What are SD9's shortcomings? Objective comments please.THANKS!

[Boris Furlan]

That's enough to justify not spending $1100 on immature technology.

MMMM....sorry not to be agree with such statment.....if you just want to take a look at my first photographs.....they are just about green subject....with really poor light....and in a experimenting phase.......

Not a mature technology...well....wath are you expecting from technology???

For me, I do really prefer be a beta tester of such an amazing technologic improvement, than a sheep following a "proved to be good" technology....which is aged just because of this...
(Hope I manage to express myself .....english is not my best way to do it....)
--
http://www.pbase.com/borisf
...you would certainly not ask to a four days old Lion to hunt his first
zebra.....so give me few months to get some more decent
shots...thanks ...

 

[David Hughes]

Dmitriy, what camera do you shoot with? May we see some of your photos?

tx

How much better?

 

[Chris Lewis167065]

My money says he wouldn't dare do it.

tx

How much better?

 

[Champa]

tx

How much better?

--
Chris and David in case you are interested to look and see for yourself.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=6033785

CA
http://www.pbase.com/champa
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9

 

[Chris Lewis167065]

That's just because he THOUGHT he had a good shot.

 

[sg10]

May I ask what flash you use with your SD9?

Certainly. I don't mind saying I screwed up and bought the EF-500 DG ST instead of the super. In my defense, it was bundled so cost effectively I think it was darn near free.

I like it, it works very well, but I recently ordered the "Super" and will probably ebay the ST. Reason: I didn't realize the 1/180th shutter speed limit would affect manual shots too. I want the ability to synch the flash with faster shutters. Some say the "Super" works as advertised, up to 1/6000th right out of the box, others said their camera needed adjusting from Sigma to enable that feature, so its still somewhat of a gamble. The other features of the Super make it worthwhile to me either way.

Still, the ST is a great flash that I've been very happy with.

Your posts are very helpful, and your photos are very impressive.

Thank you. I'm a rank amateur, pilot by trade, who is trying to get better. That said, some 6000 shots trying to overcome the limits of SuperCCD3, to my great frustration, makes one a much better photographer. Seriously.

Thank you Sigma for confirming it wasn't just me. :^D
--
http://www.pbase.com/imageprocessing/sd9

 

[tammons]

The greens in that shot look about right. What WB were you using.

tx

How much better?

--
Chris and David in case you are interested to look and see for
yourself.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=6033785

CA
http://www.pbase.com/champa
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9

 

[sg10]

Yellowish skin tones, dull greens, yellows oversaturated in
general, blues are too blue, noise, limited sensitivity, and SA
mount. Can't see nothing else.

I actually agree with that, though it is simply the SD-9's AWB bias that you are adverse to. SD-9 WB is completely unrelated to image quality since WB is never permanently set by the SD-9, it is only temporarily tagged to the RAW file.

Your repeated concerns about WB is nothing more than negative-transfer from your Canon experience. The SD-9 doesn't shoot in-camera JPEG, so a slight WB miss doesn't unrecoverably ruin the image by biasing limited dynamic range in the wrong direction. Nor is there any obligation to even use AWB, you can shoot custom WB, a preset, or a shoot a separate WB reference (even after the original shot). In all cases and using any method, though, the current WB tag is a simply a non-issue, as it is never set permanently.

SD-9 color acuracy is simply superb once images are temporarily tagged with the proper WB. You really need to understand this issue to understand how a pro-JPEG disposition limits you in very practical ways.

 

[Dmitriy Belenko]

I actually agree with that, though it is simply the SD-9's AWB bias
that you are adverse to. SD-9 WB is completely unrelated to image
quality since WB is never permanently set by the SD-9, it is only
temporarily tagged to the RAW file.

Guess what? I can shoot RAW with Canon too. Everything you said is applicable to Canon RAW images. I have an option to use JPEG for less critical shots (or to take more shots on an extended outing) though, which you don't have.

 

[Cliff. Johnston]

Dmitriy,

Oooh, another troll has entered the realm. Do yourself (and others who might be misslead by you) a favor and check out this forum for the latest information on your missinformation. Then get some hands-on experience with an SD-9. Finally, come on back and report your findings to us. I'll lay you 10:1 odds that you'll be singing another tune. I'll drink to that!

Cliff.

That's enough to justify not spending $1100 on immature technology.

--
Cliff. Johnston

 

[Zone8]

Guess what? I can shoot RAW with Canon too. Everything you said is
applicable to Canon RAW images. I have an option to use JPEG for
less critical shots (or to take more shots on an extended outing)
though, which you don't have.

You clearly, as I said in an earlier reply that you seemed to totally misread, have no idea of the workings of the excellent SD9 so please only post facts, not conjecture. What you are claiming we have seen all before by trollers. They just go away when challenged to show some of their "fantastic" own images - which you were asked to do. The camera can shoot in several resolution qualities, so please do read the information before posting spurious non-truths.

There are hundreds of fine SD9 images to view in full size. So, where are your "superior" shots for us to drool over.

Zone8

 

[sg10]

I actually agree with that, though it is simply the SD-9's AWB bias
that you are adverse to. SD-9 WB is completely unrelated to image
quality since WB is never permanently set by the SD-9, it is only
temporarily tagged to the RAW file.

Guess what? I can shoot RAW with Canon too. Everything you said is
applicable to Canon RAW images. I have an option to use JPEG for
less critical shots (or to take more shots on an extended outing)
though, which you don't have.

What does that have to do with your assertion that WB is a problem with the Sd-9? Read the title of your original message.

And if bandwidth is ever or could ever be a concern, why would anyone shoot not only a JPEG, but an interpolated-JPEG?? JPEG permanently destroys dynamic range, permantantly sets the WB (usually slightly to significantly incorrectly, with any camera), reduces the color palette to about 1/8192nd its original size, and introduces unrecoverable artifacts. Interpolation then adds even more artifacts, and more importantly consumes 3x the necessary pixel bandwidth.

RAW vs. RAW, ok, it could be a matter of taste to opt for the generally more versitile, lower color-res and not very sharp 10D. But by any objective measure, a 5M sensor 36-bit 68B color image from an SD-9 is of indisputably higher quality than a 6M sensor, 8M color lossy JPEG, from any digital camera.

So of course the SD-9 has an option for less critical shots, its called mdium res. And guess how many MPs an SD-9 medium-res image has after interpolation (which obviously happens out-of-camera with RAW)? You guessed right: 3024 x 2016, 6MP. And you better believe medium resolution is a bandwidth hog (but only out of camera) at roughly 30MB required per fully lossless, 36-bit color image.

--
http://www.pbase.com/imageprocessing/sd9

 

[tammons]

Guys, I think you are beating a dead horse, er umm, troll.

I used to think a lot like this guy and its obvious he owns a Canon, but does not own a SD9. I have both the 10D and the SD9 and have owned the the S2 in the past and all I can say is if he owned a SD9 his posts would be positive towards the SD9, rather than so negative. As far as I am concerned these remarks don't have a whole lot of meret and even with all the SD9 shortfalls, like dull imbalanced color and a flaky auto WB, among other things, the SD9 is one of the most under rated cameras out there. Color is an easy fix, but its tough to create a razer sharp photo from a fuzzy file. Actually I dont think the color is that great out of the 10D either.

I just hope they come out with a SD9 pro model because I would buy one of those too.
Watch in about 3 month he will be back, only owning a SD9.

I actually agree with that, though it is simply the SD-9's AWB bias
that you are adverse to. SD-9 WB is completely unrelated to image
quality since WB is never permanently set by the SD-9, it is only
temporarily tagged to the RAW file.

Guess what? I can shoot RAW with Canon too. Everything you said is
applicable to Canon RAW images. I have an option to use JPEG for
less critical shots (or to take more shots on an extended outing)
though, which you don't have.

What does that have to do with your assertion that WB is a problem
with the Sd-9? Read the title of your original message.

And if bandwidth is ever or could ever be a concern, why would
anyone shoot not only a JPEG, but an interpolated-JPEG?? JPEG
permanently destroys dynamic range, permantantly sets the WB
(usually slightly to significantly incorrectly, with any camera),
reduces the color palette to about 1/8192nd its original size, and
introduces unrecoverable artifacts. Interpolation then adds even
more artifacts, and more importantly consumes 3x the necessary
pixel bandwidth.

RAW vs. RAW, ok, it could be a matter of taste to opt for the
generally more versitile, lower color-res and not very sharp 10D.
But by any objective measure, a 5M sensor 36-bit 68B color image
from an SD-9 is of indisputably higher quality than a 6M sensor, 8M
color lossy JPEG, from any digital camera.

So of course the SD-9 has an option for less critical shots, its
called mdium res. And guess how many MPs an SD-9 medium-res image
has after interpolation (which obviously happens out-of-camera
with RAW)? You guessed right: 3024 x 2016, 6MP. And you better
believe medium resolution is a bandwidth hog (but only out of
camera) at roughly 30MB required per fully lossless, 36-bit color
image.

--
http://www.pbase.com/imageprocessing/sd9

 

[sprockett]

Hi tammons,

though i've pretty much decided on a SD9, can i ask how the interface of the SD9 is compared to the 10D?

I've been using canon's pretty much all the time. (Non Dslr)
and i've owned both the G3 and the G5 as well.

Menu Navigation for that is SUPERB, and soooooooo intuitive.

The image review is also sooooooo speedy, offering 10 levels of zoom and super speedy scrollin up and down an image when zoomed in.

Im pretty sure the 10D also is pretty good interms of button layout (based on experience with other canon slrs)

How does the SD9 perform in that respect?

I hope the software isnt sluggish like Nikon (sorry, owned both the coolpix 880 and the 5700. Horible!)

Thanks!

 

[Dmitriy Belenko]

Repeat after me: "JPEG has nothing to do with dynamic range". Maybe if you repeat it one hundred times you'll understand the tecnhical and non-technical explanations given to you above by two people already.

I've never said that SD 9 has white balance problem. White balance problems are easy to fix - just take a shot of a white sheet of paper and adjust multipliers for individual colors.

SD9 has COLOR balance problem, and that's almost impossible to fix because there's no way in photoshop to shift or change the color sensitivity diagram of every individual color sensor.

I actually agree with that, though it is simply the SD-9's AWB bias
that you are adverse to. SD-9 WB is completely unrelated to image
quality since WB is never permanently set by the SD-9, it is only
temporarily tagged to the RAW file.

Guess what? I can shoot RAW with Canon too. Everything you said is
applicable to Canon RAW images. I have an option to use JPEG for
less critical shots (or to take more shots on an extended outing)
though, which you don't have.

What does that have to do with your assertion that WB is a problem
with the Sd-9? Read the title of your original message.

And if bandwidth is ever or could ever be a concern, why would
anyone shoot not only a JPEG, but an interpolated-JPEG?? JPEG
permanently destroys dynamic range, permantantly sets the WB
(usually slightly to significantly incorrectly, with any camera),
reduces the color palette to about 1/8192nd its original size, and
introduces unrecoverable artifacts. Interpolation then adds even
more artifacts, and more importantly consumes 3x the necessary
pixel bandwidth.

RAW vs. RAW, ok, it could be a matter of taste to opt for the
generally more versitile, lower color-res and not very sharp 10D.
But by any objective measure, a 5M sensor 36-bit 68B color image
from an SD-9 is of indisputably higher quality than a 6M sensor, 8M
color lossy JPEG, from any digital camera.

So of course the SD-9 has an option for less critical shots, its
called mdium res. And guess how many MPs an SD-9 medium-res image
has after interpolation (which obviously happens out-of-camera
with RAW)? You guessed right: 3024 x 2016, 6MP. And you better
believe medium resolution is a bandwidth hog (but only out of
camera) at roughly 30MB required per fully lossless, 36-bit color
image.

--
http://www.pbase.com/imageprocessing/sd9

 

[Jun2]

I agree with you. The color problem of SD9 is beyond WB. Looked at the spetrum. You never get strong clean green and red. Tammons can correct the color problem in PS. I find it is very difficult to do without alert other color of the image.

I think Tammons' comments are more objective, carrying useful information whether or not you agree with him. A lot of others just have my camera is better than yours attitude. That leads the discussion to no where.

Jun2

I've never said that SD 9 has white balance problem. White balance
problems are easy to fix - just take a shot of a white sheet of
paper and adjust multipliers for individual colors.

SD9 has COLOR balance problem, and that's almost impossible to fix
because there's no way in photoshop to shift or change the color
sensitivity diagram of every individual color sensor.

I actually agree with that, though it is simply the SD-9's AWB bias
that you are adverse to. SD-9 WB is completely unrelated to image
quality since WB is never permanently set by the SD-9, it is only
temporarily tagged to the RAW file.

Guess what? I can shoot RAW with Canon too. Everything you said is
applicable to Canon RAW images. I have an option to use JPEG for
less critical shots (or to take more shots on an extended outing)
though, which you don't have.

