Excellent "swirl", Steve!
Here's an fp shot with a Russian Helios 44-2 (58mm f/2) lens which I've had for years but never used because it didn't focus beyond about 3m. I took the lens apart and adjusted the helicoid stop (filed a bit of metal off!!) and now it focuses just fine; close to infinity.
Not everyone's cup of tea! But a bit of fun
I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:Thanks, Steve. The image from FP comes out darker, I brightened it a bit and vice versa. Other settings to the left of "0". For SDQ, I always use crispy, then denoise in Topaz DeNoise - the result is then great! Due to the different time of photography, I did not solve the colors. Sigma FP is close..
SDQ H
FP
settings
I'm not really sure what I'm seeing in Raw Digger. However, I think I shot the fp at EV -0.3 and the sd at EV 0I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:Thanks, Steve. The image from FP comes out darker, I brightened it a bit and vice versa. Other settings to the left of "0". For SDQ, I always use crispy, then denoise in Topaz DeNoise - the result is then great! Due to the different time of photography, I did not solve the colors. Sigma FP is close..
SDQ H
FP
settings
Ignore EV0 setting, it's on Auto for both.
fp
sd
:-D
What I see is not a lot of difference betwixt the two.I'm not really sure what I'm seeing in Raw Digger.I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:
Ignore EV0 setting, it's on Auto for both.
fp
sd
:-D
Not a big one, though. Perhaps it accounts for the difference in the color of the bricks. After all, -0.3EV is only a difference of 1/8 e.g. 113 ISO vs. 100.
I think it depends on the purpose of the comparison which I believe is to show that it is possible to get similar image quality from the two cameras one way or another, e.g. raw formats, converters, converter adjustments, output-referred adjustments.
Watch out for circling sharks which might speed in to tell you how good the Quattro is at over 100 ISO.
--
You did well!
Ah. That's interesting and kinda confirms my thinking, Thanks, Ted. And I'm using the 'lowly' fp rather than the 61 mp fpL, which according to Scott, should blow the doors of the fp and its 24 mp sensor. I dunno. I do know the fpL has an AA filter and the fp doesn't and many don't like thatWhat I see is not a lot of difference betwixt the two.I'm not really sure what I'm seeing in Raw Digger.I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:
Ignore EV0 setting, it's on Auto for both.
fp
sd
:-D
You're looking at the wrong part of the DPreview image Ted. I was referring to the part to the right of middle, which looks like that Imatest image.... and, in any case, Imatest's chart is not incorporated into DPR's test image - meaning that Imatest's app can not analyze DPR's test image.
Imatest:
DPR:
Oops!! I had never noticed that before, per se ...You're looking at the wrong part of the DPreview image Ted.... and, in any case, Imatest's chart is not incorporated into DPR's test image - meaning that Imatest's app can not analyze DPR's test image.
Imatest:
DPR:
Yes, it could be a copy of the prior non-proprietary "Dead Leaves" target or DPR bought the Imatest improved version,
Whoa Nelly! That's not quite what I said or meant. Here's what I actually said:Ah. That's interesting and kinda confirms my thinking, Thanks, Ted. And I'm using the 'lowly' fp rather than the 61 mp fpL, which according to Scott, should blow the doors of the fp and its 24 mp sensor.What I see is not a lot of difference betwixt the two.I'm not really sure what I'm seeing in Raw Digger.I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:
Ignore EV0 setting, it's on Auto for both.
fp
sd
:-D
)--
Whoa Scott! That’s a shed load of cameras.Whoa Nelly! That's not quite what I said or meant. Here's what I actually said:Ah. That's interesting and kinda confirms my thinking, Thanks, Ted. And I'm using the 'lowly' fp rather than the 61 mp fpL, which according to Scott, should blow the doors of the fp and its 24 mp sensor.What I see is not a lot of difference betwixt the two.I'm not really sure what I'm seeing in Raw Digger.I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:
Ignore EV0 setting, it's on Auto for both.
fp
sd
:-D
"I wonder if the fp L blows the doors off the fp and SD Quattro H. I guess it should, for the price."
