Another quirktastic camera from Sigma....... Locked

absquatulate wrote:

robert1955 wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

So, the image quality? well I was pleasantly surprised by both the Quattro sensor and how SPP 6.5.2 dealt with its files, excellent is all I can say. It's not a Merrill, it's not better or worse, just different,

It would have been of some interest if you had

There are lots of samples on the net, they're not difficult to find, there's a site known as "Flickr" which is useful.

If you write a sort-of-review like you did, to make a point this just is not good enough

I love both for certain things. SPP is clunky as always but on my laptop it chugs through the raw conversions as expected.

You mean 5 minutes a file as usual?

No, not at all, less than 30 seconds to expand to full size using an i7 processor on 8mb of ram, as someone who develops film I can't say it's eating away at me, but if you're the spray and pray type I guess it might.

Converting the files to 16 bit tiffs after minor tweaking I can process them more fully in Capture 1 Pro no problem, which sharpens the files much better than SPP. I haven't played much with DNG yet but I'll give them a go at some time. The colour is outstanding from the SD Quattro, very accurate to my eyes,

You realize foveon colors have to be more computational than Bayer? No, you probably will deny that

I only care about the results, which are excellent. Obviously there is intensive processing going on, hence the speed and hit on battery life, anyone who shoots Foveon knows this.

But this is not the foveon forum, this is the place where there should be open discussion. If you don't want discussion or only support from those who feel like you, go to a foveon place

more accurate than the Merrills unless you stick the Merrills on a tripod and give them some time (don't ask me why but that's how it works with the DPXM's for me).

Magical isn't it that a tripod changes colors?

It doesn't change colours, it gives you the time to make sure you get it right, correct exposure is everything with foveon.

Your comment becomes even more vague

you can't beat those puzzled Canikon

I wish the forum had an option to automagically delete all posts that use that useless word

Looks like you're going to be disappointed then.

It still is a stupid word to use. It suggest the person using it thinks he knows better than the 80% or so users who chose Canon or Nikon [they are 2 separate entities you know], who chose not only because of marketing [another common fallacy]

eyes, that "WTH! but I won't ask because I'll look stupid" kind of look, it's all part of the rich tapestry of shooting Sigma

That's rich indeed

I've experienced it, I'm not really bothered if you believe me or not.

Not, it is clear you tried only writing for your own gratification.

Sigma cameras are very rare, many people don't even know they exist, I've never seen anyone else shooting with one, they're not even that easy to source, not that I care too much, I know where to find them.

Makes the point of writing this sort-of-review even more lacking

, the results ain't half bad either

Sigma: believing is seeing

If you can't be bothered to actually look on Flickr these cameras definitely aren't for you.

All in all pretty pointless as a review. No-one with a vague interest in these cameras will think she's missing something.
As for car analogies: the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSU_Spider comes to mind

All in all a pretty pointless post,

Well, my reply can of course not salvage  the OP.

Point of the wankel reference is that the wankel engine promised great advantages, which in reality did not come true

if you don't have anything interesting to say it's probably best not to bother,

Mirror mirror. Or take a selfie.

but thanks for calling anyway....

Likewise, not.

I would not have bothered, if you had made a half way serious effort at doing a review.