What does that have to do with your assertion that WB is a problem
with the Sd-9? Read the title of your original message.

And if bandwidth is ever or could ever be a concern, why would
anyone shoot not only a JPEG, but an interpolated-JPEG?? JPEG
permanently destroys dynamic range, permantantly sets the WB
(usually slightly to significantly incorrectly, with any camera),
reduces the color palette to about 1/8192nd its original size, and
introduces unrecoverable artifacts. Interpolation then adds even
more artifacts, and more importantly consumes 3x the necessary
pixel bandwidth.

RAW vs. RAW, ok, it could be a matter of taste to opt for the
generally more versitile, lower color-res and not very sharp 10D.
But by any objective measure, a 5M sensor 36-bit 68B color image
from an SD-9 is of indisputably higher quality than a 6M sensor, 8M
color lossy JPEG, from any digital camera.

So of course the SD-9 has an option for less critical shots, its
called mdium res. And guess how many MPs an SD-9 medium-res image
has after interpolation (which obviously happens out-of-camera
with RAW)? You guessed right: 3024 x 2016, 6MP. And you better
believe medium resolution is a bandwidth hog (but only out of
camera) at roughly 30MB required per fully lossless, 36-bit color
image.

--
http://www.pbase.com/imageprocessing/sd9

 

[tammons]

Hi tammons,

though i've pretty much decided on a SD9, can i ask how the
interface of the SD9 is compared to the 10D?

The 10D has a higher quality body in general, a stronger body all around with a great battery system.

I've been using canon's pretty much all the time. (Non Dslr)
and i've owned both the G3 and the G5 as well.

Menu Navigation for that is SUPERB, and soooooooo intuitive.
The image review is also sooooooo speedy, offering 10 levels of
zoom and super speedy scrollin up and down an image when zoomed in.

The SD9 and the 10D image review is fast and actually the body controls are a lot alike with the individual button approach. I prefer the SD9 control setup barely over the 10D control setup. The SD9 is just a bit simpler layout.

Im pretty sure the 10D also is pretty good interms of button layout
(based on experience with other canon slrs)

Its good too.

How does the SD9 perform in that respect?

Its fine. It eats batteries though. I get about 100-150 shots per set. The 10D gets about 500 per charge.

I hope the software isnt sluggish like Nikon (sorry, owned both the
coolpix 880 and the 5700. Horible!)

The Sd9 is fast reviewing and shooting, but so is the 10D. The 10D has a slower startup and wakeup than the SD9, about 2 sec each vs maybe .25 sec. for the SD9

You are missing a lot of other items though. You really need to get your hands on both these cameras at the least in a store and take some photos and play around with them for a bit. They are drastically different cameras. I think the 10D is more of a well balanced all around camera that is great for low light photography and the lens selection is superb, but the images are very very soft. Personally I would prefer to shoot a SD9 and get razor sharp photos and deal with the SD9 limitations.

Thanks!

 

[spacesuit6]

Be sure to get the EF-500 Super WITH THE "DG" designation. It should be the same price, and is the only one that supports S-TTL metering with the SD9 (so i'm told).

I originally bought the EF-500 Super (w/o the DG) and it didn't expose properly at all, most times even out of the range that auto exposure compensation could fix. Had to send it back and buy the DG ... a three-week process.

best of luck,

eric

May I ask what flash you use with your SD9?

Your posts are very helpful, and your photos are very impressive.

--
eric goeres ~ goeres.com

 

[spacesuit6]

I was super worried about the clipping, too (as in Askey's review), but it hasn't happened yet, and I look for it all the time.

I'm tinking maybe this problem got solved on recent models shipping now?

eric

can i ask how come ur old SD9 had the problem and ur current one
doesnt?

is it a FIRMware fix? or just batch related?

Is there any repeatable TEST taht i can do to confirm my unit
doesnt suffer from clipping ? (i saw the clipping pic.. its god
awful!)

also where did u get the 1100 deal including the 24-70ex from?
thats SUPERB!!!

Thanks!

If you need to shoot low light or high iso and dont mind soft
images the 10D is a good choice, with the S2 as a 2nd choice.
Actually the S2 is a much better camera than the 10D, it just does
not have a mirror lockup and can not meter through a manual lens.
The S2 is not as sharp as the SD9 but way ahead of the 10D. It also
has better color out of the camera than either the 10D or SD9. The
S2 is quieter than the SD9 but not as quiet as the 10D.