After I get another SD Quattro H (and a Sony A7r IV), I think I'll get a Sigma fp L. I'll do a similar comparison test between the SD Quattro H and the fp L at that time (pretty far in the future, I guess, because first I plan to get a Fuji X-H2 with some lenses, and a better/faster new computer, with which I can edit the 8K video from that camera). Then at least I'll be able to tell if the fp L can blow the doors off the SD Quattro H. Yeah, I guess I'm a crazy person, with a severe case of G.A.S. (Of course I'll need some good lenses for that Fuji camera too.
Yeah, and I plan to get a few lenses for my Nikon first too, such as a 40mm f1.4 Art, a 24-35mm f2 Art, and a 105mm macro.Whoa Scott! That’s a shed load of cameras.Whoa Nelly! That's not quite what I said or meant. Here's what I actually said:Ah. That's interesting and kinda confirms my thinking, Thanks, Ted. And I'm using the 'lowly' fp rather than the 61 mp fpL, which according to Scott, should blow the doors of the fp and its 24 mp sensor.What I see is not a lot of difference betwixt the two.I'm not really sure what I'm seeing in Raw Digger.I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:
Ignore EV0 setting, it's on Auto for both.
fp
sd
:-D
"I wonder if the fp L blows the doors off the fp and SD Quattro H. I guess it should, for the price."
After I get another SD Quattro H (and a Sony A7r IV), I think I'll get a Sigma fp L. I'll do a similar comparison test between the SD Quattro H and the fp L at that time (pretty far in the future, I guess, because first I plan to get a Fuji X-H2 with some lenses, and a better/faster new computer, with which I can edit the 8K video from that camera). Then at least I'll be able to tell if the fp L can blow the doors off the SD Quattro H. Yeah, I guess I'm a crazy person, with a severe case of G.A.S. (Of course I'll need some good lenses for that Fuji camera too.
Best, Steve
Ha! A good pal of mine is a commercial freelance photographer and I’m amazed at the age and seemingly poor quality of kit he uses. He came over to us the other day to take a load of photos of spring flowers for a data base he’s building for his commercial landscaping clients. Our garden is pretty jammed packed for spring flowers, so, I could see him in action. Mostly he used a 10 year old Olympus OM5 micro four thirds and a macro lens he got off eBay for 50 quid. Plus some home made reflectors held in place by bamboo canes.Yeah, and I plan to get a few lenses for my Nikon first too, such as a 40mm f1.4 Art, a 24-35mm f2 Art, and a 105mm macro.Whoa Scott! That’s a shed load of cameras.Whoa Nelly! That's not quite what I said or meant. Here's what I actually said:Ah. That's interesting and kinda confirms my thinking, Thanks, Ted. And I'm using the 'lowly' fp rather than the 61 mp fpL, which according to Scott, should blow the doors of the fp and its 24 mp sensor.What I see is not a lot of difference betwixt the two.I'm not really sure what I'm seeing in Raw Digger.I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:
Ignore EV0 setting, it's on Auto for both.
fp
sd
:-D
"I wonder if the fp L blows the doors off the fp and SD Quattro H. I guess it should, for the price."
After I get another SD Quattro H (and a Sony A7r IV), I think I'll get a Sigma fp L. I'll do a similar comparison test between the SD Quattro H and the fp L at that time (pretty far in the future, I guess, because first I plan to get a Fuji X-H2 with some lenses, and a better/faster new computer, with which I can edit the 8K video from that camera). Then at least I'll be able to tell if the fp L can blow the doors off the SD Quattro H. Yeah, I guess I'm a crazy person, with a severe case of G.A.S. (Of course I'll need some good lenses for that Fuji camera too.
Best, Steve
--
Scott Barton Kennelly
https://www.bigprintphotos.com/
Thanks Steve, but I have a plan. I figure on getting the Fuji to shoot 40 MP super-telephoto and video stuff first, followed by the Sony A7r IV for better results when shooting eclipses. Then I'll get an fp L, and finally have an L mount camera.Ha! A good pal of mine is a commercial freelance photographer and I’m amazed at the age and seemingly poor quality of kit he uses. He came over to us the other day to take a load of photos of spring flowers for a data base he’s building for his commercial landscaping clients. Our garden is pretty jammed packed for spring flowers, so, I could see him in action. Mostly he used a 10 year old Olympus OM5 micro four thirds and a macro lens he got off eBay for 50 quid. Plus some home made reflectors held in place by bamboo canes.Yeah, and I plan to get a few lenses for my Nikon first too, such as a 40mm f1.4 Art, a 24-35mm f2 Art, and a 105mm macro.Whoa Scott! That’s a shed load of cameras.Whoa Nelly! That's not quite what I said or meant. Here's what I actually said:Ah. That's interesting and kinda confirms my thinking, Thanks, Ted. And I'm using the 'lowly' fp rather than the 61 mp fpL, which according to Scott, should blow the doors of the fp and its 24 mp sensor.What I see is not a lot of difference betwixt the two.I'm not really sure what I'm seeing in Raw Digger.I don't understand, when comparing CAMERAS and particularly raw data, why people have to do adjustments of any kind at all !! Best use RawDigger:
Ignore EV0 setting, it's on Auto for both.
fp
sd
:-D
"I wonder if the fp L blows the doors off the fp and SD Quattro H. I guess it should, for the price."
After I get another SD Quattro H (and a Sony A7r IV), I think I'll get a Sigma fp L. I'll do a similar comparison test between the SD Quattro H and the fp L at that time (pretty far in the future, I guess, because first I plan to get a Fuji X-H2 with some lenses, and a better/faster new computer, with which I can edit the 8K video from that camera). Then at least I'll be able to tell if the fp L can blow the doors off the SD Quattro H. Yeah, I guess I'm a crazy person, with a severe case of G.A.S. (Of course I'll need some good lenses for that Fuji camera too.
Best, Steve
I offered him my DP3 Merrill thinking the improved image quality would help. Nope, no point as people only look at photos on a phone screen.
That’s real life. It’s eejit amateurs like me that buys new gear.
Scott, have a look at the getDpi website. The L mount forum has some good fpL pics. Very impressive. That maybe the only camera you will ever need
--
Best, Steve
Yep. Some of us even think that the only way to compare two sensors is to look at 8x10 prints produced therefrom ... ;-)
Normally I would whine about re-sizing but the Siemens Stars are I believe scale-invariant and, in any case, make your point well enough.
--
The difference is stark. Is it all in the Sony’s weak AA filter? I very much doubt it.
cheers
[Edit: apparently the Panasonic S5 has a 24 MP full frame sensor and has no AA filter, just like the Sigma fp, so here is its equivalent image. Confirms my point.]
I agree, in these test images, the Bayer images look rubbish compared with the sdQH.Interesting that the photos supplied by the OP are leading people to conclude the Sigma fp has effectively the same detail or resolution capability as the sdQH.
It doesn’t. Well, probably not. (Because DPR never tested the fp, I substituted Sony A7 III for fp in the following test image, which DPR say has a weak AA filter compared to none for the fp. But a weak AA filter has *very* little effect on resolution compared to the blatant difference we see below.)
I took the DPR test image at ISO 100 for A7III and sdQH (X3F) and processed in the same software (Affinity Photo), roughly matched brightness and WB, and resized to same size (54 MP). Let’s look at a small area of the test image at 200%.
The difference is stark. Is it all in the Sony’s weak AA filter? I very much doubt it.
cheers
[Edit: apparently the Panasonic S5 has a 24 MP full frame sensor and has no AA filter, just like the Sigma fp, so here is its equivalent image. Confirms my point.]
