perhaps a better question would be 'How much flatter do the images look'? Do you new Quattro owners feel it's 80% what you had with your Merrill ? 50%? Perhaps you feel the image is just as 'Flat' as that of a Bayer camera.

Do tell.

You may lose some at full resolution, but you can always get it back at 4.9MP.  Personally I don't find 4.9MP of true X3 capture bad at all, at least for a lot of web work and reasonably sized prints.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
HBowman
Senior MemberPosts: 1,132
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Erational, 2 months ago

Erational wrote:

Shortly I will be driving myself crazy comparing my old M to the new Q. I can't keep them both. It is dizzying how some folks shots from the Q will definitely look better than the Q and vise-versa.

My anxiety comes in the form of wondering if I will loose that ethereal 3-D-ness I cherish so much with my M-series camera. Perhaps a better question would be 'How much flatter do the images look'? Do you new Quattro owners feel it's 80% what you had with your Merrill ? 50%? Perhaps you feel the image is just as 'Flat' as that of a Bayer camera.

Do tell.

Hello,

Merrill and Quattro are two brothers. Merrill is less shiny than the other, have more personality and an immediate wow effect even if you have a D800. Apart if you have 900$ to throw away and like rubber band SD card doors, there is no real reason to jump on the quattro when you have the Merrill actually on the market. Buy two more battery (you already have 2 in the box), buy some accessory and you ok.

The Quattro do not have this wow effect, at all. If you take time to watch the old threads when merrill was launched... Apples and Oranges

The Merrill might have some drawbacks but, at unanimity, still the VERY camera who will give you satisfaction, trust me, especially for this price. In 5 years, if Merrill and Quattro are collector items, the Merrill might worth far more than the Quattro.

The Merrill is just the mature brother.

I use to know and be a Leica user. Remember the Jump from the M9 to the M240 ? >> Same story. One have soul, directly, because of CCD. The other is just ... normal. A D610 + good lenses kill the M240, I do not even speak about the D800/810.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards - http://www.hulyssbowman.com
SIGMA forum is like Dallas. You'll get used to it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 18,014Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Erational, 2 months ago

Erational wrote:

Shortly I will be driving myself crazy comparing my old M to the new Q. I can't keep them both. It is dizzying how some folks shots from the Q will definitely look better than the Q and vise-versa.

My anxiety comes in the form of wondering if I will loose that ethereal 3-D-ness I cherish so much with my M-series camera. Perhaps a better question would be 'How much flatter do the images look'? Do you new Quattro owners feel it's 80% what you had with your Merrill ? 50%? Perhaps you feel the image is just as 'Flat' as that of a Bayer camera.

Do tell.

I think it depends on what you shoot, I shoot mostly landscapes and some of the results I've seen from the Q look quite horrible for that type of work (garish colours and smudged detail in the distance). However, I've seen some very nice portrait stuff from it. It may well depend on who's shooting and processing with it, but for landscape shots there is no doubt that to my eyes so far the Merrill is superior in what it can produce.

-- hide signature --

“The most puzzling development in politics during the last decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.”
Mikhail Gorbachev
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roland Karlsson
Forum ProPosts: 20,739Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to HBowman, 2 months ago

HBowman wrote:

I use to know and be a Leica user. Remember the Jump from the M9 to the M240 ? >> Same story. One have soul, directly, because of CCD. The other is just ... normal. A D610 + good lenses kill the M240, I do not even speak about the D800/810.

The CMOS vs CCD topic has been discussed in the technology forum. There is no difference between CCD and CMOS. They both detect photons. They both do an AD conversion from the number of photons detected. Exactly the same result.

What happened was that (approximately at the same time as changing to CMOS) the Bayer filters were changed. In order to improve sensitivity, the overlap of the color channels was increased. This decreases the color saturation in the image. Something you can get back by simply increasing the color saturation. You can actually say that the newer Bayer sensors are closer to the Foveon colorwise.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma DP2 Quattro RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RKGoth
Senior MemberPosts: 1,091Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Erational, 2 months ago

Erational wrote:

My anxiety comes in the form of wondering if I will loose that ethereal 3-D-ness I cherish so much with my M-series camera.

