Reading mode: Light Dark

Wishlist.. a DP1Q Zoom

Go to last post
PicOne

PicOne

Veteran Member
Messages
6,932
Solutions
2
Reaction score
208
Location
NY, US
While a fixed FL Dp2Q (at the 45mm equiv) is fine.. and the 75 equiv is OK (would prefer a bit more separation from the 2Q (eg. 85 or 100mm equiv), the wide angle body in the series I really think would be awesome if it offered a little zoom.

I realize there is some amount of tradeoff/giveback when using a zoom lens. That said, perhaps a minimal zoom amount (eg. 1.5x) could have been designed and implemented without too much IQ degradation. Who would like to see eg. a 24-35mm or 20-30mm equiv DP1Q ? Just speaking for myself, I'd see boatloads more utility out of such a camera than a fixed 28mm. That said, I'm far from a lens engineer, so don't know what real tradeoffs in IQ would have to be made to accommodate.
 
PicOne said:
While a fixed FL Dp2Q (at the 45mm equiv) is fine.. and the 75 equiv is OK (would prefer a bit more separation from the 2Q (eg. 85 or 100mm equiv), the wide angle body in the series I really think would be awesome if it offered a little zoom.

I realize there is some amount of tradeoff/giveback when using a zoom lens. That said, perhaps a minimal zoom amount (eg. 1.5x) could have been designed and implemented without too much IQ degradation. Who would like to see eg. a 24-35mm or 20-30mm equiv DP1Q ?
Click to expand...
With that little change in range I don't really see any benefit given the weight/size and points of failure the zoom would add. For that little focal length change I could just take a step forward or back!

For those that want a little more range, might I suggest wide angle adaptors or TC converters... the closeup filters already work really well.
 
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
PicOne said:
While a fixed FL Dp2Q (at the 45mm equiv) is fine.. and the 75 equiv is OK (would prefer a bit more separation from the 2Q (eg. 85 or 100mm equiv), the wide angle body in the series I really think would be awesome if it offered a little zoom.

I realize there is some amount of tradeoff/giveback when using a zoom lens. That said, perhaps a minimal zoom amount (eg. 1.5x) could have been designed and implemented without too much IQ degradation. Who would like to see eg. a 24-35mm or 20-30mm equiv DP1Q ?
Click to expand...
With that little change in range I don't really see any benefit given the weight/size and points of failure the zoom would add. For that little focal length change I could just take a step forward or back!
Click to expand...
While on a nominal "mm" basis, there seemingly seems little difference between 20mm and 30mm, it's a significant FOV (angle of view) difference with 20mm being considered (in 35mm terms) as an "Ultra-wide" and 30mm more in the vein a typical street-shooter/environmental portrait FL. A 20-30mm zoom might have a 94-70 degree Angle of view difference. (OTOH a 200-300mm only changes from about 12 degrees to 8 degrees)

OTOH, thinking that since it's nominally not that big of a swing (1.5x range) , that size effects due to the zoom range might not be too prohibitive. Against the new Quattro body size, perhaps insignificant. Against the Merrill predecessor body, yes it probably would be.

As to points of failure.. heck I don't know, but there are hundreds of camera models out there with a lot more zoom range. Zoom failure isn't something I typically hear about as a concern. Perhaps also with this limited 1.5x zoom range, the mechanism could be designed with full internal zoom without need for the lens to telescope in size.
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
For those that want a little more range, might I suggest wide angle adaptors or TC converters... the closeup filters already work really well.
Click to expand...
I'd rather this functionality built in than as add-ons.. but that's just me.
 
While a zoom DPxQ would be nice, it would be far from the principal idea, too much compromise I would imagine and would add the price up and weight if they wanted to make a good zoom lens, while the focal lengths available might be limiting, you could always get the DSLR Quattro (If and when it is released) and pick the lenses that would suit you.
 
Omexis said:
While a zoom DPxQ would be nice, it would be far from the principal idea, too much compromise I would imagine and would add the price up and weight if they wanted to make a good zoom lens, while the focal lengths available might be limiting, you could always get the DSLR Quattro (If and when it is released) and pick the lenses that would suit you.
Click to expand...
 
PicOne said:
PicOne said:
<...>
Click to expand...
Perhaps.. I'm not sure. Any prior discussion I've seen on the matter of a zoom DP series has presupposed an all-encompassing range -- eg. 24-70 or 28-80 or somesuch (approx. 3x range). Zoom compromises I had impression were often stemming from need to go from a wide to a tele perspective. Keeping the entire range wide would presumably be a much easier prospect.

Inspiration for the idea resides in seeing relative success of examples such as the Tokina 11-16 or Nikon 14-24; limited range wide angle zoom lenses that yield (at least at some points in their respective focal length ranges) quality that's equivalent to many primes.
Click to expand...
I'm a big fan of the 18-35 too, but all of those lenses are popular because they are used on cameras you can also use other lenses too. And they are rather large.
 
PicOne said:
Omexis said:
While a zoom DPxQ would be nice, it would be far from the principal idea, too much compromise I would imagine and would add the price up and weight if they wanted to make a good zoom lens, while the focal lengths available might be limiting, you could always get the DSLR Quattro (If and when it is released) and pick the lenses that would suit you.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
OTOH . . . the Sigma 18-50mm f3.5-5.6 only weighs 245 grams. This lens would offer slightly wider angle, and if it were made with OS it would offer something that no DP camera has ever had . . . optical image stabilization. Yes, it would be a heavier camera . . . but Sigma could charge $1,199 for it, and people would still buy it . . . especially if it has excellent IQ . . . and I think it could. Such lenses typically have had pretty good IQ. Just look at the current Nikon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6G VR II. When stopped down just a little that lens is very sharp and has very little distortion from 18-35mm, with almost none in the 35-55mm range. That lens only weighs 195 grams, according to DPreview. I don't see how Sigma can't beat that with a built-in lens for the same size sensor in a zoom version of the DP Quattro.

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

Loading…

www.bhphotovideo.com
 
A zoom is an obvious possibility, but can a zoom lens be made sharp enough? The Quattro might well show up its inferior optical performance (compared to the primes).

The other obvious possibilities would be a DP0Q with a very wide angle lens (a big challenge to Sigma's lens designers), and a DP4Q with a longer lens, perhaps 90mm.
 
PicOne said:
That said, perhaps a minimal zoom amount (eg. 1.5x) could have been designed and implemented without too much IQ degradation. Who would like to see eg. a 24-35mm or 20-30mm equiv DP1Q ? Just speaking for myself, I'd see boatloads more utility out of such a camera than a fixed 28mm.
Click to expand...
I was selling my DP1m because the 28mm are not wide enough, and the corner quality and CA's were a little bit disappointing for me.
My dream would be a 20mm or at least 24mm (equiv.) tilt-shift lens on a DP1 Quattro, or why not something like a Leica Tri Elmar 16/18/21mm on a DP camera. This would be the perfect camera for architecture and landscapes and very unique.
I think, with cameras like the Sony A7r, we have more image quality than most of the people will ever need. Who will buy 3 DP Quattro cameras instead of one Sony A7r except us (crazy Foveon fans.)
So Sigma could (or should) make something really special with the DP cameras to stand out.
 
Last edited:
Scottelly said:
OTOH . . . the Sigma 18-50mm f3.5-5.6 only weighs 245 grams. This lens would offer slightly wider angle, and if it were made with OS it would offer something that no DP camera has ever had . . . optical image stabilization. Yes, it would be a heavier camera . . . but Sigma could charge $1,199 for it, and people would still buy it . . . especially if it has excellent IQ . . . and I think it could. Such lenses typically have had pretty good IQ. Just look at the current Nikon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6G VR II. When stopped down just a little that lens is very sharp and has very little distortion from 18-35mm, with almost none in the 35-55mm range. That lens only weighs 195 grams, according to DPreview. I don't see how Sigma can't beat that with a built-in lens for the same size sensor in a zoom version of the DP Quattro.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/lenses/nikon_18-55_3p5-5p6_vr_ii

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1023360-USA/nikon_2211_nikkr_afs_dx_18_55mm_3_5_5_6g_vr2.html
Click to expand...
Why are you referencing 17-50 and 18-50 lenses? You're right, these (~3x zooms) would be huge.

I thought I was pretty explicit, describing the (much narrower range) WA zoom for the DP 1 model that I thought could work (ie. a 24-35 or 20-30mm FF equiv). On a DP this would be a 16-23 or 13-20mm lens.

Sigma could keep the 30mm DP2 (45mm equiv) and the 50mm DP3 (at 75mm).

--
'Everything in photography boils down to what's sharp and what's fuzzy.'
-Gaylord Herron
 
Last edited:
maceoQ said:
PicOne said:
That said, perhaps a minimal zoom amount (eg. 1.5x) could have been designed and implemented without too much IQ degradation. Who would like to see eg. a 24-35mm or 20-30mm equiv DP1Q ? Just speaking for myself, I'd see boatloads more utility out of such a camera than a fixed 28mm.
Click to expand...
I was selling my DP1m because the 28mm are not wide enough, and the corner quality and CA's were a little bit disappointing for me.
My dream would be a 20mm or at least 24mm (equiv.) tilt-shift lens on a DP1 Quattro, or why not something like a Leica Tri Elmar 16/18/21mm on a DP camera. This would be the perfect camera for architecture and landscapes and very unique.
I think, with cameras like the Sony A7r, we have more image quality than most of the people will ever need. Who will buy 3 DP Quattro cameras instead of one Sony A7r except us (crazy Foveon fans.)
So Sigma could (or should) make something really special with the DP cameras to stand out.
Click to expand...

FWIW I cannot write about DP1Merrill corners, as I've never used one. But I've been impressed over and over with the excellentDP2Merrill corner quality, in the large number of Nevada shots I'm still processing!

Best regards, Sandy
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman (archival)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann (current, many new DP2Merrill photos online)
 
maceoQ said:
PicOne said:
That said, perhaps a minimal zoom amount (eg. 1.5x) could have been designed and implemented without too much IQ degradation. Who would like to see eg. a 24-35mm or 20-30mm equiv DP1Q ? Just speaking for myself, I'd see boatloads more utility out of such a camera than a fixed 28mm.
Click to expand...
I was selling my DP1m because the 28mm are not wide enough, and the corner quality and CA's were a little bit disappointing for me.
My dream would be a 20mm or at least 24mm (equiv.) tilt-shift lens on a DP1 Quattro, or why not something like a Leica Tri Elmar 16/18/21mm on a DP camera. This would be the perfect camera for architecture and landscapes and very unique.
I think, with cameras like the Sony A7r, we have more image quality than most of the people will ever need. Who will buy 3 DP Quattro cameras instead of one Sony A7r except us (crazy Foveon fans.)
So Sigma could (or should) make something really special with the DP cameras to stand out.
Click to expand...
While I would really like to see a DP Quattro with a zoom lens, so just one camera would be necessary to carry, the fact that a zoom lens would compromise image quality is obvious. If you're going to compromise on image quality, you're NOT going to buy a DP Quattro camera. They're just too limited in so many ways. If you're willing to compromise image quality you'd be better off getting a Sony RX100 of some flavor. They're lighter, more compact, cheaper, faster, and have good, f1.8 zoom lenses. Two of them have wi-fi and fold-out screens. One of them even has a fold-out screen AND a built-in viewfinder. You can get optional electronic viewfinders for the other two. Don't forget, these little Sony RX100 cameras have image stabilization too . . . something the Sigma DP line has been lacking since its inception.

Loading…

www.bhphotovideo.com

Loading…

www.bhphotovideo.com

Loading…

www.bhphotovideo.com
 
maceoQ said:
PicOne said:
That said, perhaps a minimal zoom amount (eg. 1.5x) could have been designed and implemented without too much IQ degradation. Who would like to see eg. a 24-35mm or 20-30mm equiv DP1Q ? Just speaking for myself, I'd see boatloads more utility out of such a camera than a fixed 28mm.
Click to expand...
I was selling my DP1m because the 28mm are not wide enough, and the corner quality and CA's were a little bit disappointing for me.
My dream would be a 20mm or at least 24mm (equiv.) tilt-shift lens on a DP1 Quattro, or why not something like a Leica Tri Elmar 16/18/21mm on a DP camera. This would be the perfect camera for architecture and landscapes and very unique.
Click to expand...
So why not think about a WA adaptor for the newer DP1Q? They are improving the lens on that so hopefully corner issues will go away, then for truly wide shots you could adapt out a bit further... or do a pano.
Member said:
I think, with cameras like the Sony A7r, we have more image quality than most of the people will ever need. Who will buy 3 DP Quattro cameras instead of one Sony A7r except us (crazy Foveon fans.)
So Sigma could (or should) make something really special with the DP cameras to stand out.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone needs to buy three cameras though, two would suffice to get a good range of focal lengths. I like traveling with just a DP1M and DP3M, the DP2M is great and all but two cameras with that much range really works well.
 
PicOne said:
Scottelly said:
OTOH . . . the Sigma 18-50mm f3.5-5.6 only weighs 245 grams. This lens would offer slightly wider angle, and if it were made with OS it would offer something that no DP camera has ever had . . . optical image stabilization. Yes, it would be a heavier camera . . . but Sigma could charge $1,199 for it, and people would still buy it . . . especially if it has excellent IQ . . . and I think it could. Such lenses typically have had pretty good IQ. Just look at the current Nikon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6G VR II. When stopped down just a little that lens is very sharp and has very little distortion from 18-35mm, with almost none in the 35-55mm range. That lens only weighs 195 grams, according to DPreview. I don't see how Sigma can't beat that with a built-in lens for the same size sensor in a zoom version of the DP Quattro.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/nikon/lenses/nikon_18-55_3p5-5p6_vr_ii

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1023360-USA/nikon_2211_nikkr_afs_dx_18_55mm_3_5_5_6g_vr2.html
Click to expand...
Why are you referencing 17-50 and 18-50 lenses? You're right, these (~3x zooms) would be huge.

I thought I was pretty explicit, describing the (much narrower range) WA zoom for the DP 1 model that I thought could work (ie. a 24-35 or 20-30mm FF equiv). On a DP this would be a 16-23 or 13-20mm lens.

Sigma could keep the 30mm DP2 (45mm equiv) and the 50mm DP3 (at 75mm).
Click to expand...
 
I was thinking a little more about that, and I think I'd prefer to see the DPZ Quattro cameras with 16-28mm f2.8 and 28-70mm f2.8-4 OS lenses. That would give a range slightly more than the 17-70mm f2.8-4 OS C lens, and at the same time they could be sharper, better lenses. The 17-70mm is not really a long range zoom, but it is probably a little more than can be made with best quality. They might want to charge a little more for the camera with the OS functionality, but that would mean they could charge $1,199 for the DPZ1 Quattro and $1,299 for the DPZ2 Quattro. They could put a macro function in the DPZ2 Quattro too. I'd REALLY like to see fold-out screens on those two cameras. Maybe electronic viewfinders and wi-fi too.

Just for information: Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM C = 465 g
 
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
So why not think about a WA adaptor for the newer DP1Q? They are improving the lens on that so hopefully corner issues will go away, then for truly wide shots you could adapt out a bit further... or do a pano.
Click to expand...
I have never seen good results with WA adaptor on any Sigma DP.
My "DP1m" is now the "DP2m two shots panorama"
And the DP3m for people...so yes, i also have only two DP Merrills (next to the SD1)
But i would immediately buy a great DP1 TS-E, even if its more expensive.

 
D Cox said:
The other obvious possibilities would be a DP0Q with a very wide angle lens (a big challenge to Sigma's lens designers),
Click to expand...
That's what I have needed for a very long time. An effective 15mm is not too wide.
 
maceoQ said:
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
So why not think about a WA adaptor for the newer DP1Q? They are improving the lens on that so hopefully corner issues will go away, then for truly wide shots you could adapt out a bit further... or do a pano.
Click to expand...
I have never seen good results with WA adaptor on any Sigma DP.
Click to expand...
I get excellent results at F8 and smaller with the very expensive Nikon WC E75 adapter on my DP1. I described these long ago in this forum. But it's clumsy and heavy and gets me only 21mm instead of 28mm.

It never has been clear to me why there was no true W/A DP0. 28mm is quite ordinary.

--
'To see, not with, but through the eye.' [William Blake]
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22905474@N06/
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info. Priscilla. I think they did 28, 45, and 75, because 35, 50, and 85 are good focal lengths, but not quite wide enough for some people. You can get those by cropping just a little with the 28, 45, and 75 focal length equivalent DP series cameras anyway.

If they had made a 24mm I think they would still have people complaining that is not wide enough. A DP0 Quattro with a 21mm f2.8 equivalent would be very cool, but I don't think Sigma would get many sales of such a camera. It would be very limiting. I think we're lucky to have as many DP series cameras as we do. I don't think it would make sense for them to make more models. Anyone wishing to have longer or wider focal lengths should probably just buy the DSLR camera. I know it would cost a lot more for someone who has a DP1 Merrill to get an SD1 Merrill with an 8-16mm lens (12-24mm equiv.), and the aperture would not let in anywhere near as much light as the f2.8 lenses on the DP series cameras, but ultimately I think Sigma needs to draw the line somewhere, and they've done it by only offering three DP series cameras.

That said, I would love to see Sigma make a DP0 Quattro with a 14mm f4 lens (compact and 21mm wide-angle equiv.). A DP4 Quattro with a 90mm f4 lens would be very cool too (135mm equiv.), don't you think? It wouldn't offer such a short depth of field as a 105mm f2.8 OS Macro on the SD1, but it sure would be cheaper and more compact. There are people out there who love to shoot with just a full-frame DSLR and a 135mm f2.8 lens. That's a great portrait camera, which is good for shooting animals and objects, like architectural details, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top