eke2k6 wrote:
I learned photography on a Sigma DP1. The original Sigma pocketable camera. I've bought several other Sigma cameras since then. I understand their draw, but here are my issues with them, and the people who get defensive over them.
1) A $1000 pocketable camera is only usable up to ISO 400. Anything after is virtually non-existent. I've had horrible luck trying to take simple indoor photos during a meal with friends or family. Let's not even try to talk about bringing the camera to an event like Mardi Gras in New Orleans. Focusing was IMPOSSIBLE, and the images looked horrible to the ridiculous noise I got when I went to ISO 800 and above. What use is "sharpness" when you can't even get a camera to focus properly.
What an idiotic mis-use of a camera. Why don't you take an F1 racing car to the peak-hour commute to work in pouring rain and snow and belting heat, and complain about how horrible is your luck.
2) "Hold on, the camera is still writing to the SD card" is a line I used sooo many times when people asked to see a photo I just took. That's virtually unacceptable in any modern camera. Even the dinosaur 5D Mk1 allowed me to review images instantly, not to talk of the likes of my D750 or D800.
Stop mis-using the camera. If you are really doing point-and-shoot-and-show, which makes no sense if you bought this camera for what it does well, at least set the Quick Preview to 10 seconds.
3) Focus. In anything other than brightly lit areas, you may as well manual focus.
Exaggerated BS. I smell a troll.
4) Battery life. LOL. Most bayer cameras have to do intense computation to provide a finished image. The entire claim to fame of the foveon sensor is that it doesn't have to do this. So why on earth is the battery life so poor? My X100s was a far more advanced camera, yet it could squeeze out multiple times the amount of shots the Sigma cameras can.
Trolling. Battery life is short, as indicated. In fact, the way you have written this suggests an argumentative and mean attitude.
5) Since my DP1 days, I've come to own the DP2M, Dp2Q, X100S, 5D Mk1, 5D Mk2, D700, D750, D800, and a few others I forget to mention. Every camera post-Sigma has given me better rounded image quality than the DPs have.
Agreed. They are not rounded cameras. But you decided to make this troll thread, and duplicate your post #1 in another thread for good measure, out of resentment that Sigma owners enjoy their cameras (because unlike you they know how to do it). I have an Olympus E-M5 II. It is a much better-rounded camera. Loving my dp0Q.
6) The other claim to fame of the DP cameras is the image quality or sharpness. Everyone here claims that it's somehow the benefit of the foveon sensor. However, the Art lenses have shown where the true power of the DP series has always come from...the lenses. With the APS-C crop factor, one is basically harnessing a Sigma Art lens at f/4. Any test chart will show the absurd sharpness these lenses are capable of at f/4 to f/5.6. That, plus the ridiculous amount of sharpening that SPP does to photos, and that's the Dp formula right there. I use the 35mm Art on my D750 nowadays, and the images I get surpass anything the DP2M or DP2Q could ever give me.
Meteoroid reviewed a DP2Q. It weighs 400g and costs $860. Slightly cheaper and just over half the weight of the Art 35 alone. Meteoroid says it is too big and bulky. Are you sure he bought the right camera (RX100 IMHO) for his needs? Are you sure your alternatives are viable for him? Frankly the DP2Q has hardly any competition, if you want it for what it does well, and don't want to pay or carry much more. OTOH if you want it for what it doesn't do well, then you are not a wise purchaser.
As for "ridiculous sharpening in SPP", tech analysis shows that with Sharpness setting on -0.8, images are unsharpened. Strangely, despite what you say about "there's the DP formula", they are not like Bayer images when I do this.
7) Sigma ...Photo ...Pro. Nothing else needs to be said.
It's bad. How many years did you use it for? Why????
So, ladies and gentlemen, PLEASE stop with the nonsensical attacks on a photographer's skill level whenever critiques of the Sigma cameras are presented. I admire the company, but it's clear their cameras are lacking in so many vital ways. The SD write time issue is a comical example of this.
Only three people commented on the Metroid review to date, before you, and only one of them made any reference to his skill level, and he is non-English-first-language. I took his comment as simply encouraging Metroid to focus on the positives and use his camera for what it is best for, while developing his photographic skill through the positive abilities of the tool in his hands.
You, on the other hand, write as though we are all blind to the weaker areas of Sigma cameras, and need to have our blinkers removed, in the roughest way you can remove them. Be not so foolish, dear fellow.
Before anyone tries to talk about me, or my skill, let me present my website with images shot from both Sigma and non-Sigma cameras: http://www.timshelxeke.com/
So tell us, why did you use a Sigma camera for more than one month?
And then please retire from this forum. There are plenty of positive-minded Sigma owners here who are nevertheless critically analytical of the sensors, the lenses, and the camera performance, without needing to harp on about how they don't do what they don't do.
Finally, I bought my dp0 as a $900, 500g camera that does 21mm-e landscapes and architecture with the resolution of a 40 MP Bayer camera and sharp, undistorted corners without correction. You say it is sub-par, so please show me a non-sub-par camera that can do this under $1000 and 700g.
