DPx best focal length poll

LMC54 · Dec 3, 2007

Always good to read your well thought out and considerate notes. I hope you are right and they are focused on the finality of the SD14 with satisfaction.
Regards,
Larry

NarrBL said:
Do appreciate your frustrations.

I am just thinking that by the evidence of many years, the camera
business is kind of ferocious, and not less now.

In developing a new thing, as you probably find in your own business,
it is very healthy to have diversity - more than one progress going
on.

This is especially true in a technology business, as you often enough
have roadblocks that wait on something or someone to make the next
step possible.

Also as I think Laurence has tried to suggest, there's a lot of
mileage to be made for all the Sigma cameras, by opening up new
markets like the one with professionals and advanced photographers
which the DP-1 has stated for its intent.

It's frustrating, I know, to have many of the
young-equipment-and-monkey crowd descend on this with their demanding
attitudes, but I suspect Sigma is keeping their own attention well
focused where it will actually do the most good.

Anyway, my intent is to suggest that the DP-1 effort isn't taking
away from the SD. I know there are a few loopholes apparently left
unexamined in stating this, but also that it is 'possible' these may
have some proper answers.

With regards,
Clive

LMC54 said:

JLK said:

What makes you think that they're not working on a next generation
SLR? My impression is that they have at least three groups of
engineers (lenses, dSLR, and the DP-1 guys)?

I don't think the DP-1 is going to sell nearly as many units as a
Canon Powershot 11000-X, but it will likely do very well. And having
held the preproduction unit, I can say that I'd be much more likely
to carry it around all the time.

You make some interesting comments about Sigma cheaping out---I've
found the SD14 to be an improvement in almost every area over the
SD10 (I still miss the two dials, and the new Foveon sensor has a
couple of quirks)---have you been bit with issues with yours?

--
Jim

Click to expand...

--
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=235

Click to expand...

--
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=235

SandyF · Dec 3, 2007

LMC54 said:
.....they are focused on the finality of the SD14

Larry, the 'finality of the SD14?'
what do you mean by that?

on the contrary for me, I think, Sigma can keep releasing those firmware updates with improvements! The SD14 gets better with each, 1.04's secret sauce, 1.05's ISO50, let's keep going... LOL. The only disadvantage is that just when I think I have the SD14 figured out, a firmware update changes it...
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann

LMC54 · Dec 3, 2007

I don't quite understand your insistence to nip me at my heels, I've stated what I feel and so have you. I think the issue is done or do you have to go on and on until I say "Uncle"?
Regards,
Larry

SandyF said:
LMC54 said:

.....they are focused on the finality of the SD14

Click to expand...

Larry, the 'finality of the SD14?'
what do you mean by that?
on the contrary for me, I think, Sigma can keep releasing those
firmware updates with improvements! The SD14 gets better with each,
1.04's secret sauce, 1.05's ISO50, let's keep going... LOL. The only
disadvantage is that just when I think I have the SD14 figured out, a
firmware update changes it...
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann

--
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=235

SandyF · Dec 3, 2007

Larry, really nothing personal, and I don't wish to 'nip.' On the contrary, I tend to write posts thinking of the silent readers, lurkers, as well as the person to whom I'm addressing a post. One thing I've learned about forums such as these, for everyone who comments, there are probably many times 10x as many readers --

Just to beat around the words one last time, 'finality' seems to imply, SD14 finished and done. Or as others have asked, is there a new SDx coming. Both of which I don't think is the case. I think the SD14 will continue to be updated/improved via firmware updates. Personally I think (but have no knowledge to back this up) that the rapid firmware updates we've received for the SD14 originate in part from R&D and what's being learned about the processing pipeline for the DP1. The two cameras have a certain symbiosis, even though they're very different.
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann

BJN · Dec 3, 2007

I don't buy the argument that the slow lens has to be huge Olympus provided an excellent 35mm 2.8 lens on the small Stylus series film cameras. These lenses didn't extend from the camera body and they covered full frame 35mm format.

Yes, I'm sure the same optical design on a microlens sensor would have significant light falloff. But Sigma's concept can incorporate an extending lens barrel. Considering the Sigma will likely be expensive, it should have a lens that's either fast or offers some limited excellent quality zoom range at a more moderate fastest aperture.

The concept camera lacks attention to details that make it look cheap and compromise ergonomics. Silver-on-silver buttons and legends don't cut it.

