... Comparison #1- DP2S vs DP2X vs DP2M

… Very good request. Lessens the occasion of operator error. Though, would have to be at 100 ISO because the Merrill does not do 50 ISO. Look forward to the results myself!

interesting to see the differences between your jpegs and the tiffs. Then I processed the tiffs with various adjustments first to set white balance to the snow and second to get the tones out closer to 0 and 255 in each. I did not touch saturation. Curiously enough, The 2x had much less of a magenta tint in the tiff. A -9 correction instead of a -30. The two Merrills were very similar. The tiff needed a bit of warmth while the jpeg was spot on. The DP2s tiff was considerably greener needing a +16 tint correcftion. Same wb. I would say you did a good job evening out the DP2s (reducing the green cast) while going the wrong way with the D2x (adding even more magenta) and missing the magenta cast on the Merrill. Perhaps you are more sensitive to green than you are magenta. Or your software let you down.

I cropped the 2s and 2x to the proportions of the Merrill. A lot is lost in the supposedly 4mm difference (in 35mm terms). So, after going through various steps, I found the 2x to be the flattest (though I added a heap of clarity and contrast and brightened it considerably). It did have the disadvantage of being the most underexposed. It was my least favorite:

The D2S has the most contrast of the three. A nice bump in the mid highs and mid lows. A good deal more colorful though it benefited from having a nice section of open sky.

The Merrill now falls to second behind the DP2s. The Merrill has some contrast but smaller bumps more at the dark and light extremes. The Merrill's sensor did receive one stop less light.

You pretty much nailed the exposure of the DP2s. A variable favoring it. I think in terms of another shoot, it would be good to have an unchanging scene. A clear blue sky, for example. I think that would better equalize the colors presented to the sensors. Part of what we may be seeing is a function of how much the sky is cloud covered. The 2X sky is entirely white, the Merrill's has a tinge of color, and the 2s has some actual clear sky. Another variable favoring the 2s. It does benefit from reducing the green cast. Then, also good to shoot one of your dark, indoor scenes. and give a good indication of the quality of the shadows. Shoot all at the same iso. So, for now, I have changed my vote.

... Brev: A tremendous contribution from a superiour processor. The subjective balance and beauty of the DP2S is even clearer on a fairer playing field. The other two are still fine Foveon images, but literally pale in comparison.

... I believe that the clouds were consistently patchy that day, the light therefore likely changing steadily. However, they were taken as quickly as I could mount the cameras on the tripod, and I believe that there was roughly the same amount of open sky in each. Believe that the DP2S simply handled the subtle colour hues the best. Whereas the other two simplified the sky into "light grey".

... I suppose a clear blue sky would be the fairest. But, clear blue skies are boring. It is the subtle hues I am interested in.

... Again, tremendous processing. If not (yet) an official member of the Sigma clan, you are definitely an enthusiastic, professional contributer!

Hulyss Bowman wrote:

... snip...

It was the Pixelozoïc age. The humans back in those days were very excited on their computer screen scrutinizing every pixels and sub pixels. ...xnip...

Excellent !!!

… Brilliant.

Iain G Foulds wrote:

… Brilliant.

I have dp1m and dp2m but in the initial rendition of those 3 images I would say dp2s was the most "right"-feeling image to me, contrast and color wise.

Thank you for this very informative comparison! It would be interesting to have such a comparison between the three classic models DP2, DP2s and DP2x. Maybe someone has all three models and could make such a comparison? Best regards!

Jhnns wrote:

Thank you for this very informative comparison! It would be interesting to have such a comparison between the three classic models DP2, DP2s and DP2x. Maybe someone has all three models and could make such a comparison? Best regards!

Yes, and all at 100 ISO, same aperture/shutter/EC with default internal JPEG settings and no messing around with the images afterwards - in other words, a CAMERA comparison ...

… Hard to believe that the images were taken only a month ago. Since then have decided that the DP2S (with a serious tripod) is my choice, sold my DP2X, and the DP2M is for sale.

Jhnns wrote:

Thank you for this very informative comparison! It would be interesting to have such a comparison between the three classic models DP2, DP2s and DP2x. Maybe someone has all three models and could make such a comparison? Best regards!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/-fs-/galleries/72157664297050855/

Have a look at this gallery! It contains images taken with all three DP2 classic models. As is evident all three models are capable of delivering outstanding images in the right hands.

