sd Quattro as an XPan analog?

[HeavyDuty]

I periodically go though panoramic photography phases and after several years I feel one coming on again. I have a dp0 Quattro for tripod mounted landscape, but I’ve personally found using it handheld to be a nonstarter.

I’m wondering if a sd Quattro with a 14mm might work for me as a handheld panoramic camera. It has the same 21:9 aspect ratio available with a choice between transparent and opaque framelines as does the dp0.

I’m thinking the sd Quattro would do better for me than the H model, a 18mm-e would be a little wide for me. Are there major differences between the two models other than sensor size? If I scratch this itch, would I do better with an H variant?

 

[Ceistinne]

I periodically go though panoramic photography phases and after several years I feel one coming on again. I have a dp0 Quattro for tripod mounted landscape, but I’ve personally found using it handheld to be a nonstarter.

I’m wondering if a sd Quattro with a 14mm might work for me as a handheld panoramic camera. It has the same 21:9 aspect ratio available with a choice between transparent and opaque framelines as does the dp0.

I’m thinking the sd Quattro would do better for me than the H model, a 18mm-e would be a little wide for me. Are there major differences between the two models other than sensor size? If I scratch this itch, would I do better with an H variant?

HeavyDuty,

Other than the sensor size they are the same. I have both.

S

 

[left eye]

I have both and apart from the larger sensor there is one subtle difference, the EVF.

While the EVF resolution in both is the same, the image delivered from the sensor is of a lower res than the EVF could support. The information graphics look good - and are presented at the full resolution of the EVF.

The H model delivers a bit more resolution to the EVF and the view does look better. It has to be said the EVF rendering of what you are composing is quite low res by today’s standards, quite off-putting in fact!

I’d say the APS-C version is just that bit too below par to make me want to use it, the H version, is just good enough. There’s not a lot of difference but what difference there is, makes the H version’s EVF experience better.

Also there may be one other difference, as the H version was released afterwards, I think it was said it was given a faster processor to deal with the greater amount of resolution, this may affect / improve AF - though I haven’t verified that.

 

[HeavyDuty]

Definitely food for thought. I just can’t think of other camera bodies that natively support anything like 21:9 with VF masks. If Nikon would offer more aspect ratios I’d use that, but there’s something compelling about the Sigmas.

 

[HeavyDuty]

Gulp.

Reading reviews sold me on the acuity and resolution. I found an excellent condition body and 14/1.8 for what I thought was reasonable money from a well respected retailer, I’ll have a 14 day return privilege. Let’s give it a try.

Finding a PG-41 may be painful, but I want that extra battery capacity.

 

[left eye]

Definitely food for thought. I just can’t think of other camera bodies that natively support anything like 21:9 with VF masks. If Nikon would offer more aspect ratios I’d use that, but there’s something compelling about the Sigmas.

The GFX cameras do a proper XPan ratio of 65:24 (2.7:1).

I have the original GFX50S bought new at the time many years ago, great camera (EVF in another league compared to the Sigma sd, and I have the tilt adapter for the EVF), available 2nd hand for reasonable prices. The GF23mm is a nice lens (18mm equivalent - before cropping).

 

[TN Args]

.... I have a dp0 Quattro for tripod mounted landscape, but I’ve personally found using it handheld to be a nonstarter.

Why would you say that? It's leaf shutter vibrates much less than the sdQ, so you would have to use a much faster lens (and use it wide open) or a lens with optical IS to get any advantage.



cheers

 

[fronko]

yeah probably one of the easiest cameras to use handheld. my advice is hold it in place a little longer after shutter press than you would a different camera

 

[HeavyDuty]

.... I have a dp0 Quattro for tripod mounted landscape, but I’ve personally found using it handheld to be a nonstarter.

Why would you say that? It's leaf shutter vibrates much less than the sdQ, so you would have to use a much faster lens (and use it wide open) or a lens with optical IS to get any advantage.

cheers

Ergonomically it doesn’t work for me handheld - I always use the LVF-01, and it’s much too large for eyelevel work. On a tripod, or even a monopod it’s great.

--
Ken in Central Texas
Railroad Action: http://www.pbase.com/kjford
Candids: http://www.pbase.com/kjford/other

 

[HeavyDuty]

Definitely food for thought. I just can’t think of other camera bodies that natively support anything like 21:9 with VF masks. If Nikon would offer more aspect ratios I’d use that, but there’s something compelling about the Sigmas.

The GFX cameras do a proper XPan ratio of 65:24 (2.7:1).

I have the original GFX50S bought new at the time many years ago, great camera (EVF in another league compared to the Sigma sd, and I have the tilt adapter for the EVF), available 2nd hand for reasonable prices. The GF23mm is a nice lens (18mm equivalent - before cropping).

I’d love one, but it’s three times the price of admission.

 

[Abbazz]

I periodically go though panoramic photography phases and after several years I feel one coming on again. I have a dp0 Quattro for tripod mounted landscape, but I’ve personally found using it handheld to be a nonstarter.

I’m wondering if a sd Quattro with a 14mm might work for me as a handheld panoramic camera. It has the same 21:9 aspect ratio available with a choice between transparent and opaque framelines as does the dp0.

I think that you are aiming for a lens that is too wide. In my view, a 14mm lens on an sd Quattro when shooting in 21:9 format has an overdone look (too much perspective distortion on the sides).

In fact, the main lens of the original xPan was the 45mm. The idea was it had the field of view of a normal lens on 24x36mm format (which the xPan was also able to shoot) but it was also able to expand the horizontal angle of view almost twice as wide when shooting in 24x65mm.

On the 15.6x23.5mm sensor of the sd Quattro, the image size when in 21:9 crop mode is 10.07x23.5mm so a lens equivalent to the 45mm of the xPan would be a 18mm.

I’m thinking the sd Quattro would do better for me than the H model, a 18mm-e would be a little wide for me. Are there major differences between the two models other than sensor size? If I scratch this itch, would I do better with an H variant?

The only advantage of the H model compared to the sd Quattro is the slight increase in pixel count (around 25%). The bigger sensor also requires more lens coverage and lots of "crop lenses" will show vignetting or fuzzy corners on the H.

On an sd Quattro H with its 17,9×26,7mm sensor (11,44x26,7mm image size in 21:9 mode), the equivalent of the xPan's 45mm would be a 21mm.

I like to use my old Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro zoom on both cameras when I shoot in 21:9 mode. I use it from 18mm on the sd Quattro and from 21mm on the Quattro H (but also often at longer focals; the 90mm is also very useful on the original xPan). It covers the whole image in 21:9 mode on the larger sensor of the H model.

When I use a wider lens, like the 8-16mm zoom, I always switch to 1:1 aspect ratio in order to minimize perspective distortion on the image sides. The 8-16mm in square mode is a very powerful tool, just like a Hasselblad SWD.

Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[HeavyDuty]

I periodically go though panoramic photography phases and after several years I feel one coming on again. I have a dp0 Quattro for tripod mounted landscape, but I’ve personally found using it handheld to be a nonstarter.

I’m wondering if a sd Quattro with a 14mm might work for me as a handheld panoramic camera. It has the same 21:9 aspect ratio available with a choice between transparent and opaque framelines as does the dp0.

I think that you are aiming for a lens that is too wide. In my view, a 14mm lens on an sd Quattro when shooting in 21:9 format has an overdone look (too much perspective distortion on the sides).

In fact, the main lens of the original xPan was the 45mm. The idea was it had the field of view of a normal lens on 24x36mm format (which the xPan was also able to shoot) but it was also able to expand the horizontal angle of view almost twice as wide when shooting in 24x65mm.

On the 15.6x23.5mm sensor of the sd Quattro, the image size when in 21:9 crop mode is 10.07x23.5mm so a lens equivalent to the 45mm of the xPan would be a 18mm.

I’m thinking the sd Quattro would do better for me than the H model, a 18mm-e would be a little wide for me. Are there major differences between the two models other than sensor size? If I scratch this itch, would I do better with an H variant?

The only advantage of the H model compared to the sd Quattro is the slight increase in pixel count (around 25%). The bigger sensor also requires more lens coverage and lots of "crop lenses" will show vignetting or fuzzy corners on the H.

On an sd Quattro H with its 17,9×26,7mm sensor (11,44x26,7mm image size in 21:9 mode), the equivalent of the xPan's 45mm would be a 21mm.