If you want super sharp images and dont need out of camera jpegs
and are going to shoot in good light, the SD9 blows all the other
cameras away.

Ive been BLOWN away by:

1. SD9 Price
2. SD9 Images

WHat the HELL is canon up to? I've been a long canon fan, and
after seeing a thread on another forum, i now see what ive beeen
missing all along!!

I more or less confirmed that i was going to get a 10D, having seen
sample images from a 10D, i know more or less what im gonna get...

I am still trying to figure that one out myself. I think canon is
more interested in capuring the whole Dslr camera market than
making their cameras produce the best and sharpest photos.

Can anyone share EXACTLY what are SD9's shortcomings over the 10D are?

From the review, I learnt that:
1. AF Issues

None for me really. It is a little slower than the 10D

2. 2 FPS vs 3FPS

I am not an action shooter.

3. 15 sec max exposure, and 1 SEC on iso 200 onwards
4.No built-in flash.

Built in flases are not really strong enough for any serious
shooting anyway, but it would be nice for flash fill.

5. Limited to RAW X3F files that need to be converted.

So far I have owned the S2 and the 10D and on both of those cameras
I shot raw 95% of the time. You get much higher quality from raw.
Now I have a 717 as a Jpeg camera.

6. not so good night exposures

Thats a real downer, but its a tradoff I was willing to take,
although I have seen some good nightshots here and there.

7. Color clipping once a certain color is overexposed (stated in
dpreview, is this still happening with the newer batches?)

I had this problem with my initial SD9, but the one I have now is
fine. Actually my 10D is a lot worse about blowing out than my SD9.

8. Poor greens

Well the colors from the SD9 in my opinion are dull. Check theis
link and look at the spectrum comparison. It is evident they are
dull compared to the D60.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/sigma9sd/
These are easy to fix. A lot easier than trying to sharpen a 10D
photo.
Also check this thread for corrected colors.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=6012278

Qns:
1.Any other caveats i shd look out for?

Try one out if you get a chance. Also the SD9 is not IR sensative.
Plan on buying some NR software like neatimage.

2.Also, how is AF compared to a 10D?

The 10D is faster, but I dont have any problems with sigma EX lenses.

3. How many shots can 4AAs last me? and do i HAVE to use the
lithiiums? can i just use the 4AAs?

Both sets and about 1-150 shots. I check the histogram almost every
shot so I get about 100 shots.

4. is there flash compensation?

Do you mean a Sync, or WB?

5. I will be using it for both landscape as well as portrait (model
shoot), would the worser color reproduction affect me greatly?

I think the SD9 makes a better controlled light camera than
anything else once you have a custom WB setup, the color should be
fine. A lot of pros use the S2 and that would be my 2nd choice if
you dont mind comprimising some sharpness.

6. Finally, since this is a relatively older camera, would it risk
obsolescence or drastic price decreases (incase i decide to sell it)

I really dont think you can go too wrong. I bought my camera with a
28-70ex lens and a 512cf card for $1100. I guess you could buy a
10D with a canon 24-70L lens for $2800, but you are not going to
get sharper photos.

7.

Currently, at the $1000 price level,. its UNBELIEVABLE value for
me....
Im a student, so even a 400 price difference (btw 10D) is a lot to
me...

To all SD9 users:
would u honestly tell me to get this, or a 10D?

Thats a really hard question because they are such diferent
cameras. See the comments at the top.
For good light I prefer the SD9, absolutely.
For low light conditions the 10D or the S2 are the best.
And for IR I use a 717, but the S2 is a super IR camera too.

hope u can hepl me out.. THANKS A TRILLION!

--
eric goeres ~ goeres.com

 

[David Hughes]

Looked at the shot.

Nice shot. Nice and even. Colors work. Has a slightly flat/Bayer feel to it. Overall, a thumbs up on the shot. Well done.

Given what I saw in the photograph, lighting conditions, background, distance to subject, my limited experience with my Sd9, etc, in my opinion the SD9 would have rendered a better image, not that this one was bad. Contrary, to me it worked nicely. I just have a sense the SD9 would have provided more.

david

tx

How much better?

--
Chris and David in case you are interested to look and see for
yourself.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=6033785

CA
http://www.pbase.com/champa
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9

--
http://david.oldcolo.com/gallery/sd9
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9