No. It retains excellent separation of background/foreground detail even when those details are close in distance, colour and texture. Use sharpening and contrast on raw files to get the effect you want for the subject you're working with. SPP 6 defaulted to -1 sharpness on some files; think about your output medium and planned use of the image.

-- hide signature --

GeekGoth, Writer http://www.geextreme.com/

 RKGoth's gear list:RKGoth's gear list
Nikon Coolpix S8000 Samsung Galaxy Camera 3G Sigma DP2 Quattro Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Olympus E-510 +60 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roland Karlsson
Forum ProPosts: 20,739Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to papillon_65, 2 months ago

papillon_65 wrote:

I think it depends on what you shoot, I shoot mostly landscapes and some of the results I've seen from the Q look quite horrible for that type of work (garish colours and smudged detail in the distance). However, I've seen some very nice portrait stuff from it. It may well depend on who's shooting and processing with it, but for landscape shots there is no doubt that to my eyes so far the Merrill is superior in what it can produce.

Yes, it all depends. And, as usual, everything gets exaggerated when doing side by side comparisons. Then you can see the difference in very small details. Things you normally may not care about.

It is true that the Merrill (out of the box) gives more texture and more visible detail in e.g. far away parts of a landscape. This gives it an extra punch. It looks sharp and exciting.

But, it is also true that (at least for me) when doing the side by side comparisons the Merrill looks manipulated. It looks like some special effect has been added in the post processing. Very impressive, but not real IMHO.

Often when post processing images I add some sharpening and some S-curve (i.e. contrast) and some color saturation etc. Things that add that extra. The image will then look better, but slightly overdone it will look unreal. I think the Merrill often do that - add slightly more than it should.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma DP2 Quattro RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 18,014Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Roland Karlsson, 2 months ago

Roland Karlsson wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

I think it depends on what you shoot, I shoot mostly landscapes and some of the results I've seen from the Q look quite horrible for that type of work (garish colours and smudged detail in the distance). However, I've seen some very nice portrait stuff from it. It may well depend on who's shooting and processing with it, but for landscape shots there is no doubt that to my eyes so far the Merrill is superior in what it can produce.

Yes, it all depends. And, as usual, everything gets exaggerated when doing side by side comparisons. Then you can see the difference in very small details. Things you normally may not care about.

It is true that the Merrill (out of the box) gives more texture and more visible detail in e.g. far away parts of a landscape. This gives it an extra punch. It looks sharp and exciting.

But, it is also true that (at least for me) when doing the side by side comparisons the Merrill looks manipulated. It looks like some special effect has been added in the post processing. Very impressive, but not real IMHO.

Often when post processing images I add some sharpening and some S-curve (i.e. contrast) and some color saturation etc. Things that add that extra. The image will then look better, but slightly overdone it will look unreal. I think the Merrill often do that - add slightly more than it should.

I think the thing for me is that you can tone down what the Merrill does in post, but you can never really replicate it coming the other way. I've seen plenty try but never quite manage it, that's why the three Merrills are unique cameras IMHO and why I'll shoot with them until Sigma reproduce what they can do in faster, newer, bodies, which may be never. I get what the Quattro can do, and I can see the appeal for some, it's just not the same for me.

-- hide signature --

“The most puzzling development in politics during the last decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.”
Mikhail Gorbachev
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Roland Karlsson
Forum ProPosts: 20,739Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to papillon_65, 2 months ago

papillon_65 wrote:

I think the thing for me is that you can tone down what the Merrill does in post, but you can never really replicate it coming the other way. I've seen plenty try but never quite manage it, that's why the three Merrills are unique cameras IMHO and why I'll shoot with them until Sigma reproduce what they can do in faster, newer, bodies, which may be never. I get what the Quattro can do, and I can see the appeal for some, it's just not the same for me.