I believe the secret is actually the lens - and this is shared by all three models. It just has the right amount of sharpness but it also has very nice bokeh. In contrast, in the later DP2M the bokeh often is very busy and harsh.

In any case with regard to differences here is my take (I used to own all three models, but I kept the "s"):

DP2s and DP2x both have coloured buttons whereas in the DP2 they are all black. They both have an option to conserve batteries by switching off power to the sensor automatically ( not available in the DP2) and DPx and DP2s both also have a better LCD compared to the original DP2.

DP2x has in addition a jpg+raw option and AFE which is both good and bad ( it is easy to burn highlights but it has cleaner shadows at iso 400 but shows banding in b&w at iso 1600). As a result of AFE you need to use SPP 4.2.2 with the DP2x but with DP2 and DP2s you can use the earlier SPP 3.5.2 which has a better b&w mode (with no or little noise reduction in high iso).

Auto WB in DPx has a tendency towards pink, in the DP2s there is a general tendency towards cyan whereas the DP2 images often have a blueish cast with green corners. This is likely due to different hardware (IR cut off filters).
For best results you will need to adjust colours in SPP or elsewhere slightly for all models (and preferably a calibrated monitor to do this!)

Metering is slightly different for all three models, with DP2 asking for a bit more light than DP2s which in turn is less conservative than DP2x. I think this is to prevent burning highlights in the DP2x whereas for DP2 and DP2s this implies ISO 100 is defined slightly differently ( in the DP2 it seems to act more like ISO 70).

Hope this helps!

Yes, thank you very much for this interesting information! Best regards!

… Appreciate your good information and experience. All three models are excellent. I only know that I had to work much more in post, and less successfully, with the original model and the X. Whereas, I was mostly delighted with the S Raw image immediately. Which was very possibly simply an indication of my poor processing skills.

allineedislight wrote:

Metering is slightly different for all three models, with DP2 asking for a bit more light than DP2s which in turn is less conservative than DP2x. I think this is to prevent burning highlights in the DP2x whereas for DP2 and DP2s this implies ISO 100 is defined slightly differently ( in the DP2 it seems to act more like ISO 70).

A long time ago I asked Sigma which of the several calculation methods allowed by I.S.O. is used to define their Exposure Index (known here as "the ISO") - I think I asked about the SD1 Merrill.

I was told that the Recommended Exposure Method (REI) is used.

In simple English, this allows manufacturers to estimate the REI - a.k.a.
"ISO" value - based on a series of test images. No actual calculation published, unlike the other I.S.O. methods.

A bit like here where many prefer to assess Quality based on looks rather than actual accountable values ... LOL

Long gone are the days of "ISO Speed" determined by the I.S.O. Saturation-based method, where the Photographer actually got half a stop of highlight headroom thrown in - useful for DP2x, SD15 and Quattros, I would think. That headroom disappeared with I.S.O.'s introduction of the Japanese Standard Output Sensitivity method, thereby allowing manufacturers to increase the "ISO" by over 40% for the same sensor!

http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/SOS_REI.pdf

xpatUSA wrote:

allineedislight wrote:

Metering is slightly different for all three models, with DP2 asking for a bit more light than DP2s which in turn is less conservative than DP2x. I think this is to prevent burning highlights in the DP2x whereas for DP2 and DP2s this implies ISO 100 is defined slightly differently ( in the DP2 it seems to act more like ISO 70).

A long time ago I asked Sigma which of the several calculation methods allowed by I.S.O. is used to define their Exposure Index (known here as "the ISO") - I think I asked about the SD1 Merrill.

I was told that the Recommended Exposure Method (REI) is used.

In simple English, this allows manufacturers to estimate the REI - a.k.a.
"ISO" value - based on a series of test images. No actual calculation published, unlike the other I.S.O. methods.

That's very interesting!

I tried spot metering a grey card with both the DP2 and DP2s and these two cameras were consistently always 1/3 stop apart (with the DP2 requiring more exposure). So the DP2 and DP2s are definitely differently calibrated.

For the DP2x it is slightly different. if I recall correctly spot metering gave the same result as the DP2s but matrix metering was tuned towards protecting highlights, so in contrasty scenes the DP2x is reducing exposure compared to the DP2s (and also the DP2).