I'm not convinced that Sigma actually wants to sell cameras . .

Thank you Ted, looking for a DP2s, but kind of worried about ebay and the like. I may have to consider ebay, Sears' price is a bit high for that model.

Greetings All you Sigma Fans

Ok, so after 2 glasses of wine, I thought I'd spoke out, get use to it.  There isn't much out there that supports the Foveon.  Just use SPP, convert if you want and then import the files into what ever you want.

Have fun

Roger J.

xpatUSA wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

. . . .and the X3F format changing with each new model, it is small wonder that so few converter providers have anything to do Sigma's products.

I actually bought the DP1s and DP2s thinking they would be no different to the SD14 (same sensor, right?). Ha, how naïve can one get?!!

So I went out today and shot a couple of DP1s X3Fs.

Having just downloaded PhotoScape I thought that it might open them but . . . . wrong again (yes I know they only list SD9, 10, 14). Good enough, I go, so off to FastStone Viewer for a quick peek. Ha! After conversion, here we see a washed-out image that is unusable - meaning that DP1 and 2s X3F files are not even supported by DCraw.

Unbelievable.

What saga? Why not just use SPP, or better yet, Lightroom? I don't understand what it is you are constantly searching for. Lightroom would be a perfect solution for your Sigma.

Roger wrote:

Greetings All you Sigma Fans

Ok, so after 2 glasses of wine, I thought I'd spoke out, get use to it. There isn't much out there that supports the Foveon. Just use SPP, convert if you want and then import the files into what ever you want.

Have fun

Roger J.

The pre-Merrills are supported by Lightroom/ACR. A perfect solution for those Sigma camera owners.

xpatUSA wrote:

. . well after a couple of beers, I'm beginning to wonder!

OK, they take nice pictures but, after playing with my newly acquired DP1s and DP2s, I find it quite cynical that the DP1s comes with a DP1 manual and a scruffy fold-up sheet in a hundred different languages with the English bit spread across several folds to tell us the differences between the DP1s and it's predecessor.

But then, examining a raw histogram, I was amazed to see that the maximum raw level attainable with these two cameras is around 2,300 !!

I mean, the SD9 raw values can be up in the 10,000s the SD10 even higher, then the SD14 more like 9,000 and the SD1M more like a sane 4070 - which almost bears a resemblance to the ADCs output. God knows what the Quattro puts out, something different, I'm sure.

With scaling variations like this, and the X3F format changing with each new model, it is small wonder that so few converter providers have anything to do Sigma's products.

I actually bought these two cameras thinking they would be no different to the SD14 (same sensor, right?). Ha, how naïve can one get?!!

A storm in a tea-cup, you might say - but every time I open an X3F in RawDigger, I now have to set the over/under exposure levels to suit the stupid camera used. Ridiculous!

I'm surprised you're making a judgement based on totally out-dated hardware.

I know this forum is filled with people in an echo chamber, trying to convince themselves that Sigma's best cameras and sensors came first and now the 'magic' is gone, but everyone else, including people at Sigma, know that's not true.

I think it's a shame that people who profess to be Sigma 'fans' have dismissed the Quattro's out of hand despite them being the best camera's Sigma has ever made.

I'd also point out that photographers and normal people aren't hung up on numbers. Most pros (and I mean magazine shooters, not wedding photographers) switched to digital a decade or more ago. As soon as Canon brought full-frame bodies to the market which worked well.

Those old cameras shot movie posters, fashion spreads and more, despite using sensors which don't make the grade today.

No one is being held back by the tech or the noise performance. The only people who care are on forums like this.

The rest of the world is shooting with their phone, or judging their camera based on cost, controls, coolness and compactness.

Sigma's don't sell in large numbers because they're expensive and slow. Everyone who sees my Q's thinks it's an ILC and looks at me aghast when they work out it's not.

Sigma have a fantastic technology. They're smart to sell it to the people who get it, rather than pitch for the mainstream and fail because the speed isn't there.

xpatUSA wrote:

MrSkelter wrote:

xpatUSA wrote:

. . well after a couple of beers, I'm beginning to wonder!

OK, they take nice pictures but, after playing with my newly acquired DP1s and DP2s, I find it quite cynical that the DP1s comes with a DP1 manual and a scruffy fold-up sheet in a hundred different languages with the English bit spread across several folds to tell us the differences between the DP1s and it's predecessor.

But then, examining a raw histogram, I was amazed to see that the maximum raw level attainable with these two cameras is around 2,300 !!

I mean, the SD9 raw values can be up in the 10,000s the SD10 even higher, then the SD14 more like 9,000 and the SD1M more like a sane 4070 - which almost bears a resemblance to the ADCs output. God knows what the Quattro puts out, something different, I'm sure.

With scaling variations like this, and the X3F format changing with each new model, it is small wonder that so few converter providers have anything to do Sigma's products.

I actually bought these two cameras thinking they would be no different to the SD14 (same sensor, right?). Ha, how naïve can one get?!!

I'm surprised you're making a judgement based on totally out-dated hardware.

I've had every Foveon sensor camera, including the Polaroid x530, except Quattro. Since my main gripe is about Sigma changing the X3F format so often, the Quattro can be included in the gripe - witness the SPP 6.x saga.

What's the big deal? Just adjust for each camera. Each camera stands on its own.

I know this forum is filled with people in an echo chamber, trying to convince themselves that Sigma's best cameras and sensors came first and now the 'magic' is gone . . .

A demeaning statement which has neither merit nor place in this forum.

-- hide signature --

Pedantry is not a felony.
Ted