I like to use my old Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro zoom on both cameras when I shoot in 21:9 mode. I use it from 18mm on the sd Quattro and from 21mm on the Quattro H (but also often at longer focals; the 90mm is also very useful on the original xPan). It covers the whole image in 21:9 mode on the larger sensor of the H model.

When I use a wider lens, like the 8-16mm zoom, I always switch to 1:1 aspect ratio in order to minimize perspective distortion on the image sides. The 8-16mm in square mode is a very powerful tool, just like a Hasselblad SWD.

Cheers!

Abbazz

Good information, thank you!

I experimented with using a 20 or 21mm and cropping to 21:9 in post years ago in film days; when the dp0 came out it allowed me to do all of that in camera. That’s what appeals about the sd Quattro, it’s basically the same as what I get with the dp0 in a more handheld friendly format plus the ability to use it for other things due to it being an ILC. To be honest I seized on the Sigma 14mm without giving it much thought solely based on my dp0 experience.

I also have a thing for 1:1 and have had a few naughty ideas that the sd Quattro would be a great tool for me shooting square since my 500CM never sees the light of day anymore. More things to consider!

 

[HeavyDuty]

My sdQ and a 14/1.8 arrived today, a PG-41 shows up tomorrow and a 30/1.4 Monday. My initial impression is very favorable; there are some quirks to work out like how to best invoke image magnification while focusing and other control customizations but I feel like I can go forth and create crap images right now. Firmware is already 1.13.

 

[HeavyDuty]

The PG-41 is here and it’s a chonk. I’m used to a Z9 as my main body, but this is pretty big. I think it will be beneficial for a lot of work, though and it’s fast to remove if needed. It makes a big difference with the 14/1.8, and verticals in general are much less painful.

 

[left eye]

The PG-41 is here and it’s a chonk. I’m used to a Z9 as my main body, but this is pretty big. I think it will be beneficial for a lot of work, though and it’s fast to remove if needed. It makes a big difference with the 14/1.8, and verticals in general are much less painful.

Yes, I concidered it as I like the added vertical grip on my GFX50S - using it without batteries in, to keep the package as lightweight as possible. Can always carry an extra battery separately.

But the grip for the sdQ is another kettle of fish, and ‘removes’ the built in quirky raised grip design, which while not the most comfortable grip in the world does make me smile and want to use the camera more. Wherever I can I’m always trying to minimise bulk and weight, such as opting for a wrist strap on all my cameras, and usually the smallest prime lenses I can find (though that’s not always possible!), and the smallest shoulder bag I can get away with etc.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to hearing how your sdQ journey unfolds, and the 30mm should be arriving shortly?…

 

[HeavyDuty]

The PG-41 is here and it’s a chonk. I’m used to a Z9 as my main body, but this is pretty big. I think it will be beneficial for a lot of work, though and it’s fast to remove if needed. It makes a big difference with the 14/1.8, and verticals in general are much less painful.

Yes, I concidered it as I like the added vertical grip on my GFX50S - using it without batteries in, to keep the package as lightweight as possible. Can always carry an extra battery separately.

But the grip for the sdQ is another kettle of fish, and ‘removes’ the built in quirky raised grip design, which while not the most comfortable grip in the world does make me smile and want to use the camera more. Wherever I can I’m always trying to minimise bulk and weight, such as opting for a wrist strap on all my cameras, and usually the smallest prime lenses I can find (though that’s not always possible!), and the smallest shoulder bag I can get away with etc.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to hearing how your sdQ journey unfolds, and the 30mm should be arriving shortly?…

I’m trying to cut out time this weekend to try the camera and 14, but the kids are keeping me hopping. I’m thinking before work on Monday if the weather and light cooperates. The 30mm should be here Monday, too.

 

[saltydogstudios]

Definitely food for thought. I just can’t think of other camera bodies that natively support anything like 21:9 with VF masks. If Nikon would offer more aspect ratios I’d use that, but there’s something compelling about the Sigmas.

This is also something of interest to me.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4800637

My Panasonic S1 offers

4:3

3:2

16:9

1:1

65:24

2:1

I definitely smiled the first time I changed it to 65:24.

And Panasonic is also L-Mount so you can use your Sigma BF lenses...

The S1 is a heavy beast, I believe they make lighter variants (and higher resolution variants).

--
"no one should have a camera that can't play Candy Crush Saga."