It goes actually both ways. Too little local contrast might erase information that you cannot get back. Too much local contrast creates texture that might be hard to reduce without destroying detail.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma DP2 Quattro RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 18,014Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Roland Karlsson, 2 months ago

Roland Karlsson wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

I think the thing for me is that you can tone down what the Merrill does in post, but you can never really replicate it coming the other way. I've seen plenty try but never quite manage it, that's why the three Merrills are unique cameras IMHO and why I'll shoot with them until Sigma reproduce what they can do in faster, newer, bodies, which may be never. I get what the Quattro can do, and I can see the appeal for some, it's just not the same for me.

It goes actually both ways. Too little local contrast might erase information that you cannot get back. Too much local contrast creates texture that might be hard to reduce without destroying detail.

I can't say I've had any problem toning down shots from the Merrills, Nik Color Efex and other Nik tools do a great job of giving me pretty much any look I want.

-- hide signature --

“The most puzzling development in politics during the last decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.”
Mikhail Gorbachev
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PrebenR
Senior MemberPosts: 2,706
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Roland Karlsson, 2 months ago

Roland Karlsson wrote:

It goes actually both ways. Too little local contrast might erase information that you cannot get back. Too much local contrast creates texture that might be hard to reduce without destroying detail.

Exactly, to the point!

-- hide signature --

Out lightwriting with Sigma
«Kaos»

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PrebenR
Senior MemberPosts: 2,706
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to papillon_65, 2 months ago

papillon_65 wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

I think the thing for me is that you can tone down what the Merrill does in post, but you can never really replicate it coming the other way. I've seen plenty try but never quite manage it, that's why the three Merrills are unique cameras IMHO and why I'll shoot with them until Sigma reproduce what they can do in faster, newer, bodies, which may be never. I get what the Quattro can do, and I can see the appeal for some, it's just not the same for me.

It goes actually both ways. Too little local contrast might erase information that you cannot get back. Too much local contrast creates texture that might be hard to reduce without destroying detail.

I can't say I've had any problem toning down shots from the Merrills, Nik Color Efex and other Nik tools do a great job of giving me pretty much any look I want.

For landscape I take it? Try Merrill for portrait.

But in your experience from working with the quattro and it's RAW you cannot manage to change the look of the RAW files? Hmm...

-- hide signature --

Out lightwriting with Sigma
«Kaos»

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papillon_65
Forum ProPosts: 18,014Gear list
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to PrebenR, 2 months ago

PrebenR wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

papillon_65 wrote:

I think the thing for me is that you can tone down what the Merrill does in post, but you can never really replicate it coming the other way. I've seen plenty try but never quite manage it, that's why the three Merrills are unique cameras IMHO and why I'll shoot with them until Sigma reproduce what they can do in faster, newer, bodies, which may be never. I get what the Quattro can do, and I can see the appeal for some, it's just not the same for me.

It goes actually both ways. Too little local contrast might erase information that you cannot get back. Too much local contrast creates texture that might be hard to reduce without destroying detail.

I can't say I've had any problem toning down shots from the Merrills, Nik Color Efex and other Nik tools do a great job of giving me pretty much any look I want.

For landscape I take it? Try Merrill for portrait.

I have, it worked out very well.

But in your experience from working with the quattro and it's RAW you cannot manage to change the look of the RAW files? Hmm...

Well no, but it won't give me the micro-contrast and look I can get from a Merrill, and why would I buy a new camera and then try and get it to replicate what a camera I already own does? that would be a bit silly really wouldn't it?

-- hide signature --

Out lightwriting with Sigma
«Kaos»

-- hide signature --

“The most puzzling development in politics during the last decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.”
Mikhail Gorbachev
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/

 papillon_65's gear list:papillon_65's gear list
Sigma DP1 Merrill Sigma DP2 Merrill Fujifilm XF1 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DMillier
Forum ProPosts: 17,594
Like?
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?
In reply to Roland Karlsson, 2 months ago

The CCD vs CMOS debate keeps going because people are engaging in magical thinking.

It's the same as many as the debates in the audio world where double blind tests proves there is no difference but the placebo effect kicks in during sighted tests and many people find it almost impossible to let go of their magical thinking.

-- 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/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads