One trick pony Locked

maxotics wrote:

Since Sigma have been making cameras, each new one gets trashed and praised and damned with faint praise by the usual suspects upon release. Then there is a sorting out phase as some knuckleheads, including moi, set out to figure out what it CAN do before the CAN'T do message settles in.

I agree with what you're saying, Lawrence, I just wish Sigma hadn't made what I'd call a "poke in the eye" decision with the body shape. Can you fit it in your copter? Yes, I know it won't bother some people, but I doubt it will become a reason to prefer the camera. From what I can see, my reaction has been the same as most people. So yes, there are things the camera can do, like faster operational speed, that I'd LOVE to tell all my photographic friends, but I can't because that improvement is nullified by an extremely poor camera design. Net-net, the Quattro is a step backwards.

What happened? Do you know? What am I missing? I have not tested the camera against a Merrill because I have a 1, not a 2. If others finding are correct, the image isn't as good (which doesn't surprise me). Then you get back to the trade-off of IQ for speed and I can't figure it out because I'm so annoyed by the cumbersome camera design. As the reviewer pointed out in the video, it doesn't facilitate one-handed use so what's the benefit of the extra width?

For years everyone on this forum complains about SPP and Sigma has done very little to improve it's speed. Yes, it v6 does seem a bit faster, but it still crashes. (I have 6.03). As for the battery, I don't agree with many others who want a bigger battery. If that body-design is Sigma solution to that problem then talk about ruining your face to save your nose.

I am so upset that Sigma has put me in a position of defending the above reviewer. He is more right than wrong about the Quattro (The Merrill is another matter).

Anyway, here's my review, for what it's worth. http://maxotics.com/?p=350

You know what I think is funny? You just wrote your review of the DP2 Quattro, but you made two statements/requests for Sigma to make improvements. One was for them to rewrite SPP. But isn't that what they just did? The other was, "extend the grip forward on the Merrill (like other cameras) and put in a bigger battery to run a STRONGER processor. Don’t worry about making the battery last, per number of shots, make it powerful to clear up the camera buffer as fast as possible." Well . . . the True III is a "STRONGER processor" . . . right? Done. The first part of that is a request for a grip . . . but the Quattro HAS a grip, and from what I've read the new design is definitely nicer to hold. (I wish I could get my hands on a Quattro to try it myself.) You also suggest a larger batter . . . and Sigma has already given this to you in the Quattro.

Yet you're complaining. WTF?