Clearly there's a lot of interest in a DP-like camera. If Sigma can't pull it off, I hope someone else will go after the niche.

--
BJN

Laurence Matson · Dec 3, 2007

You don't have to buy it, but it might help if you understood it.

In all likelihood (I don't have images of the mju-II, as it was called here) the lens extended into the body. It is hard to imagine how they did it otherwise.

And it is film and not digital. As has been discussed literally hundreds of times over the last years and months, the angle that light hits an imager is far more critical than with film.

I am going to assume that you understand the above.

Film is also less critical in terms of sharpness to the extent that pixel peepers had not been invented then and because the entire concept of extreme sharpness was not so advanced then as now with the exception those who actually printed larger than A5 and who used a grain focusser.

BJN said:
I don't buy the argument that the slow lens has to be huge Olympus
provided an excellent 35mm 2.8 lens on the small Stylus series film
cameras. These lenses didn't extend from the camera body and they
covered full frame 35mm format.

Yes, I'm sure the same optical design on a microlens sensor would
have significant light falloff. But Sigma's concept can incorporate
an extending lens barrel. Considering the Sigma will likely be
expensive, it should have a lens that's either fast or offers some
limited excellent quality zoom range at a more moderate fastest
aperture.

It has an extending lens barrel to get the distance right.

And if you do not understand how critical each millimeter is, then you likely did not follow the discussions relating to the M8 and the IR cutoff filter.

BJN said:
The concept camera lacks attention to details that make it look cheap
and compromise ergonomics. Silver-on-silver buttons and legends don't
cut it.

It is a concept camera and now in Alpha. I have no idea what cosmetic changes will appear in the final production model.

BJN said:
Clearly there's a lot of interest in a DP-like camera. If Sigma can't
pull it off, I hope someone else will go after the niche.

Funny that they have not yet, isn't it? That might help you understand that the problem is more difficult to solve than some think.

--
Laurence

My idea of good company is the fellowship of clever, well-informed people, who have a great deal of conversation and liberality of ideas.

Jane Austen

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/root
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd10
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com

wolfie · Dec 3, 2007

as Sigma has already said in explaining their f4 choice is to preserve the compact form - frankly I'd much rather a few extra ounces and bit bulkier body - even a non-retracting lens (lens mechanisms are usually the first thing to go wrong or get damaged).
--
Shoot the Light fantastic

Laurence Matson · Dec 3, 2007

Image quality is certainly not second unless I read that press release all wrong. The f/4 lens is designed to provide that. I am not sure f/2.8 or below would necessarily provide better image quality.

wolfie said:
as Sigma has already said in explaining their f4 choice is to
preserve the compact form - frankly I'd much rather a few extra
ounces and bit bulkier body - even a non-retracting lens (lens
mechanisms are usually the first thing to go wrong or get damaged).
--
Shoot the Light fantastic

--
Laurence

My idea of good company is the fellowship of clever, well-informed people, who have a great deal of conversation and liberality of ideas.

Jane Austen

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/root
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd10
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com

wolfie · Dec 3, 2007

This isn't going to be a "family snap-shot" camera, and it wont be cheap. I am hardly guessing when I reckon it will be in the same price range as Ricoh GR-D or budget DSLR with a f3.5-5.6 kit zoom.

To me the big problem is the compromise to make it a "pocket camera" - this should be a second or third variation offered, not the market pioneer. This means the slow f4 lens. If someone wants to pay a premium price to get the APS sensor I think they would want at least f2.8 to get some available light capability. I really want this camera to succeed - I really want something smaller than a DSLR that will get me past the small sensor smeary details.

To my mind a camera about the size of a Sony DSC-V3 would be OK and dont forget making us a wide and a telephoto converter as well!

By concentrating on pocket-size they compromise the whole success for a secondary , non-essential aim.
--
Shoot the Light fantastic

NarrBL · Dec 3, 2007

wolfie, I think Laurence covered many of the issues, and I think you and BJN are not having a full picture of what you ask for here.

As so many times reminded, film and digital sensors differ in their lens requirements. BJN says it but doesn't seem to observe the consequences of his knowledge in this driveby.

Have a look at a nearby lens capability to what you ask. 20mm focal length, f1.8 instead of 16mm/f2-2.8:

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/lens/wide/20_18.htm

Look at the view of the lens elements. See the size of that front element? See the length of the optical chain? That's what you need to get the higher light-gathering plus the near-parallel rays coming out on the sensor plane.

This lens weighs half a kilo, for its glass content. It is the better part of 4 inches in diameter and length (converting for you). That is absolutely monstrous for a DP-1 concept. As a ballpark - yes, an optimum DP-1 28mm would probably be a bit smaller. But still very large.

I would rather wait for the size advancements of a bio-eye sensor than any repeal of the physics/geometry that determines such lenses.

Hope this helps your imagining, and your sense of good judgement, each.

As well, personally not buying it about a Sony-size. It's much too large, and not elegant. Yes, both count, as we are speaking to desires of persons for a convenient, highly professional pocket camera here. As my opinion, for what it's worth.

Regards,
Clive

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner · Dec 3, 2007

wolfie said:
This isn't going to be a "family snap-shot" camera, and it wont be
cheap. I am hardly guessing when I reckon it will be in the same
price range as Ricoh GR-D or budget DSLR with a f3.5-5.6 kit zoom.
To me the big problem is the compromise to make it a "pocket camera"

this should be a second or third variation offered, not the market

pioneer.

Size is as you say a killer feature - in that any other fixed lens camera that has tried to go larger than pocket size, has killed itself off.

If I have a camera I cannot fit in my pocket, that means I am carrying a bag. If I have to lug a bag anyway (or a camera on a strap), then why not my DSLR with a lens or two? That is why in the end those cameras just do not gain traction. They serve no master well.

This is why a high-quality pocket sized camera is so crucial. Because people can buy it to complement the DSLR they already have, for times when they cannot have a DSLR with them.

wolfie said:
This means the slow f4 lens. If someone wants to pay a
premium price to get the APS sensor I think they would want at least
f2.8 to get some available light capability.

But large sensor in a small package is a primary design choice that drives everything else. You can buy plenty of cameras with smaller sensors and faster lenses today, so why not try something different?

wolfie said:
I really want this
camera to succeed - I really want something smaller than a DSLR that
will get me past the small sensor smeary details.
To my mind a camera about the size of a Sony DSC-V3 would be OK and
dont forget making us a wide and a telephoto converter as well!
By concentrating on pocket-size they compromise the whole success for
a secondary , non-essential aim.

Do you not see how the end of your second paragraph is at odds with your first? What you do want, great image quality or a small smeary sensor? Since you can already buy many small smeary sensors today, why is not that simply the most important design aspect, period?

If you really don't mind a camera larger than pocket size and you want a larger sensor, buy an SD-14 and superglue the 30mm f/1.4 onto it. Why is that solution not as valid for you as any other camera which cannot fit in a pocket?

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner · Dec 3, 2007

LMC54 said:
Look, Sigma won't gain squat from this venture but a blackeye
especially with a slow lens, most who use this camera will shoot in
the dark or poor lights for family shots.

Why? Generic P&S users are not the target market. People who have DSLR's and want a good quality camera when the DSLR is not on hand, are the market... so it would seem unlikely the cameras would mostly be used in low light, instead they will get used in all sorts of conditions just like other cameras today.

And then the times they are shooting in lower light, the image quality will be compared with a host of smaller sensored cameras that deliver very noisy images anyway so I fail to see a major issue.

LMC54 said:
They won't sell lenses for
it so there is no gain there

Except to lead people to understand what the sensor can deliver in the DSLR Sigma already sells today... How many people buying a DP-1 to complement something like a digital rebel might well move onto an SD-14 when it comes time for a new camera? There are many people that get very excited about images the camera produces, so given that is a primary motivator to get people looking at Sigma DSLR's it is paramount that you get that sensor into people's hands so they can see the effect for themselves with their own images.

LMC54 said:
and at the moment spending all their
camera building time on it when they should be spending all their
resources on the SD14 to straighten out all the shortcomings.

Which more buyers of Sigma cameras in general will assist, by bringing in more funds for R&D.

LMC54 said:
They
should be beefing up the SD14 hardware wise and software wise with
each new batch off the line.

I think that will come, undoubtedly they are working on new cameras in terms of DSLR's as well. But it's not like there is not great benefit to be seen down the road, both in terms of image processing (one can imagine the new image pipeline they are working on being used to deliver better in-camera JPG to either the SD-14 or a model after) and also just camera design in general (like working better with storage media, or improving firmware that works with the sensor).

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

LMC54 · Dec 3, 2007

I'm not an idiot and realize what's going on, but thanks for the lecture. I think you are misunderstanding my constructive views to make sure they don't short change what is a fine concept with poor parts or other choices to cut costs. (I don't agree with this project, especially with the lens choice. But who am I to say what they need.)

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
LMC54 said:

Look, Sigma won't gain squat from this venture but a blackeye
especially with a slow lens, most who use this camera will shoot in
the dark or poor lights for family shots.

Click to expand...

Why? Generic P&S users are not the target market. People who have
DSLR's and want a good quality camera when the DSLR is not on hand,
are the market... so it would seem unlikely the cameras would mostly
be used in low light, instead they will get used in all sorts of
conditions just like other cameras today.

And then the times they are shooting in lower light, the image
quality will be compared with a host of smaller sensored cameras that
deliver very noisy images anyway so I fail to see a major issue.

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

They won't sell lenses for
it so there is no gain there

Click to expand...

Except to lead people to understand what the sensor can deliver in
the DSLR Sigma already sells today... How many people buying a DP-1
to complement something like a digital rebel might well move onto an
SD-14 when it comes time for a new camera? There are many people
that get very excited about images the camera produces, so given that
is a primary motivator to get people looking at Sigma DSLR's it is
paramount that you get that sensor into people's hands so they can
see the effect for themselves with their own images.

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

and at the moment spending all their
camera building time on it when they should be spending all their
resources on the SD14 to straighten out all the shortcomings.

Click to expand...

Which more buyers of Sigma cameras in general will assist, by
bringing in more funds for R&D.

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

They
should be beefing up the SD14 hardware wise and software wise with
each new batch off the line.

Click to expand...

I think that will come, undoubtedly they are working on new cameras
in terms of DSLR's as well. But it's not like there is not great
benefit to be seen down the road, both in terms of image processing
(one can imagine the new image pipeline they are working on being
used to deliver better in-camera JPG to either the SD-14 or a model
after) and also just camera design in general (like working better
with storage media, or improving firmware that works with the sensor).

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

--
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=235

LMC54 · Dec 3, 2007

I would rather have a f2.8 and stop it down to f4. Through experience with lenses it seems a native f2.8 stopped down to f4 is better than a native f4 shot all the way open. Plus the added speed of f2.8 at 16.x mm (DOF would be decent for those who like everything in focus) would give a bit more creative options. As far as I know the more creative options there are the better your tool is.

Laurence Matson said:
wolfie said:

as Sigma has already said in explaining their f4 choice is to
preserve the compact form - frankly I'd much rather a few extra
ounces and bit bulkier body - even a non-retracting lens (lens
mechanisms are usually the first thing to go wrong or get damaged).
--
Shoot the Light fantastic

Click to expand...

--
Laurence

My idea of good company is the fellowship of clever, well-informed
people, who have a great deal of conversation and liberality of ideas.

Jane Austen

http://www.pbase.com/lmatson/root
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/root
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd10
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/sigma/sd9
http://www.beachbriss.com

--
http://www.fredmiranda.com/hosting/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=235

finalcutstudio · Dec 3, 2007

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
Size is as you say a killer feature - in that any other fixed lens
camera that has tried to go larger than pocket size, has killed
itself off.

If I have a camera I cannot fit in my pocket, that means I am
carrying a bag. If I have to lug a bag anyway (or a camera on a
strap), then why not my DSLR with a lens or two? That is why in the
end those cameras just do not gain traction. They serve no master
well.

This is why a high-quality pocket sized camera is so crucial.
Because people can buy it to complement the DSLR they already have,
for times when they cannot have a DSLR with them.

I'm not sure how pocketable is the 2" thick DP1. I certainly don't want it in my pants pocket (I got my wallet, cellphone, car keys in those already); and I don't normally wear a jacket or coat. So I would imagine that a small, traveler's bag would be necessary for people like myself. In which case, why not just bring a small DSLR, as you put it? Good question.

Search

DPx best focal length poll

LMC54

Forum Pro

SandyF

Forum Pro

LMC54

Forum Pro

SandyF

Forum Pro

BJN

Veteran Member

Laurence Matson

Forum Pro

wolfie

Senior Member

Laurence Matson

Forum Pro

wolfie

Senior Member

NarrBL

Veteran Member

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner

Forum Pro

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner

Forum Pro

LMC54

Forum Pro

LMC54

Forum Pro

finalcutstudio

Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts