SD1 full size disillusion (landscapes, nature)

Started Jun 27, 2011 | Discussions thread
MOD Kendall Helmstetter Gelner Forum Pro • Posts: 20,337
Re: The main problem with Sigma SD1...

nedelcho wrote:

Here is a short list of, as I can see them:

1. Posterization and magenta cast in the shadow areas (may be it is a bug in noise reduction system and WB processing, but I see it in almost every sample, even these from Olga. Mainly on her portrait images, in the shadow on the models neck - even with these web sized photos).

That may be a color space issue, we'll have to see.

2. Green-magenta blotches in shadows and areas of very fine detail where the default noise reduction has some trouble to clean them is still very present.

Actually thats cleaned up quite a lot from previous cameras although it still can be found on occasion. But if you expose correctly generally it's not an issue.

3. Vertical banding in many of the samples and RAW files I've seen, which is apparent even if slightly pushed in post (even on low ISOs 100/200).

Are you sure that one is not just in the pre-production photos? That does show up in earlier hardware but generally is not in production equipment.

4. Discoloration - faded colors on high iso (if ISO 800 maybe considered high).

I would say that is not an issue at all (not at ISO 800 anyway). That starts to occur somewhat at ISO 1600 but it's way better than previous cameras in that regard.

5. Some faint traces of noise and noise reduction even in ISO 100 images (it is barely visible though) even with noise reduction "turned off" in SPP5.

By turned off, do you mean both sliders all the way to the left?

6. Very high default sharpening in SPP5 is responsible for oversharpened images with very little foveonish feel.

I agree the sharpening in there feels like too much on default.

7. Very slow processing and write times in camera (judging by the many complaints).

The write time is an issue, it takes a while to write out an image even with a fast CF card. The processing you can judge for yourself with downloaded SD-1 images since it depends on your system, I do think it's pretty slow at least on a Mac... both of those are one area for sure that are slower than previous cameras.

To some extent you can work around those for some shots at least by lowering the resolution if you know you'll not need the full resolution being captured. But what's the fun in THAT?

8. Inability to make long exposures (for night landscapes).

It can do two minutes but I know what you mean, it would be great to be able to leave it on for a few hours. That to me is a pretty fringe case though.

All this and the ridiculous price, will put many users off with this camera even if it has potential.

The price to my mind comes first in not just putting people off, but making it impossible for many to afford the camera from the start.

Sorry but these just aren't images from 10,000$ camera

The thing is at the best, the images are as good or better than images coming from $8k cameras.

But very few people in the general market are going to buy on IQ alone.

you have to realize this, even if it is hard (because of the expectations every one here had). And you can't call it's shortcomings and brutally cut off camera body a "feature". It is not.

The camera body is not "brutally cut off". It's not a Nikon but it's a good body, better than many DSLR's on the market today, with very good controls for someone that knows what they want the camera to do. There is I think some value in that being a consideration in design.

Basic camera body without any feature it's competition has, even something so valuable such as well implemented live view is not "artistic camera".

The man behind the camera is the artist. A true talented photographer will make beautiful images regardless of the camera. But cameras are designed to make life a little easier, not harder.

The thing you are not seeing is that the Sigma cameras DO make life easier for a lot of shots, because they require much less post-processing to be really nice images than other camera bodies. To me the cameras make life a LOT easier.

And they give you a fundamentally clean image with consistent detail that again, you don't have to clean up in post.

Why you have to adapt to this very basic camera body, when every other manufacturer has better featured body with very comparable quality for 1/3-th of the price, which you don't have to constantly fight to make useable results? Why?

Because to me after everything is done, long after equipment is broken and discarded, only the image remains, and I still prefer the output from the Foveon cameras.

Is that wrong? Why is it wrong to prefer something in art? I thought it was the artists choice?

That's what really gets me, is people on the forums that prefer Foveon images are constantly attacked. Why? We don;t go over to Nikon or Canon or other forums and say they are wrong for liking the cameras the like. Why should only Sigma owners be wrong in the choice of camera they have made?

 Kendall Helmstetter Gelner's gear list:Kendall Helmstetter Gelner's gear list
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG HSM Sigma 50-500mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sigma 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow