Q Looses the 3-D of the M?

Started Jul 23, 2014 | Discussions thread
Roland Karlsson Forum Pro • Posts: 27,728
Re: Q Looses the 3-D of the M?

DMillier wrote:


I see nothing to obviously worry about from the quattro images I've seen so far. They look like they will stand comparion with any bayer shots. The Merrill is just freaky, it does things to textures that probably aren't correct but look good. I like that.

I guess the biggest argument against the Quattro has to be that if it produces results like high resolution bayer cameras, what is the point, given the know drawbacks of the sensor and the cameras it comes in. The Merrills at least have something different to attract buyers.

It's a bit of a marketing problem that could be solved by Sigma putting the sensor in fully competitive bodies that stand with the best.

For me personally - I do not really like the Bayer solution. It tries to extract resolution down to pixel level even though it really should be heavily over samplep. It works surprisingly well with modern complicated demosaicing algorithms though. With some exceptions. One is trees and grass - it looks fuzzy with Bayer cameras. Not nice. A Bayer APS-C camera should really be 100 MP or so, so that the lens will act as an AA filter.

Both the Merrill and the Quattro gives more consistent resolution.

The problem, for me, with the Merrill is the hyper realistic sharpness. That kind of effects is something I want to add on demand. If it is a part of the camera, then the camera is a very narrow and special camera.

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp2 Quattro Sony RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax K-1 +14 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow