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

Firstly, let me say this isn't going to be a standard review comparing this to Bayer cameras, that would be like buying a Landrover and complaining it doesn't do 0-60 in 6 seconds. Secondly I have all 3 DP Merrills and the SD15, so I'm very familiar with Foveon sensors and Sigma's way of doing things. I am new to the Quattro sensor but I'll come on to that.

So what about the SD Quattro? I bought an open box SD Quattro, (as new), with the 30mm F1.4 Art lens for £739, that is an absolute steal in my book. I'm not sure what happened to the previous buyer, he only took less than 200 shots with it, I'm guessing he didn't know what he was buying, or maybe SPP was too much to bear. I knew exactly what I was buying and I know all about the downsides of shooting with foveon, so I'm not going to labour the point on that, they're all well known to Sigma afficionado's, personally I don't care about them, I bought a camera that does certain things better than anything else IMHO, though I wasn't entirely sure about the Quattro sensor and how SPP would work the files on my computer.

Anyway, the camera itself is typically Sigma quirky, which I actually love. Give me something original all day long, standard cameras are ten a penny. The build quality for the price is phenomenal, utilitarian but functional. I read a hilarious review on this camera in which the reviewer pretty much criticised everything, I guess he doesn't get Sigma, I do. There are lots of excellent touches to this camera, from the pop up diopter, to the clever placement of the power switch, to the side LCD for settings, very original and very cool for me. No video - excellent (never use it) and no scene mode gimmicks (never use them), but lots of useful features for just shooting stills, all good so far. It has a lovely chunky grip which I also like, and excellent quality robust buttons, another plus, twin configurable dials are also nice. Yes the EVF is lower rez but I understand why, however it does the job, and if you're used to using DP Merrills then it's a big bonus - definitely good enough. The LCD itself is lovely and excellent for confirming sharpness.

In operation the camera is exactly what I expected, pedestrian is fine with me, who's in a rush when using this type of camera? it's still faster than using film (which I still do occasionally). Focusing is also pedestrian but accurate, just like my Merrills, no issues for me there either, give me accuracy over speed all day long. 0.05 seconds blurry focusing doesn't really work for me personally and landscapes tend to stay where they are. You can also reduce the focusing box to a very small size, similar to the Merrills, and focus peaking? I'll definitely take that.

Another newsflash - it's not great at high ISO, Landrovers aren't good for road racing as well...imagine my shock. I also can't track a swallow in flight with this camera, another shocker.

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, I love both for certain things. SPP is clunky as always but on my laptop it chugs through the raw conversions as expected. 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, 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). I also love the choice of aspect ratios, give me some of that 1:1 & 4:3 goodness please.

I stuck the old Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-F4 on the SD Quattro and was pleasantly surprised, though it has some field curvature and fades at the edges, the results were incredibly sharp where it really matters, I can only imagine how the superb Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 will perform on it. The 30mm F1.4 art is also very sharp centrally at F1.4. I'm not interested in the 18-35mm F1.8 before anyone mentions it, it's too big and heavy for what I want this camera for (I've already owned one).

The other point that is never mentioned in the reviews of this camera is its infrared capability, I love black and white and black and white using a red filter with the IR filter removed, a big plus for this camera for me and the reason why I never tried the "compact" Quattro's. I'll be getting the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 to go with the SD Quattro, I can't wait to do some wide angle IR black and white with it.

So in summary, only pleasant surprises for me, it is what it is, digital medium format for £739, what's not to like? The Sigma quirkyness just adds to the fun of using a camera like this for me. If Vivian Maier can shoot street using a Rolleiflex I sure as hell can get used to shooting most things with this camera, isn't testing yourself all part of the fun?
With Sigma and foveon you either get it or you don't, I look forward to never seeing anyone else using this camera where-ever I shoot, you can't beat those puzzled Canikon 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, the results ain't half bad either

absquatulate wrote:

Firstly, let me say this isn't going to be a standard review comparing this to Bayer cameras, that would be like buying a Landrover and complaining it doesn't do 0-60 in 6 seconds. Secondly I have all 3 DP Merrills and the SD15, so I'm very familiar with Foveon sensors and Sigma's way of doing things. I am new to the Quattro sensor but I'll come on to that.

So what about the SD Quattro? I bought an open box SD Quattro, (as new), with the 30mm F1.4 Art lens for £739, that is an absolute steal in my book. I'm not sure what happened to the previous buyer, he only took less than 200 shots with it, I'm guessing he didn't know what he was buying, or maybe SPP was too much to bear. I knew exactly what I was buying and I know all about the downsides of shooting with foveon, so I'm not going to labour the point on that, they're all well known to Sigma afficionado's, personally I don't care about them, I bought a camera that does certain things better than anything else IMHO, though I wasn't entirely sure about the Quattro sensor and how SPP would work the files on my computer.

Anyway, the camera itself is typically Sigma quirky, which I actually love. Give me something original all day long, standard cameras are ten a penny. The build quality for the price is phenomenal, utilitarian but functional. I read a hilarious review on this camera in which the reviewer pretty much criticised everything, I guess he doesn't get Sigma, I do. There are lots of excellent touches to this camera, from the pop up diopter, to the clever placement of the power switch, to the side LCD for settings, very original and very cool for me. No video - excellent (never use it) and no scene mode gimmicks (never use them), but lots of useful features for just shooting stills, all good so far. It has a lovely chunky grip which I also like, and excellent quality robust buttons, another plus, twin configurable dials are also nice. Yes the EVF is lower rez but I understand why, however it does the job, and if you're used to using DP Merrills then it's a big bonus - definitely good enough. The LCD itself is lovely and excellent for confirming sharpness.

In operation the camera is exactly what I expected, pedestrian is fine with me, who's in a rush when using this type of camera? it's still faster than using film (which I still do occasionally). Focusing is also pedestrian but accurate, just like my Merrills, no issues for me there either, give me accuracy over speed all day long. 0.05 seconds blurry focusing doesn't really work for me personally and landscapes tend to stay where they are. You can also reduce the focusing box to a very small size, similar to the Merrills, and focus peaking? I'll definitely take that.

Another newsflash - it's not great at high ISO, Landrovers aren't good for road racing as well...imagine my shock. I also can't track a swallow in flight with this camera, another shocker.

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, I love both for certain things. SPP is clunky as always but on my laptop it chugs through the raw conversions as expected. 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, 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). I also love the choice of aspect ratios, give me some of that 1:1 & 4:3 goodness please.

I stuck the old Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-F4 on the SD Quattro and was pleasantly surprised, though it has some field curvature and fades at the edges, the results were incredibly sharp where it really matters, I can only imagine how the superb Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 will perform on it. The 30mm F1.4 art is also very sharp centrally at F1.4. I'm not interested in the 18-35mm F1.8 before anyone mentions it, it's too big and heavy for what I want this camera for (I've already owned one).

The other point that is never mentioned in the reviews of this camera is its infrared capability, I love black and white and black and white using a red filter with the IR filter removed, a big plus for this camera for me and the reason why I never tried the "compact" Quattro's. I'll be getting the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 to go with the SD Quattro, I can't wait to do some wide angle IR black and white with it.

So in summary, only pleasant surprises for me, it is what it is, digital medium format for £739, what's not to like? The Sigma quirkyness just adds to the fun of using a camera like this for me. If Vivian Maier can shoot street using a Rolleiflex I sure as hell can get used to shooting most things with this camera, isn't testing yourself all part of the fun?
With Sigma and foveon you either get it or you don't, I look forward to never seeing anyone else using this camera where-ever I shoot, you can't beat those puzzled Canikon 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, the results ain't half bad either

Quirky handling, poor iso performance, slow, average or below in 4 out of 7 categories, and you give it 5 stars? 5 stars as in there is no room for improvement?

I dont think the camera is the only thing quirky here.

absquatulate wrote:

Mackiesback wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

Firstly, let me say this isn't going to be a standard review comparing this to Bayer cameras, that would be like buying a Landrover and complaining it doesn't do 0-60 in 6 seconds. Secondly I have all 3 DP Merrills and the SD15, so I'm very familiar with Foveon sensors and Sigma's way of doing things. I am new to the Quattro sensor but I'll come on to that.

So what about the SD Quattro? I bought an open box SD Quattro, (as new), with the 30mm F1.4 Art lens for £739, that is an absolute steal in my book. I'm not sure what happened to the previous buyer, he only took less than 200 shots with it, I'm guessing he didn't know what he was buying, or maybe SPP was too much to bear. I knew exactly what I was buying and I know all about the downsides of shooting with foveon, so I'm not going to labour the point on that, they're all well known to Sigma afficionado's, personally I don't care about them, I bought a camera that does certain things better than anything else IMHO, though I wasn't entirely sure about the Quattro sensor and how SPP would work the files on my computer.

Anyway, the camera itself is typically Sigma quirky, which I actually love. Give me something original all day long, standard cameras are ten a penny. The build quality for the price is phenomenal, utilitarian but functional. I read a hilarious review on this camera in which the reviewer pretty much criticised everything, I guess he doesn't get Sigma, I do. There are lots of excellent touches to this camera, from the pop up diopter, to the clever placement of the power switch, to the side LCD for settings, very original and very cool for me. No video - excellent (never use it) and no scene mode gimmicks (never use them), but lots of useful features for just shooting stills, all good so far. It has a lovely chunky grip which I also like, and excellent quality robust buttons, another plus, twin configurable dials are also nice. Yes the EVF is lower rez but I understand why, however it does the job, and if you're used to using DP Merrills then it's a big bonus - definitely good enough. The LCD itself is lovely and excellent for confirming sharpness.

In operation the camera is exactly what I expected, pedestrian is fine with me, who's in a rush when using this type of camera? it's still faster than using film (which I still do occasionally). Focusing is also pedestrian but accurate, just like my Merrills, no issues for me there either, give me accuracy over speed all day long. 0.05 seconds blurry focusing doesn't really work for me personally and landscapes tend to stay where they are. You can also reduce the focusing box to a very small size, similar to the Merrills, and focus peaking? I'll definitely take that.

Another newsflash - it's not great at high ISO, Landrovers aren't good for road racing as well...imagine my shock. I also can't track a swallow in flight with this camera, another shocker.

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, I love both for certain things. SPP is clunky as always but on my laptop it chugs through the raw conversions as expected. 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, 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). I also love the choice of aspect ratios, give me some of that 1:1 & 4:3 goodness please.

I stuck the old Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-F4 on the SD Quattro and was pleasantly surprised, though it has some field curvature and fades at the edges, the results were incredibly sharp where it really matters, I can only imagine how the superb Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 will perform on it. The 30mm F1.4 art is also very sharp centrally at F1.4. I'm not interested in the 18-35mm F1.8 before anyone mentions it, it's too big and heavy for what I want this camera for (I've already owned one).

The other point that is never mentioned in the reviews of this camera is its infrared capability, I love black and white and black and white using a red filter with the IR filter removed, a big plus for this camera for me and the reason why I never tried the "compact" Quattro's. I'll be getting the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 to go with the SD Quattro, I can't wait to do some wide angle IR black and white with it.

So in summary, only pleasant surprises for me, it is what it is, digital medium format for £739, what's not to like? The Sigma quirkyness just adds to the fun of using a camera like this for me. If Vivian Maier can shoot street using a Rolleiflex I sure as hell can get used to shooting most things with this camera, isn't testing yourself all part of the fun?
With Sigma and foveon you either get it or you don't, I look forward to never seeing anyone else using this camera where-ever I shoot, you can't beat those puzzled Canikon 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, the results ain't half bad either

Quirky handling, poor iso performance, slow, average or below in 4 out of 7 categories, and you give it 5 stars? 5 stars as in there is no room for improvement?

I dont think the camera is the only thing quirky here.

Could you give me another foveon sensor camera that out-performs it? It has a completely different sensor architecture to any other non-foveon camera and therefore, IMHO, its not comparable to any bayer camera as it has completely different processing demands and challenges. The only other cameras it is comparable to are foveon and the SDQ-H is the same but has a slightly larger sensor. As l said clearly in my review, you wouldn't compare a Landrover to a Porsche.

Not the point. You list all its flaws. You rate it barely average in 4 out of 7 categories, which is bad for most modern gear, and then you give it 5 out of 5 stars. To me that is a rating that cant be improved upon. Who cares about foveon sensor stuff, you just gave it a rating that suggests it cant be improved upon after pointing out its myriad of shortcomings. Do you not see how this makes any sort of star rating compeletely meaningless?

It may be 5 stars to you because of your love for unique or flawed quirky gear or because you are comparing it to a pinhole camera, but it makes the star rating system worthless to others. Its like people who give a 1 star rating to a product on Amazon because the shipping was slow. Imsuppose user supplied content is worth what we are paying for it.

absquatulate wrote:

Mackiesback wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

Mackiesback wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

Firstly, let me say this isn't going to be a standard review comparing this to Bayer cameras, that would be like buying a Landrover and complaining it doesn't do 0-60 in 6 seconds. Secondly I have all 3 DP Merrills and the SD15, so I'm very familiar with Foveon sensors and Sigma's way of doing things. I am new to the Quattro sensor but I'll come on to that.

So what about the SD Quattro? I bought an open box SD Quattro, (as new), with the 30mm F1.4 Art lens for £739, that is an absolute steal in my book. I'm not sure what happened to the previous buyer, he only took less than 200 shots with it, I'm guessing he didn't know what he was buying, or maybe SPP was too much to bear. I knew exactly what I was buying and I know all about the downsides of shooting with foveon, so I'm not going to labour the point on that, they're all well known to Sigma afficionado's, personally I don't care about them, I bought a camera that does certain things better than anything else IMHO, though I wasn't entirely sure about the Quattro sensor and how SPP would work the files on my computer.

Anyway, the camera itself is typically Sigma quirky, which I actually love. Give me something original all day long, standard cameras are ten a penny. The build quality for the price is phenomenal, utilitarian but functional. I read a hilarious review on this camera in which the reviewer pretty much criticised everything, I guess he doesn't get Sigma, I do. There are lots of excellent touches to this camera, from the pop up diopter, to the clever placement of the power switch, to the side LCD for settings, very original and very cool for me. No video - excellent (never use it) and no scene mode gimmicks (never use them), but lots of useful features for just shooting stills, all good so far. It has a lovely chunky grip which I also like, and excellent quality robust buttons, another plus, twin configurable dials are also nice. Yes the EVF is lower rez but I understand why, however it does the job, and if you're used to using DP Merrills then it's a big bonus - definitely good enough. The LCD itself is lovely and excellent for confirming sharpness.

In operation the camera is exactly what I expected, pedestrian is fine with me, who's in a rush when using this type of camera? it's still faster than using film (which I still do occasionally). Focusing is also pedestrian but accurate, just like my Merrills, no issues for me there either, give me accuracy over speed all day long. 0.05 seconds blurry focusing doesn't really work for me personally and landscapes tend to stay where they are. You can also reduce the focusing box to a very small size, similar to the Merrills, and focus peaking? I'll definitely take that.

Another newsflash - it's not great at high ISO, Landrovers aren't good for road racing as well...imagine my shock. I also can't track a swallow in flight with this camera, another shocker.

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, I love both for certain things. SPP is clunky as always but on my laptop it chugs through the raw conversions as expected. 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, 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). I also love the choice of aspect ratios, give me some of that 1:1 & 4:3 goodness please.

I stuck the old Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-F4 on the SD Quattro and was pleasantly surprised, though it has some field curvature and fades at the edges, the results were incredibly sharp where it really matters, I can only imagine how the superb Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 will perform on it. The 30mm F1.4 art is also very sharp centrally at F1.4. I'm not interested in the 18-35mm F1.8 before anyone mentions it, it's too big and heavy for what I want this camera for (I've already owned one).

The other point that is never mentioned in the reviews of this camera is its infrared capability, I love black and white and black and white using a red filter with the IR filter removed, a big plus for this camera for me and the reason why I never tried the "compact" Quattro's. I'll be getting the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 to go with the SD Quattro, I can't wait to do some wide angle IR black and white with it.

So in summary, only pleasant surprises for me, it is what it is, digital medium format for £739, what's not to like? The Sigma quirkyness just adds to the fun of using a camera like this for me. If Vivian Maier can shoot street using a Rolleiflex I sure as hell can get used to shooting most things with this camera, isn't testing yourself all part of the fun?
With Sigma and foveon you either get it or you don't, I look forward to never seeing anyone else using this camera where-ever I shoot, you can't beat those puzzled Canikon 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, the results ain't half bad either

Quirky handling, poor iso performance, slow, average or below in 4 out of 7 categories, and you give it 5 stars? 5 stars as in there is no room for improvement?

I dont think the camera is the only thing quirky here.

Could you give me another foveon sensor camera that out-performs it? It has a completely different sensor architecture to any other non-foveon camera and therefore, IMHO, its not comparable to any bayer camera as it has completely different processing demands and challenges. The only other cameras it is comparable to are foveon and the SDQ-H is the same but has a slightly larger sensor. As l said clearly in my review, you wouldn't compare a Landrover to a Porsche.

