Review of Sigma DP2Q

Are you certain that this is not a flesh colored wire? I believe it may very well be. You can purchase ear buds with flesh colored wire. The flesh color on the wire begins abruptly just at the junction of the ear piece and the descending wire. Google it - there are many such being advertised. I "think" you may be chasing an imaginary demon here...

Lin

Hng wrote:

In this picture, look at the white wire of woman's earphone. White changes by background color - skin color on the face then gray by the wall and suddenly merged, disappears. It never happens with true Foveon.

Lin Evans wrote:

Are you certain that this is not a flesh colored wire? I believe it may very well be. You can purchase ear buds with flesh colored wire. The flesh color on the wire begins abruptly just at the junction of the ear piece and the descending wire. Google it - there are many such being advertised. I "think" you may be chasing an imaginary demon here...

Lin

Hng wrote:

In this picture, look at the white wire of woman's earphone. White changes by background color - skin color on the face then gray by the wall and suddenly merged, disappears. It never happens with true Foveon.

Lin, study the pic again. This case seems you go too far into Sigma fanboy-ism.

Hng wrote:

Lin Evans wrote:

Are you certain that this is not a flesh colored wire? I believe it may very well be. You can purchase ear buds with flesh colored wire. The flesh color on the wire begins abruptly just at the junction of the ear piece and the descending wire. Google it - there are many such being advertised. I "think" you may be chasing an imaginary demon here...

Lin

Hng wrote:

In this picture, look at the white wire of woman's earphone. White changes by background color - skin color on the face then gray by the wall and suddenly merged, disappears. It never happens with true Foveon.

Lin, study the pic again. This case seems you go too far into Sigma fanboy-ism.

I did study it, I just don't come to the same conclusions as you. As for "fanboy-ism?" I have over 40 digital cameras of almost every brand. I use Olympus, Nikon, Sony, Sigma, Pentax, Panasonic, Fuji, Kodak, Epson, Hewlett-Packard, Canon and others. This isn't a case of "fanboy-ism" it's just a careful analysis. How do you explain the abrupt change from white to flesh color? I gave you samples to look at - where is your evidence that it isn't the most logical explanation? I think Occam's Razor applies here. Why look for some convoluted explanation when a much more logical one is available?

You were certain that the black chair was blue and that the Q lost the color. It turned out as I suspected that the blue color was reflected light. Now you are certain that the ear bud cable is white and that the flesh color comes from some convoluted issue with the camera. The more likely scenario is that the earbud cable is actually flesh colored. It's very common - Google it. I think rather than immediately assuming that someone is a "fanboy" you might examine your own motivation for searching for issues which may not exist?

Lin

Lin Evans wrote:

Hng wrote:

Lin Evans wrote:

Are you certain that this is not a flesh colored wire? I believe it may very well be. You can purchase ear buds with flesh colored wire. The flesh color on the wire begins abruptly just at the junction of the ear piece and the descending wire. Google it - there are many such being advertised. I "think" you may be chasing an imaginary demon here...

Lin

Hng wrote:

In this picture, look at the white wire of woman's earphone. White changes by background color - skin color on the face then gray by the wall and suddenly merged, disappears. It never happens with true Foveon.

Lin, study the pic again. This case seems you go too far into Sigma fanboy-ism.

I did study it, I just don't come to the same conclusions as you. As for "fanboy-ism?" I have over 40 digital cameras of almost every brand. I use Olympus, Nikon, Sony, Sigma, Pentax, Panasonic, Fuji, Kodak, Epson, Hewlett-Packard, Canon and others. This isn't a case of "fanboy-ism" it's just a careful analysis. How do you explain the abrupt change from white to flesh color? I gave you samples to look at - where is your evidence that it isn't the most logical explanation? I think Occam's Razor applies here. Why look for some convoluted explanation when a much more logical one is available?

Lin

It's the fact that I wonder what happens and you can see some explanations from other posters above.

I don't doubt you have 40 cameras but I'm pretty sure you don't use all 40 or a day's shooting for you is going to require a train of sherpas.  I have 20 or so and I use 4 of them and that can be a less than ideal experience...

Even if this is a glitch, all cameras glitch from time to time. It is rarely significant...

I have six motor vehicles also, and I can assure you that I don't drive them all at the same time either, but what has it to do with "fanboyism?" The point is that am no more a "fanboy" of Sigma than I am of Sony, Olympus, Nikon, Pentax or Canon, Subaru, Dodge, Harley Davidson, or Ford. I do seek truth and dislike the idea of constantly picking at insignificant issues with any of my cameras and especially blaming these issues on the instrument when there are much more logical explanations. Hing thought that a black chair was actually blue because the sides were tinted blue. He thought that the Q lost the color in the shadows. I suspected that the blue light was simply reflected light which was verfied as correct by the OP. Hing suspects that there is some convoluted issue with the Q which is turning the earbud cable flesh colored because of the skin color of the person wearing it. Because the change is abrupt as indicated by the red arrow in my screen capture from an extreme zoom in Photoshop, I believe that the cable is actually flesh colored. To support that view, I posted pictures of such.

The point is that a dissenting opinion about something does not make one a "fanboy." Perhaps there is some convoluted issue with the Q and perhaps the earbud cable is flesh colored. The latter is much more reasonable since there is supporting evidence to examine.

Lin

DMillier wrote:

I don't doubt you have 40 cameras but I'm pretty sure you don't use all 40 or a day's shooting for you is going to require a train of sherpas. I have 20 or so and I use 4 of them and that can be a less than ideal experience...