maxotics wrote:
What I don't get is all the fuss about the body. First thing I thought was: Great street camera. With a wrist strap and the OVF, LCD turned off, zone focussing, and excellent performance at low res, it is a no brainer. Set the auto ISO range to 100-800, lock the aperture to f/8 and you should always be in a good shutter speed range.
The Quattro is as conspicuous as Sony's A7S, which has a silent shutter, can shoot in any light and has autofocus light years ahead of the Sigma. We'll have to see if any street shooters take to this camera. I seriously doubt it, sorry.
SPP has always had its ups and downs. It has been faster and slower, better or worse at default settings. But it is what it is and still the best raw converter for these images. And the last I checked, it is much faster than a chemical darkroom. A deal-killer for me, never. But then I don't mind snow blowing a really steep driveway very, very slowly in the middle of a blizzard.
Actually, I can live with SPP. It's worth it to me as to many on this forum. But if that isn't an issue why shoot with a slightly faster camera that isn't as good as the model before it? Unless you think the Q images are better. Are they? They'd have to be a lot better for me to choose that camera over an M. Thoughts?
Some street shooters DO use DP series cameras . . . with some good results:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma_dp_street_photography/
Please don't think I'm saying they would not rather use the Sony . . . but at 3 times the price (by the time you add a good f2.8 lens), I don't think many street photographers will pick the Sony over the Sigma. I'd be surprised to see more street photographers shooting with the Sony A7r. Now . . . the Sony A7 is a different story. For about twice the price of the Sigma, you can get an A7 with a lens, and it will be better for shooting in color at ISO 1600 and above. SOME street photographers will make that choice. Already there are a lot of people buying that camera. B&H has 52 reviews of it so far.