Not the point. You list all its flaws. You rate it barely average in 4 out of 7 categories, which is bad for most modern gear, and then you give it 5 out of 5 stars. To me that is a rating that cant be improved upon. Who cares about foveon sensor stuff, you just gave it a rating that suggests it cant be improved upon after pointing out its myriad of shortcomings. Do you not see how this makes any sort of star rating compeletely meaningless?

As I said, show me a Foveon sensor camera that is better? Bayer and Foveon comparisons are apples and hedgehogs, completely different beasts, so compared to every other Foveon camera it is 5 stars as far as I'm concerned, until something better comes along.

It may be 5 stars to you because of your love for unique or flawed quirky gear or because you are comparing it to a pinhole camera, but it makes the star rating system worthless to others. Its like people who give a 1 star rating to a product on Amazon because the shipping was slow. Imsuppose user supplied content is worth what we are paying for it.

See above, and no I don't give 1 star reviews on Amazon for slow postage, you just made that up, which isn't a great strategy for debating, it's more commonly labelled "fake news" these days.

5 star response. Still missing the point.

absquatulate wrote:

Mackiesback wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

Mackiesback wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

Mackiesback wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

Firstly, let me say this isn't going to be a standard review comparing this to Bayer cameras, that would be like buying a Landrover and complaining it doesn't do 0-60 in 6 seconds. Secondly I have all 3 DP Merrills and the SD15, so I'm very familiar with Foveon sensors and Sigma's way of doing things. I am new to the Quattro sensor but I'll come on to that.

So what about the SD Quattro? I bought an open box SD Quattro, (as new), with the 30mm F1.4 Art lens for £739, that is an absolute steal in my book. I'm not sure what happened to the previous buyer, he only took less than 200 shots with it, I'm guessing he didn't know what he was buying, or maybe SPP was too much to bear. I knew exactly what I was buying and I know all about the downsides of shooting with foveon, so I'm not going to labour the point on that, they're all well known to Sigma afficionado's, personally I don't care about them, I bought a camera that does certain things better than anything else IMHO, though I wasn't entirely sure about the Quattro sensor and how SPP would work the files on my computer.

Anyway, the camera itself is typically Sigma quirky, which I actually love. Give me something original all day long, standard cameras are ten a penny. The build quality for the price is phenomenal, utilitarian but functional. I read a hilarious review on this camera in which the reviewer pretty much criticised everything, I guess he doesn't get Sigma, I do. There are lots of excellent touches to this camera, from the pop up diopter, to the clever placement of the power switch, to the side LCD for settings, very original and very cool for me. No video - excellent (never use it) and no scene mode gimmicks (never use them), but lots of useful features for just shooting stills, all good so far. It has a lovely chunky grip which I also like, and excellent quality robust buttons, another plus, twin configurable dials are also nice. Yes the EVF is lower rez but I understand why, however it does the job, and if you're used to using DP Merrills then it's a big bonus - definitely good enough. The LCD itself is lovely and excellent for confirming sharpness.

In operation the camera is exactly what I expected, pedestrian is fine with me, who's in a rush when using this type of camera? it's still faster than using film (which I still do occasionally). Focusing is also pedestrian but accurate, just like my Merrills, no issues for me there either, give me accuracy over speed all day long. 0.05 seconds blurry focusing doesn't really work for me personally and landscapes tend to stay where they are. You can also reduce the focusing box to a very small size, similar to the Merrills, and focus peaking? I'll definitely take that.

Another newsflash - it's not great at high ISO, Landrovers aren't good for road racing as well...imagine my shock. I also can't track a swallow in flight with this camera, another shocker.

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, I love both for certain things. SPP is clunky as always but on my laptop it chugs through the raw conversions as expected. 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, 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). I also love the choice of aspect ratios, give me some of that 1:1 & 4:3 goodness please.

I stuck the old Sigma 18-50mm F2.8-F4 on the SD Quattro and was pleasantly surprised, though it has some field curvature and fades at the edges, the results were incredibly sharp where it really matters, I can only imagine how the superb Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 will perform on it. The 30mm F1.4 art is also very sharp centrally at F1.4. I'm not interested in the 18-35mm F1.8 before anyone mentions it, it's too big and heavy for what I want this camera for (I've already owned one).

The other point that is never mentioned in the reviews of this camera is its infrared capability, I love black and white and black and white using a red filter with the IR filter removed, a big plus for this camera for me and the reason why I never tried the "compact" Quattro's. I'll be getting the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 to go with the SD Quattro, I can't wait to do some wide angle IR black and white with it.

So in summary, only pleasant surprises for me, it is what it is, digital medium format for £739, what's not to like? The Sigma quirkyness just adds to the fun of using a camera like this for me. If Vivian Maier can shoot street using a Rolleiflex I sure as hell can get used to shooting most things with this camera, isn't testing yourself all part of the fun?
With Sigma and foveon you either get it or you don't, I look forward to never seeing anyone else using this camera where-ever I shoot, you can't beat those puzzled Canikon 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, the results ain't half bad either

Quirky handling, poor iso performance, slow, average or below in 4 out of 7 categories, and you give it 5 stars? 5 stars as in there is no room for improvement?

I dont think the camera is the only thing quirky here.

Could you give me another foveon sensor camera that out-performs it? It has a completely different sensor architecture to any other non-foveon camera and therefore, IMHO, its not comparable to any bayer camera as it has completely different processing demands and challenges. The only other cameras it is comparable to are foveon and the SDQ-H is the same but has a slightly larger sensor. As l said clearly in my review, you wouldn't compare a Landrover to a Porsche.

Not the point. You list all its flaws. You rate it barely average in 4 out of 7 categories, which is bad for most modern gear, and then you give it 5 out of 5 stars. To me that is a rating that cant be improved upon. Who cares about foveon sensor stuff, you just gave it a rating that suggests it cant be improved upon after pointing out its myriad of shortcomings. Do you not see how this makes any sort of star rating compeletely meaningless?

As I said, show me a Foveon sensor camera that is better? Bayer and Foveon comparisons are apples and hedgehogs, completely different beasts, so compared to every other Foveon camera it is 5 stars as far as I'm concerned, until something better comes along.

It may be 5 stars to you because of your love for unique or flawed quirky gear or because you are comparing it to a pinhole camera, but it makes the star rating system worthless to others. Its like people who give a 1 star rating to a product on Amazon because the shipping was slow. Imsuppose user supplied content is worth what we are paying for it.

See above, and no I don't give 1 star reviews on Amazon for slow postage, you just made that up, which isn't a great strategy for debating, it's more commonly labelled "fake news" these days.

5 star response. Still missing the point.

You're missing the point, which is this, no one buys these cameras to shoot sports and action or for low light shooting, most people outside of the enthusiast world probably don't even know they exist. It's the same reason why people don't use a Sony RX1 for shooting bifs. There is no point in penalising a camera like this for something it's clearly not designed to do. It does a few specific things very well, and one of those things is not even mentioned in any of the reviews on this camera (The fact that it can be converted to an IR camera just by removing the dust filter). Obviously I made the mistake of thinking that people would understand its intended use, but maybe you could contact DPR and complain that they keep giving Gold awards to cameras that you can't put in your pocket.

Quirky. Slow. Horrible ISO performance. 5 stars. Got it.

Oh, I was comparing it to a sack of potatos! LOL!

Someone took the time to write a lengthy review and while full of hyperbole, it is honest and points out the strengths and weaknesses. Anyone taking the time to read the review should appreciate that as well.

It is an opinion and if you disagree that is your opinion, as well. As far as fact checkers, please correct anything you see that is misleading or blatantly incorrect. But there is no need for the angst in these forums.

The Sigma systems have long had my attention, but is the same quirks the OP seems to appreciate that would drive me insane. Maybe one day one of the amazing IQ compact fixed lens cams but until then I'll be satisfied living vicariously through reviews like this and the images on the web.

lambert4 wrote:

Someone took the time to write a lengthy review and while full of hyperbole, it is honest and points out the strengths and weaknesses. Anyone taking the time to read the review should appreciate that as well.

It is an opinion and if you disagree that is your opinion, as well. As far as fact checkers, please correct anything you see that is misleading or blatantly incorrect. But there is no need for the angst in these forums.

+1. I also have all 3 DPM's so I can identify with this review though I use my M43 system more because it's faster and easier and gives me a wider FL range. But the Foveon files are truly superb. It's a special instrument. Not for everything or everyone. Review should be read in that context. Of course if you are mostly into action & low light it would be useless. I don't pay much attention to stars and awards. The op seems to have a continuing love affair with Sigma. Thus 5 stars, why not. Happy for him. Also nice to hear most of the good things in Foveon carried over to Quattro.

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

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?

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

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?

you can't beat those puzzled Canikon

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

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

, the results ain't half bad either

Sigma: believing is seeing

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