DP1 replacing my G9 as dSLR alternative part 1

Just finished my first day playing with the DP1 and thought I would share the results. For background, I primarily shoot with a 1DsM3 and large collection of Canon lenses - with a focus on natural landscapes, architecture and some street photography. I shoot RAW only, don't care about movie mode, face recognition etc. I was looking for a high quality camera with DSLR-like controls and excellent image quality that I could use instead of my 1Ds when :

1. I am off on non-photography related travel but want to still have the ability to capture interesting moments should they present themselves.

2. I am hiking, biking or climbing aggressively enough that hauling a 1-series body plus lenses would be difficult/impossible.

3. I am traveling with the 1Ds in a pack on my back but want to somethign I can "whip out" or keep around my neck during activities for easy access. (yes, that sounds pretty lazy but I find when dead tired on a trek that stopping, taking off a pack, fishing out an SLR, possibly changing lenses, shooting - and then putting it all back - can be enough to cause you to pass on certain photo ops. Yes, I've got a Lowepro Slingshot and a Fastpack and a rotation 360 and a primus - none are as easy as a camera around the neck and none are suitable for hard-core trekking - and the 360 and primus don't hold a 1-series body))

Up until this time, a Canon G9 has been filing all the needs above. And frankly, the G9 is a great little point and shoot. Fantastic build quality, great controls (particularly like the ISO dial and Canon-SLR-like wheel on the back). It's not terribly fast but is fast enough for me, has good IS and a nice zoom range - although it could be wider. It also has a very tiny but useable OVF that saves on battery life and works in bright conditions. The LCD is 3", very bright and clear (although not perfect on color display IMHO - can look red to me at times).

So why replace it at all? Two words: Image quality. The G9 has pretty good images quality for a P&S, certainly one of the best on the market - but it is a long way from SLR level. Even at ISO 80 (the lowest setting on the G9) blue skies and other smooth colors are somewhat noisy. And dynamic range is weak - it is pretty easy to blow highlights with it.

[cont ...]

Enter the DP1. Coming right to the point, I find the DP1 to be somewhat (or in some cases greatly) inferior to the G9 on most counts with one exception: image quality. Fortunately for the DP1, that is a pretty darn important point to have in its favor. On the other points: build quality, LCD, speed, auto-focus, interface, focal length(s), RAW write times, lens cover, handling - to name a few - the G9 is, in my opinion, better. In some cases much better (such as the LCD) in others just modestly (both are well built, the G9 just slightly better to my eye).

That said, the DP1 does have a few other advantages worth noting besides IQ. The manual focus mode on the G9 is basically a waste in my mind. Incremental steps are too large and there is a bit of a lag. The DP1 has a much better manual focus - the best of any P&S I've used.

Also, the DP1 is somewhat lighter than the G9. The DP1 external OVF (which has been somewhat maligned by many users) is actually quite nice by P&S standards. Far better than a grainy EVF and much bigger/brighter than the G9's little OVF. It makes the camera a little bigger when attached but makes no difference when worn around your neck. Plus it is very small and can be stored/carried off-camera effortlessly.

In use the DP1 reminds a bit of GX100 I replaced with the G9. The GX100 handles a little better and is a zoom (although relateively short), but they still remind me of one another - certainly much closer in feel/use than the G9, which is quite different.

All of the charges against the DP1 are generally true - slower operation, slow AF, weak LCD, poor low light focus. However, all the complaints leveled against the camera had my expectations so low in this regard that I was actually pleasantly surprized by the camera. Its not THAT slow. In decent light the focus isn't too bad. Listening to some people, the camera sounds like a prototype that barely works. That is simply not true: it certainly works fine, just not as well is some regards as some other nice P&S cameras (which, btw, are a lot less expensive).

For my purposes (primarily landscapes/cityscapes), the camera works quite nicely. Image quality is very high and - I might say - quite strange. The files are rather small in resolution (2640x1760) - but an image captured in good light and zoomed to 100% is incredibly clean - nearly "perfect" in a way of speaking. My G9 may be 12 MP, but at 100% mag (even shot at = ISO 80) there is junk all over the image. Not so with the DP1. Colors come out a little strange in Sigma's software, but once adjusted the pictures are good - really good. They upres very nicely with Blow Up or PS bicubic. Sigma says it is a 14mp camera but those are a very different type of pixels than we are used to talking about. For comparision to the many Bayer-sensor cameras on the market, I'd say you can upres to the equivalent of 8-9mp Bayer-senor SLR quality images. Is doesn't hang with the 5D at 12 MP and FF and is certainly not nipping at the heels of the 1DsM3 but is does seem comparable to a Canon 30D quality image after up-resing the very clean 2640x1760 image (this is non-scientific, just my estimated feel).

In end, the DP1 is a unique proposition. Small pluses and minuses aside, I'd summarize it like this: No zoom, 28mm prime, slower operation and serious post-processing work - in exchange for image quality that you'll only get from a good SLR/Lens combo. The DP1 is ultimately in a league of its own. If you expect dSLR like performance (other than image quality), you'll hate it. If you expect it to have the P&S features of a G9 plus SLR image quality, you'll be let down. If you are not "into photography" but just want take snapshots, you will quickly return it. But if you are looking to capture exceptional images with something smaller than a bulky SLR - and understand the means some compromise - the DP1 is a camera you'll likely find makes a great supplement to a good dSLR system. I'm sold.

Closing thought - I believe much of the angst over the DP1 comes from what it could someday be. Something with G9 (or better features) and DP1 image quality. That camera is probably not about to burst onto the scene anytime soon, but the possibility that it could be in hand sometime in the next 2 years seems quite real - and very exciting!

A balanced and thoughtful review. I share practically all your sentiments. As an alternative, did you consider the Olympus e-420 with its pancake lens? After trying the DP1 for a period, I am split between whether its slowness would ultimately frustrate me more than the increased bulk of the smallest DSLR.

I don't buy the almost arrogant attitude of some that slowness is a virtue in a camera. Thoughtfulness is definitely a prerequisite for good photography, but a responsive camera can (in most types of photography) help you realize the images you envisage. Having great IQ in only the images you managed to get is not the same as having great IQ in all the images you intended to take.

Many thanks for posting that. Am always keen to hear what serious DSLR users think of the DP1.

I'm a compact camera user myself - for me the DP1 is a true breath of fresh air in terms of IQ if you shoot RAW.

-------------------------------------------

Owner of a Sigma DP1, Fuji F31fd and Panasonic TZ5

This sums up perfectly what I am experiencing also coming from a G7!

slow, but workable, who needs 200pictures a day.
files are perfectly clean and that's what matters!

Let sigma/foveon be in it's own league, staying away from mediocrity and mainstream.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ronaldbunnik/

Yes, I did consider the e-420 w/50mm equivalent pancake as an alternative. The e-420 is a compelling device. As an actual DSLR, you get a prism viewfinder w/data in it, which is wonderful. Handling is much better than any P&S style camera including the DP1 or G9. Speed is good compared to a P&S as well (although nothing like a higher-end dSLR). And, of course, you can put on other lenses which greatly enhances its versatility.

I ultimately decided against it because it is simply way to big. What? It is the smallest DSLR around, you say? True, very true. And I really kind of like the small format. However, it is much larger than the DP1. I've seen the form factor comparison that some thoughtful person posted here on dpreview. However, held in hand, the e-420 is a lot bigger. I found myself thinking "If I go this big, maybe I just go for the new Canon XSI, which is really not that much bigger. Then I can use all of my nice L glass on it AND my 1Ds, get better telephoto on the long stuff etc." True, there is no canon pancake lens but it just seemed too close to the XSI in terms of size (and lower quality in terms of IQ) to go that route. And I don't see the e-420 + small protective case going conveniently in a large pocket, small hiking pack or being worn around the neck while treking or moving vigorously.

Speaking personally, the 50mm equivalent lens is not the best for landscapes. It may work great for other folks but is a bit narrow for me. With a set of 2 pancake lenses (say 28 and 50 mm equivalent) I might have been more tempted. Also, in comparing IQ, I believe that the DP1 has an edge over the e-420. Of course, the e-420 is more versatile and it is faster, so you might get more keepers and certainly could crank out more shots at different exposures in a shorter period of time. But a well captured DP1 image would generally, in my opinion, exclipse the e-420.

All that said (if you can't tell) I was, and am, tempted by the e-420. It was actually holding it in hand and seeing its size that pushed me to the DP1. And that was before I had held a DP1, which actually turned out to be somewhat smaller than I expected.

One thought - if you had a need for a small, lightweight kit and were not going to have a big gun (say 40D/5D size and larger) as your core system - either because of size or cost - the e-420 makes a very interesting option. With the pancake it is very small and inexpensive but it can also take some nice lenses and function as a full-dSLR system. Or if you were going to travel light but not that light (my 1Ds + selection of L glass for travel is always a heavy, dedicated bag) it might be just right for you. Certainly take a look at it. If you can't live with the slow performance but need decent IQ and smaller size - well, the e-420 might be the best game in town.

Hope that helps!

Pygoscelis said:

A balanced and thoughtful review. I share practically all your
sentiments. As an alternative, did you consider the Olympus e-420
with its pancake lens? After trying the DP1 for a period, I am split
between whether its slowness would ultimately frustrate me more than
the increased bulk of the smallest DSLR.

I don't buy the almost arrogant attitude of some that slowness is a
virtue in a camera. Thoughtfulness is definitely a prerequisite for
good photography, but a responsive camera can (in most types of
photography) help you realize the images you envisage. Having great
IQ in only the images you managed to get is not the same as having
great IQ in all the images you intended to take.

Click to expand...

Indeed, the DP1 has it's biggest market for people who don't view it as their only camera.

dtedesco said:

Just finished my first day playing with the DP1 and thought I would
share the results. For background, I primarily shoot with a 1DsM3
and large collection of Canon lenses - with a focus on natural
landscapes, architecture and some street photography. I shoot RAW
only, don't care about movie mode, face recognition etc. I was
looking for a high quality camera with DSLR-like controls and
excellent image quality that I could use instead of my 1Ds when :

1. I am off on non-photography related travel but want to still have
the ability to capture interesting moments should they present
themselves.

2. I am hiking, biking or climbing aggressively enough that hauling
a 1-series body plus lenses would be difficult/impossible.

3. I am traveling with the 1Ds in a pack on my back but want to
somethign I can "whip out" or keep around my neck during activities
for easy access. (yes, that sounds pretty lazy but I find when dead
tired on a trek that stopping, taking off a pack, fishing out an SLR,
possibly changing lenses, shooting - and then putting it all back -
can be enough to cause you to pass on certain photo ops. Yes, I've
got a Lowepro Slingshot and a Fastpack and a rotation 360 and a
primus - none are as easy as a camera around the neck and none are
suitable for hard-core trekking - and the 360 and primus don't hold a
1-series body))

Up until this time, a Canon G9 has been filing all the needs above.
And frankly, the G9 is a great little point and shoot. Fantastic
build quality, great controls (particularly like the ISO dial and
Canon-SLR-like wheel on the back). It's not terribly fast but is
fast enough for me, has good IS and a nice zoom range - although it
could be wider. It also has a very tiny but useable OVF that saves
on battery life and works in bright conditions. The LCD is 3", very
bright and clear (although not perfect on color display IMHO - can
look red to me at times).

So why replace it at all? Two words: Image quality. The G9 has
pretty good images quality for a P&S, certainly one of the best on
the market - but it is a long way from SLR level. Even at ISO 80
(the lowest setting on the G9) blue skies and other smooth colors are
somewhat noisy. And dynamic range is weak - it is pretty easy to
blow highlights with it.

[cont ...]

Click to expand...

Neither the Sigma or the G9 satisfy my needs for a second small camera - I will not spend money for these cameras. Let's wait for something like a Canon G10 with a bigger sensor while using the Canon 5D.

There is enough room between the price tags of a Leica M8 and a Sigma DP1 to create a good product.

That helps a lot: thank you for the considered reply.

Neither the DP1 nor an e-420 would ever be my primary camera, but I have been really enjoying carrying a G9 with me everywhere, and want something to replace that. The G9 is a great camera - beautifully thought out and it does a creditable job for such a small sensor: but given that I take many more photos because I now have a camera with me at vitually all times, I often wish that the "keepers" were not limited by the sensor's IQ (ie the limited DR and increased noise that go hand-in-hand with such a small size).

It seems to me that there are only two viable solutions at the moment: (i) big sensor in compact camera (ie the DP1) or (ii) smallest possible DSLR (ie e-420). The difficulty is that neither is a perfect solution. The DP1 has the desired IQ, but comes with a reasonably long list of cons (some of which are the result of being a compact camera and some are just poor design decisions on the part of Sigma). The e-420 also has the desired IQ (unlike you, I'd probably give a slight edge to the e-420 in the images I've analysed so far, but suffice to say they are both excellent and IQ from either camera would be a huge step up from the G9) but comes with a number of cons too. It's bigger and, I agree with you, that I would prefer a wider lens than the 50mm-equivalent pancake. However, as a test, I've forced myself to use only a "normal" lens and I've actually found it to be quite good (also, Olympus apparently have a wide-angle pancake in prototype stage at least).

So it really comes down to size. In this area the DP1 has the edge, although neither camera is really pocketable (also, the viewfinder is an absolute necessity for the DP1 given the poor LCD, which adds to the bulk). When I used a DP1, I put it in a small belt pouch, which is my preferred method of transporting my "carry everywhere camera". I figure that if I can just find a small, tight-fitting neoprene case for the e-420, it should be equally manageable - but finding such a case has proved elusive.

The standard cases for the e-420 are too bulky and you start to think well for just a slight increase in size I could get the e-520 and get IS too, or the Canon XSI (as you suggest)...and pretty soon you are back to where you started: a camera that is too big to be carried discretely everywhere.

So for me, I've narrowed my quest down to finding such a case for the e-420 that I can carry on my belt, or it's the DP1 for me...or possibly the DP2/DP3.'

Great review. I got my DP-1 last week and echo your thoughts almost completely. I was looking for a camera to teach me more about photography---aperture, exposure, composition, waiting for the right shot---and the DP-1 fits the bill perfectly, while being portable enough that I'll have it with me when the urge strikes.

As you allude to, I wish there were more physical controls. ISO and an aperture/shutter wheel, depending on the mode, would be fantastic, and make the DP-1 much more usable without the screen and middling menu system.

If the manual focus wheel could be moved to the lens somehow, let the current MF wheel be used for aperture or shutter in A and S modes, and let the entirely useless and superfluous W and T buttons control exposure (or aperture in M mode), I'd be able to use the DP-1 much more quickly and effectively.

Really what I want is a 1970s era rangefinder that shoots X3F files. The DP1 is as close as I've seen in my budget, and for that, I love it.

I would call the dp1 a "pocket" camera and the E420 definatly not.

I held both in my hands and IMO its a big difference. The E420 is not much smaller than a D40 for example and also not much smaller than the 520. Plus the pancake lens is 50mm FOV and not 28 FOW (depends what you want).
I dont see the dp1 and 420 having much in common.

Here are two other alternatives to the DP1 / E-420 to consider:

1. Leica M8 w/Pancake lens. Much heavier than an E-420 but a better shape and much better glass. With the lens off, the body is very compact indeed. Of course, it is much more expensive. This is an option that I have not seriously considered but only because I overlooked it in my research due to the camera's (relative) age. Clearly this is more of an E-420 alternative should you go want to go that route over the DP1, which remains much more compact.

2. Canon XSI + Canon 28 f/2.8 lens. A bigger option but not that much bigger - and, if you use a larger Canon as your main camera, it is compatible with all those lenses.

Another thought here - I do think the pleasure of using a camera is important too. I would rank the DP1 below using an SLR (any mainstream SLR) in terms of fun due to the compromises (slow speeds, less fluid operation/controls and, in particular, weak LCD). It is harder to get into a nice creative flow. This, again, is a factor I did not weigh originally but find myself contemplating now (hey, I need to rationalize the potential expense of an M8 somehow!).

But per a good point someone else made earlier, you are pretty well headed back to SLR land, where you carry it in a back-pack/bulky case, etc . Only the DP1 really keeps you from going there. That said, I am going to take a hard look at the M8 + pancake as a rather expensive but potentially viable alternative. If anyone else has made this comparison, please let me know what you concluded.

Follow-up comment on the M8. It is .38 inches wider, .43 inches shorter and .63 inches thinner (front to back). The M8 is roughly 6 oz heavier. Given the uniform shape and the size reduction where I think it counts most (from to back thickness), it really does seem like an E-420 alternative. Of course, no AF on the M8.

I wouldn't buy it until they fix some of the issues stated in the review.

Pygoscelis said:

It's bigger and, I agree with you, that I would prefer a wider
lens than the 50mm-equivalent pancake. However, as a test, I've
forced myself to use only a "normal" lens and I've actually found it
to be quite good (also, Olympus apparently have a wide-angle pancake
in prototype stage at least).

Click to expand...

If you really must have a wide-angle pancake-type lens for the E-420, you can always track down a used copy of the Nikon-mount version of Voigtlander's respected (but NLA) 12mm/f5.6 lens. With a Nikon -> 4/3 adapter, it should be possible to mount it on an Olympus E-420 or any other 4/3 body. The effective FOV is 24mm and as the photo below shows, even with the adapter, it doesn't look much thicker than the Olympus 25mm "pancake" lens.

The downsides are that you have to focus it manually in live-view mode, metering is stop-down only, and it's soft in the corners until f8, but in practice, I've not found any of these limitations particularly problematic and have managed to take many great photos with this lens mounted on a Panasonic DMC-L1 4/3 body as shown below...



And if you prefer a longer lens, Contax made a wonderful 45mm/f2.8 Tessar lens for its cameras, which yields an effective FOV of 90mm. It can also be mounted on a 4/3 body via an adapter although, again, you will have to focus it manually and metering is stop-down only. I have one of these lenses as well and the photo below shows it mounted on my DMC-L1, which combined with the 4:3 format, makes a great combo for portraits ...

Thanks: both of those are worthwhile suggestions. In addition I have other legacy glass that should work as well with an adapter (although not as wide as the Voigtlander)...all of which I would like to try out if I go the e-420 route.

My sense is, however, that if the main reason stopping me getting the DP1 is its slowness, then I am unlikely to be any faster focusing manually and being restricted to stop-down metering, and I would be better served simply getting the DP1. In essence using a 4/3 camera with legacy lenses and using the DP1 would suit the same bit of my photography (slow deliberate landscapes; still lifes) but leave the other bits that require speed not so well catered for....it's a shame the perfect solution does not exist. All this agonizing reminds me of a situation explained so eloquently in a Harold Head comic: "Verily 'tis a mind* er"

Ahh - I would love the Leica. I've used one and I have to admit that there is something seductive about an M8. But factoring in the cost of lenses, it is way out of what I am prepared to pay for something that is intended to be a complementary camera to my DSLRs.

Besides, the M8 is size-wise not much different to the e-420. It actually gives a false impression of the bulk of the e-420 to just use the three linear dimensions given in the specs because one or two projections account for the height and the depth measurements and in fact there are large parts of the resulting "three dimensional block" that the camera does not fill. I daresay that an e-420 with pancake would occupy a similar, if not smaller, volume than an M8 with comparable lens.