 

[HeavyDuty]

The PG-41 is here and it’s a chonk. I’m used to a Z9 as my main body, but this is pretty big. I think it will be beneficial for a lot of work, though and it’s fast to remove if needed. It makes a big difference with the 14/1.8, and verticals in general are much less painful.

Yes, I concidered it as I like the added vertical grip on my GFX50S - using it without batteries in, to keep the package as lightweight as possible. Can always carry an extra battery separately.

But the grip for the sdQ is another kettle of fish, and ‘removes’ the built in quirky raised grip design, which while not the most comfortable grip in the world does make me smile and want to use the camera more. Wherever I can I’m always trying to minimise bulk and weight, such as opting for a wrist strap on all my cameras, and usually the smallest prime lenses I can find (though that’s not always possible!), and the smallest shoulder bag I can get away with etc.

Anyway, I’m looking forward to hearing how your sdQ journey unfolds, and the 30mm should be arriving shortly?…

I’m trying to cut out time this weekend to try the camera and 14, but the kids are keeping me hopping. I’m thinking before work on Monday if the weather and light cooperates. The 30mm should be here Monday, too.

FedEx surprised me and brought the 30/1.4 a day early, but I’m still unable to get out shooting today. Ugh.

 

[HeavyDuty]

Partial success today. I was able to get out before work, it was quite overcast but I got the job done. I did some tripod work down on the river and then walked around town a bit.

I’m quite happy with how the sdQ handles and how the images look on the computer, and the 30/1.4 seems quite decent shot both 21:9 and 1:1.

The 14/1.8 is a heck of a lens, but it’s so big and heavy I’m running into vibration issues on the tripod - I’d need to rig a cantilever Arca style plate to balance it further forward. Plus, it’s really too much of a handful for walkabout which is the majority of what I was hoping to do with it.

I think the 14 is going back, I’ll start looking at alternatives. I’m glad I still have my dp0 for tripod 14mm 21:9 work!

 

[HeavyDuty]

I periodically go though panoramic photography phases and after several years I feel one coming on again. I have a dp0 Quattro for tripod mounted landscape, but I’ve personally found using it handheld to be a nonstarter.

I’m wondering if a sd Quattro with a 14mm might work for me as a handheld panoramic camera. It has the same 21:9 aspect ratio available with a choice between transparent and opaque framelines as does the dp0.

I think that you are aiming for a lens that is too wide. In my view, a 14mm lens on an sd Quattro when shooting in 21:9 format has an overdone look (too much perspective distortion on the sides).

In fact, the main lens of the original xPan was the 45mm. The idea was it had the field of view of a normal lens on 24x36mm format (which the xPan was also able to shoot) but it was also able to expand the horizontal angle of view almost twice as wide when shooting in 24x65mm.

On the 15.6x23.5mm sensor of the sd Quattro, the image size when in 21:9 crop mode is 10.07x23.5mm so a lens equivalent to the 45mm of the xPan would be a 18mm.

I’m thinking the sd Quattro would do better for me than the H model, a 18mm-e would be a little wide for me. Are there major differences between the two models other than sensor size? If I scratch this itch, would I do better with an H variant?

The only advantage of the H model compared to the sd Quattro is the slight increase in pixel count (around 25%). The bigger sensor also requires more lens coverage and lots of "crop lenses" will show vignetting or fuzzy corners on the H.

On an sd Quattro H with its 17,9×26,7mm sensor (11,44x26,7mm image size in 21:9 mode), the equivalent of the xPan's 45mm would be a 21mm.

I like to use my old Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro zoom on both cameras when I shoot in 21:9 mode. I use it from 18mm on the sd Quattro and from 21mm on the Quattro H (but also often at longer focals; the 90mm is also very useful on the original xPan). It covers the whole image in 21:9 mode on the larger sensor of the H model.

When I use a wider lens, like the 8-16mm zoom, I always switch to 1:1 aspect ratio in order to minimize perspective distortion on the image sides. The 8-16mm in square mode is a very powerful tool, just like a Hasselblad SWD.

Cheers!

Abbazz

You can say “I told you so” any time you want. lol.

I’m looking at two older Sigma SA mount lenses, the later 17-70/2.8-4 and a 15-30. And I purposely shot the 14 today both 21:9 and 1:1, I hadn’t considered how nicely ultrawides worked 1:1 before until you brought this up. I was seriously impressed!