Even though I shoot Canon gear, the XSI is not a starter for me because it is bulkier than just its measurements would suggest, and further, Canon does not have any pancake lenses available.

I'd be very interested to learn of your experience/impressions if you do get an M8 - particularly in relation to your experiences with the DP1.

dtedesco said:

Here are two other alternatives to the DP1 / E-420 to consider:

1. Leica M8 w/Pancake lens. Much heavier than an E-420 but a better
shape and much better glass. With the lens off, the body is very
compact indeed. Of course, it is much more expensive. This is an
option that I have not seriously considered but only because I
overlooked it in my research due to the camera's (relative) age.
Clearly this is more of an E-420 alternative should you go want to go
that route over the DP1, which remains much more compact.

2. Canon XSI + Canon 28 f/2.8 lens. A bigger option but not that
much bigger - and, if you use a larger Canon as your main camera, it
is compatible with all those lenses.

Another thought here - I do think the pleasure of using a camera is
important too. I would rank the DP1 below using an SLR (any
mainstream SLR) in terms of fun due to the compromises (slow speeds,
less fluid operation/controls and, in particular, weak LCD). It is
harder to get into a nice creative flow. This, again, is a factor I
did not weigh originally but find myself contemplating now (hey, I
need to rationalize the potential expense of an M8 somehow!).

But per a good point someone else made earlier, you are pretty well
headed back to SLR land, where you carry it in a back-pack/bulky
case, etc . Only the DP1 really keeps you from going there. That
said, I am going to take a hard look at the M8 + pancake as a rather
expensive but potentially viable alternative. If anyone else has
made this comparison, please let me know what you concluded.

Click to expand...

Pygoscelis said:

My sense is, however, that if the main reason stopping me getting the
DP1 is its slowness, then I am unlikely to be any faster focusing
manually and being restricted to stop-down metering, and I would be
better served simply getting the DP1. In essence using a 4/3 camera
with legacy lenses and using the DP1 would suit the same bit of my
photography (slow deliberate landscapes; still lifes) but leave the
other bits that require speed not so well catered for....it's a shame
the perfect solution does not exist. All this agonizing reminds me of
a situation explained so eloquently in a Harold Head comic: "Verily
'tis a mind* er"

Click to expand...

Yes and No. In reality, the 12mm Voigtlander has so much DoF that you don't need to focus it very carefully for most subjects and so long as you shoot at f8 or faster, I have had no difficulties focusing at the shooting aperture, so there's no need for me to actually stop-down the camera as I leave it stopped-down all the time.

Still, I agree with you about the size issues, as that's the reason I bought my DP-1. It lives in the messenger bag I carry with me every day and had it been any larger (such as the M8, which I also considered but ruled out not because of its cost but because I could only carry it with the lens separate from the body and even then, it was too large for the space I have available for it), then I wouldn't have bought it, period. For me, its size was equally as important as its performance and ease of use was -- is! -- a distant third. It would be nice if the AF was quicker and worked better in low light, but I shoot in manual-focus mode 90+% of the time, so it's not an issue for me; likewise, it would be nice if the shot-to-shot speed were quicker, as I have missed a few shots because of this, but that's only because I was able to get the first shot by having the camera with me, so I can live with this trade-off as well given the alternative.

And shooting people and other action-type stuff isn't so bad as I thought it would be, now that I'm not afraid of using the higher ISO settings. While I would avoid IS0800 unless absolutely necessary, it's workable in a pinch and ISO 200 and even ISO400 are just fine for my purposes. Sure, ISO100 is best and I use it whenever I can, but if I have to bump it up to get the shutter speed I need, then so be it.

Exactly my thinking too. Your use profile is the same as mine. It's exactly the same way I use this camera - in the backcountry. I want the IQ, I understand the mechanics of photograpy, but there's no way I'm carrying an SLR into those places. That said though, I agree with the review, and potential buyers should be aware of what they're getting.