Sigma fp L initial review

If it had inbuilt EVF (like in Z6), tilt LCD + beter battery, it could be really great choice for landscape.

Nov 17, 2021permalink

jyw5

I wanted a pocket sized backup camera to compliment my A7rii...this was not it.

just buy an old Sony A5100 and be done with it. You will save $2000. 61mp with no ibis and no mechanical shutter and L mount! isn't very useful or practical.

Oct 24, 2021permalink

The attention this device commands time and again does amaze me.

The product itself not so much - sadly. There's a thing called ergonomics.

Jul 19, 2021permalink

D Cox

The ergonomics are fine, provided you select a grip that suits you. Not everyone will want the same grip. Likewise for viewfinders, some will prefer the loupe while others prefer the EVF or just the plain LCD.

You do need to use the fp cameras, not just look at pictures of them.

Jul 23, 2021permalink

peterwgallagher

I guess others must have mentioned this (but I can't find it). In the "Studio Scene" (stills) the lens(?) on this camera apparently fails to deliver anywhere near sharp focus on the center bottom (3 bottles). Is this a real fault or an apparent one?

Jul 18, 2021permalink

Thematic

Whoa 😳 you are right!

Jul 23, 2021permalink

First, DPR team could you please fix this 10 vs 12 bit noise nonsense. You can just note there is difference between the two modes. But do not go in noise coming from bit depth.

Second, Sigma could actually find a way out from this non-mechanical shutter cry out, and tears all over the forums.
They just need to make few very good lenses with leaf shutter! And there will be no more tears and celebration could start all over the world.
I am somehow filling it coming :D ! And all kind of rumors creators do not even dare to use my fillings for new rumors :D !

Jul 17, 2021permalink

AstroStan

"do not go in noise coming from bit depth"

That topic may be too advanced for most. But a primary reason for increased bit depth is directly related to noise (e.g. dynamic range) so such references are not inaccurate.

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

Yes it is too advanced topic even for myself, and they are making claim without good base.
And only thing that you get with higher bit depth is resolution - either luma/croma, per pixel. But you can put whole usable DR in two bits - darkest and brightest. You will just have nothing in between.
If you look at provided image with light bars for comparison you will clearly see more noise is coming even in very bright bars. It just become worse when getting darker. Then we have one darker bar which look like copy/paste from 12 bit, then we continue with worse noise?!?!
Also tonality/exposure do not look the same/ maybe gamma mapping.
So throwing 10 vs 12 bit argument is non sense in this case.
Yes they could just said in 10 bit mode we get more noise.
But we get more noise because of 10 bit sampling do not hold well.
And I think Ilza explained it very well below.

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

AstroStan

"you can put whole usable DR in two bits - darkest and brightest"

Actually it only requires 1 bit to discriminate between dark and light.

BTW, I assembled and operated a 1 bit photon counting camera (ICCD) for astronomical deep space imaging: 1=[photon detected], 0=[no photon detected]. For example, the camera was placed on an f/32 CC scope and run at 30fps (33ms). Stacking the resulting data stream produces an approximately 17 bit image for a 1 hour run (60x60x30 intensity levels). Note that ICCD produces virtually zero read-noise. Here are some details and results:
http://www.stanmooreastro.com/ZeroCam.htm
http://www.stanmooreastro.com/IntensifiedAstronomicalImaging.htm

Jul 18, 2021*permalink

You are absolutely correct 1 bit two states - 0 and 1. My bad!
-
Cool project BTW, thank you for sharing!

Jul 18, 2021permalink

Radovan

Sigma could build a nice modular system with detachable battery expansion pack, SSD, EVF etc. One could travel with a 24mp, 61mp and perhaps a Foveon body, and bunch of detachable accessories. That would be an interesting system. One thing I’m really missing from these cameras is IBIS. Especially on the 61mp body.

I wonder if Sigma put in one of their old Foveon sensors into FP body and put an attractive price on it, perhaps people invested in L mount ecosystem would be courious enough to buy it as a secondary camera.

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

Strangefinder

Perhaps a guest article from Johnnie Behiri would be worthwhile since CineD seem to have the inside-track on this camera.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

KenTanakaPhoto

Gotta hand it to Sigma; they make the most innovative cameras…that nobody uses! I salute their spirit but decry their inability to take camera products beyond studio concepts.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

Welsh

I love their lenses (especially the 40mm f1.4) but have never seen the point of their cameras. Would still like to see full-frame Foveon, though.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

Michael Piziak

I think a lot of people are put off by the looks of this camera....

Jul 19, 2021permalink

Daft Punk

I admit I simply do not understand why people are not giving this camera more respect. I hike. I also love landscape photography. Electronic shutter does not bother me and the ultra low "fake" ISO 6 option with the Sigma provides great flexibility without need ND filters.

I am trying to think of reasons why this is not a very compelling landscape and travel camera. Seems terrific to me. Color me interested.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

filmpoet

It’s because the Sigma has too many limitations at that price point. Only an electronic shutter, no viewfinder, l mount, poor afc, etc. It’s not a “bad” camera but for $2400, I’ll take a Sony A7r3 or Nikon z7 all day for the same money brand new.

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

Radovan

IBIS would have been nice …

Jul 16, 2021permalink

Halftrack

I also hike. If I'm hiking hard, IBIS helps. The more tripod-free stabilization, the better. Also, a mechanical shutter would've made this a lot more versatile—a hiking camera needs to do it all. I know it would make the camera heavier and bulkier, but if they couldn't do a faster sensor, Sigma should've put in a mechanical shutter.

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

dr.noise

too bad the ISO 6 option is not available where it's needed the most - video mode.

Jul 20, 2021permalink

marc petzold

Because of Sigma bashing from some folks here on DPR, i'd like to add that the Sigma fp-L does have better (!) DR from ISO 400 upwards, than the Sony A7R Mark IV - with also the same 60/61 MP FF Sensor.

You don't believe it? - Watch this:
https://ibb.co/NtYszqQ

Good Light. Peace.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

I guess it remains to be seen whether this will find its niche. Much as I like Sigma as a company, and appreciate their desire to innovate and explore new avenues in camera design, I'm still struggling to see many cases where this would seem to be a good choice. I could see the appeal of the Merrils, and thought they could have refined that concept further, but I'm a bit lost with this one.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

3DSimmon

Size, function, and price are the determining factors in which I would consider an fp.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

I think size, weight and modularity are the real strong points. Not only for the camera alone, but a full setup. I can make a FF raw capable handheld rig minus lens at less than 600g. The next closest I can come up with is about 1200g. Quite the difference in weight for handheld or gimbal use, and much cheaper when an expensive recorder is not required to purchase. Some, like myself, also still prefer cinemaDNG to Prores raw or Braw. It can be even lighter still if using 8bit internal raw. For stills it's something similar, but basically you build it or strip it down to what the situation requires. It might not be a "do it all" camera, but it's a good companion if you already have an existing larger setup.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

KoolKool

So what is the cheaper and lower alternative? Panasonic gx9?

Jul 16, 2021permalink

From a caption to the image in the “Video” section:

> “… the noise from lack of bit-depth is becoming visible in the 10-bit CinemaDNG file (top)”

This shows a FUNDAMENTAL misunderstanding of the digital capture. Decreasing the bit count can only DECREASE the noise (by “clipping variations” which are below ½ of the digitization step).

The extra noise one can more-or-less-always see in “typical” fewer-bits captures comes NOT from larger digitization step, but from shorter digitization TIME. This digitization time “is used” to average the time-dependent voltage noise¹⁾ on the sensel; the shorter the averaging time, the larger the result of this noise on the sensor readout.

¹⁾ Any electrical circuit produces some noise. (BTW: Most sources of this noise have a simple-to-describe physical model. However, one of the most prominent “types of noise” — the 1/f-noise — still resists the attempts to describe it using a simple physical model! So only “engineering-grade models are known…)

Jul 16, 2021permalink

I think you’re nitpicking. Maybe it should have been called quantization noise. But the effect is visible in the image. Push the shadows too much and the 10-bit starts to look bad before the 12-bit does… by about 2 stops. Go figure.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

What you say supports my point EXACTLY! There is no such thing as “quantization noise”. Quantization REMOVES info, not “adds” (as in “adding some noise”).

Distinguishing “quantization noise” (what is this?!) from “integration noise” COULD BE nit-picking — but not in the universe where people claim that 16-bit sensor readout must provide ENORMOUS advantages comparing to 14-bit one. (BTW, in reality it has NO ADVANTAGES WHATSOEVER — even with 2× longer integration — on GFX100, and has hardly measurable advantage — about 0.1EV — on GFX100S. Is it due to an improvement on Sony’s factory? I have no clue…)

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

(Or maybe it is not “improvement on Sony’s factory”, but a better noise of the power source of GFX100S. AFAIK, noise of power sources affects ADCs a lot!)

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

I think the original statement is correct. The IMAGE NOISE is coming from the lack of bit depth. Again. They don’t specify why the lack of bit depth causes the image noise. No one said it’s 1/f noise, thermal noise or other…. They said it results in image noise. And if you don’t know what quantization noise is type “what is quantization noise” in a google search box.

You are being pedantic just to be pedantic. If you want to analyze and argue the finer points of the technology you should go to some industry conference and heckle some presenter if they’re not precise enough for you. This is a forum for photographers who use the technology. And the article seems correct to me.

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

> “The IMAGE NOISE is coming from the lack of bit depth.”

Absolutely not!

It comes from “using the reading mode which is MARKED as having less bit depth”. But (at least on the datasheet) it is ALSO MARKED as having a different readout speed!

Saying that it is bitdepth, and not readout speed, which causes the noise leads to A LOT of confusion in non-technical readers. So it should be avoided.

Not because of the NIT-PICKING of technically-savvy readers (who can translate between these notions anyway!), but because of CONFUSION in the rest of readers!

Jul 16, 2021permalink

Readout speed?!?
You are confused.
Sorry man this conversation is going to be a waste of time.

You know the readout speed on the Sony AQ is like 15-20 times faster than the readout speed on the A7RIV, and the noise performance is perhaps one stop better on the A1?

This is a rhetorical question. No need to answer.

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

What is “Sony AQ”? (Google thinks that it is α1 — and I suspect it is right, but I have no clue how did it guess…).

If so, it seems that you are majorly confused. α1 has FW of 40Ke₋ and RN of 3.8e₋, while α7rIV has FW of 38Ke₋ and RN of 3.3e₋. Who told you that α1 is better?!

Moreover, appealing to a different sensor (which is probably 10x more expensive to produce!) is a clear example of the strawman argument. I was talking of different reading modes on the SAME sensor!

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

Look at the higher noise performance and you see the A1 is better. Anyway the readout is at least an order of magnitude faster on the A1.

Feel free to believe what you want to believe.

Oh and the A1 sensor is not 10x more expensive to produce. Probably only 2.5-3x more expensive.

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

@Ilza
You are absolutely right! They put nonsense in this 10 vs 12 bit explanation!
Bit depth has no relation to noise, and any possible difference could come by something else - as you said faster read out, different power modes, different modes on sensor and etc.
And if they like to be technically correct they need to fix this. I think Rishi understand this matter and could advise.

@MikeRan
Mike this is pure nonsense, so if they put 8 bit mode we will have noise all over the place? And if they go for 4 bit what is going to happen? No image just noise?

And if you look at provided image for comparison you WILL SEE there is a difference between exposure/tonality from around the middle to the left end.
So they are doing something with gamma mapping/ some kind of Log here.
There is even one bar in the dark area 10 bit which seems to be perfectly fine in between other noise bars :D. Most probably it will get better with new firmware.
So there is much more than 10 vs 12 bit mode.

Jul 17, 2021permalink

Same if you do 14 bit RAW to 8 bit jpg photo conversion, you never get more noise over the jpg.
Bit depth just add more luma/chroma levels/resolution. And as Ilza said it could actually remove the noise/details by clipping, averaging and so on.
I do not always agree with Ilza but this time he is spot on!

Jul 17, 2021permalink

We are talking about shadow recovery. Try to do three stops of shadow recovery on your 8-bit RAWs and tell me what you see.

You will see quantization noise.

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

For example In the case of R6 and some Panasonics you will see nothing! Why because it is clipped out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantization_(signal_processing)
Very well demonstrated here. Quantization noise for single solid bar will be the same for the whole bar!
As closest think that I could compare is banding! When you have smooth gradients and not enough quantization points you get bands instead of smooth gradient. And this is exactly quantization noise! You get rounded or truncated values compared to input!
But in our case we have something very different which is random pixel luma noise. This means we have pretty much different values in same conditions 10 vs 12 bit. Which could not come from quantization which is the same for the whole bar.
I mean Ilza explained it very well. There are more things going on not just 10 vs 12 bit mode.

Jul 17, 2021permalink

Also pay attention to the light bars exposure/gain, it is not equal for 10 vs 12 bit. Which alone is enough to get more noise!
And BTW we are comparing in 8 bit jpegs on 8-10 bit monitors so all possible quantization is averaged.
And there is 1 stop difference between bars so 1 stop quantization noise is not realistic. This will make sinusoid to look like rectangular stepwise rising / falling signal :D.
They are just wrong and need to fix this.

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

“Quantization” (or quantization error) and “quantization noise” are two different but related things. When you say “quantization noise will be the same for the whole bar” it shows you are confused between these two.

Quantization noise is in fact noise, not error, and is proportional to the magnitude of the least significant bit. So the quantization noise on a 10-bit signal will be 4 times higher than the quantization noise on a 12-bit signal.

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

Yes but will not result in different non uniform noise in uniform solid color! Simply because all pixels in the same luma bar will get same noise/error. Because they are with very close values.
It is very well demonstrated and explained in wiki topic BTW.
And with this ~30 luma/B&W/monochrome bars we are far away from quantization limits.

Jul 17, 2021permalink

“Every pixel in the same luma bar will get the same noise”
Why? Noise is random. The actual level is somewhere between two discrete values. The quantization noise means sometimes the value selected will be the higher one. And sometimes it will be the lower one. Each pixel will possibly have a different value. (That’s why it’s called quantization *noise*.)

Anyway. The LSB for 12-bit data is 1/4 the magnitude of the LSB for 10-bit data. The noise is therefore 1/4 smaller as well.

Anyway none of this matters. You can argue whether there’s a semantic problem with the article or caption text (there isn’t). But the results are the results. The 10-bit data is more noisy than the 12-bit data.

Jul 17, 2021permalink

@Mikeran
"Why? Noise is random."
Because signal is strong enough! This is not in deep shadows or blacks! This is almost in the middle.
And actually if you zoom in good enough like 260-300% you will see noise is not only luma but also lots of chroma. And you have areas with different levels of noise, in pattern. Like one circle in the middle and one line in the bottom,
Nothing like this in 12 bit out. So you are not reaching quantization limits, you are in the middle of the range and should get smooth output!
By this logic if they show 8 bit out it will be almost unusable and noise will start to be apparent from the highlights......
Clearly, statement in topic is wrong, and clearly noise comes from the different mode, but not because quantization or bit depth problems.
maybe it will be optimized with future firmware maybe not.

Jul 18, 2021*permalink

Middle of the range. Yeah.. sure.

Jul 18, 2021permalink

@MikeRan: > “Look at the higher noise performance and you see the A1 is better.”

The highest noise is produced at ISO100 — which I quoted.

> “Anyway the readout is at least an order of magnitude faster on the A1.”

True — and this is exactly my point. (Even switching to the next generation of the Sony’s technology,) the increase in the readout speed forced a decrease in the image quality.

> “Oh and the A1 sensor is not 10x more expensive to produce.”

Sure. I actually wanted to write “an order of magnitude more …” — but when I discovered this “misprint”, it was too late to edit.

> “Probably only 2.5-3x more expensive.”

The only discussion with numbers I know shows numbers like 380K¥ vs 120K¥ (for α7rIII).

(Which is — a tiny bit — more than √10, so would support my claim of “an order of magnitude” — when taken literally. ;–)

Jul 25, 2021*permalink

The link did not fit the preceding reply:
https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/28270-sony-a7r-iv-a7s-iii-a9-ii-to-feature-8k-video-as-new-60mp-and-36mp-full-frame-sensor-specs-leak/?do=findComment&comment=266028

Jul 25, 2021permalink

@MikeRan: > ”Try to do three stops of shadow recovery on your 8-bit RAWs and tell me what you see.”

Yes, tell me what you see — with the shot made at ISO where EDR was (e.g.) 7 stops!

> “You will see quantization noise.”

“Quantization noise” is an oxymoron. (There ARE very few contexts where the defects introduced by quantization MAY be treated as “noise”. However, in most of the USUAL contexts quantization should be considered as something REMOVING noise, not adding it.)

Jul 25, 2021permalink

Early on you said “quantization noise.. what is this?”
Now apparently you turned into an expert.

Im out…. Feel free to continue talking to yourself about it.

Jul 25, 2021permalink

Hmm, you REALLY think that the meaning of that “what is this?” is different from “this is BS”?! I’m surprised!

In other regards: since it was clearly shown how little what you say matches reality, and how deep is your misunderstandings, — what COULD you add?

Jul 25, 2021permalink

BlueJakester

The Sigma fp L is a solution looking for a problem :-)

Jul 15, 2021permalink

Actually no, much more like concept which slowly is coming to reality and functionality!

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

Andrewteee

I've been using the fpL with the EVF and 24/3.8, 12-24/2.8 and Leica 50/2 and getting phenomenal RAW files. Detail and colors are spot on; very little PP on colors. Dynamic range is strong. B&W conversions are very pleasing, made to taste.

Quirky, yes, and the EVF is fiddly to attach, but once you're up and running it's fantastic. I don't shoot video.

Jul 15, 2021permalink

What kind of subjects have you been shooting? (guessing landscape/cityscape/architecture, but happy to be wrong).

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

As I said above they just need set of leaf shutter lenses :) !

Jul 17, 2021permalink

pollup

I guess L stands for "Lento", which means "slow" in Italian.

Jul 15, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

And in Spanish too LOL

Jul 15, 2021permalink

Fotoni

It is a weird camera. Tons of compromises to gain...exactly what? Higher MP while preserving a compact and silent operation?

Sigma fp would had been the greatest budget high quality video camera, if it had the 5.9K raw video readout mode as Panasonic S1H/S1/S5 have, but Sigma chose pixel-binning for additional aliasing.

The idea itself is great and gives a glimpse of the near future, but not today. I suspect that this Sigma fp series concept is mature enough before 2030. It just needs Sony A1 electronic shutter technology or a bit more upgraded version of it.

Jul 15, 2021permalink

> “… but Sigma chose pixel-binning for additional aliasing.”

??!! Are you sure you have a clue about this?

This is based on the LIMITATIONS OF THE SENSOR. Read the Sony’s datasheet: the sensor does not have reading modes to support the required readout speed.

(Of course, this “only” shifts the questions to this Sigma’s choice of the sensor…)

Jul 16, 2021permalink

Strangefinder

Crop-zoom options allow either slower super-sampled footage or faster scanning skipped footage depending on requirements/intent.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

@Fotoni it seems like you have no idea what you are commenting on.
This camera is 61Mpix, and you are comparing to 24Mpix cameras and 5.9K RAW?
This is more like 9.5K sensor, also there are options as noted from @Strangefinder and @amweber21.
And it is well known this sensor is not with the fastest rolling shutters on the market. But also camera is not 4000-10000$! But 2499$ camera! Which is cheapest high res photo camera ever made.

Jul 17, 2021permalink

It should be mentioned that the line-skipping in 12bit cinemaDNG only occurs between 1.0-1.24x crops. From 1.30x crop and on it will read the full area and have the resolution of 10/8bit (with the increased rolling shutter).

Jul 15, 2021*permalink

timccr

It should indeed be mentioned and it's really sad that reviewers don't seem to have understood that. So how should I compare the video of the fp and the fpL? I'm completely confused!

Jul 15, 2021permalink

I wonder how clearly this is documented in the sigma literature. Do they spell it all out?

Jul 16, 2021permalink

I don't think there is a mention of this in the manual, although most leave technical things like that out of manuals. Sigma engineers have touched on it in multiple interviews, and I can confirm with my own testing. I do wish, however, they would release a chart diagram or something official. That said, the 1.0x-1.24x 12bit line-skipping is about the only noticeable effect in 4K. It is a limitation in the read-off speed of Sony's senor, so it is nothing Sigma could have overcome.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

Yeah. I agree it is good to know and also published if it’s discovered (and I’m not doubting it) but at the same time if the manufacturers don’t clearly make this known and it’s not obvious from testing it’s kind of hard to knock the reviewers for not mentioning it.

I don’t necessarily expect reviewers to have to watch every interview to glean all the finest details out of Sigma isn’t publishing the performance. That’s on sigma, not on DPR..

By the way Sony is the same way about dual gain. They don’t really seem to acknowledge in product literature where the dual gain kicks in. We have to figure it out ourselves. At least after years of producing dual gain sensors all the review sites know to test for this and report their findings. It would be much better if Sony just published the thresholds.

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

Strangefinder

One of several articles, perhaps even more forthcoming: https://www.cined.com/sigma-fp-l-review-and-sample-footage/
CineD quote via interview with Wakamatsu-san:

For now, please see below the recommended crop factors for EACH scenario:

For the best Resolution, x1.3 – 2.48
For phase detection AF, x1.0 and x1.53
For best dynamic range, x1.24

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

Man they should ship this camera with a pocket quick reference guide.
Seriously. Why isn’t this in the manual?!?

Jul 16, 2021permalink

@MikeRan: > “By the way Sony is the same way about dual gain. They don’t really seem to acknowledge in product literature where the dual gain kicks in."

I MAY HAVE MISUNDERSTOOD YOU. BELOW I ASSUME YOU DISCUSS “SENSORS” — WHILE **NOW** I THINK THAT YOU MEAN “CAMERAS” — when what you say makes perfect sense. (Except your usage of “DUAL GAIN”!)

⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜⁜

How can they?! As we know from α7sIII, this can be changed at any moment. Anyway, IT IS NOT DUAL GAIN — and this abuse of notation is what causing your confusion!

“Switching capacitance at ISO400” is the same as “switching capacitance at ISO800” while using an extra exposure correction +1 between 400 and 800. The former just reduces “the safety overexposure” margin in highlights for the range between 400 and 800.

I suspect that switching the capacitance ON THE SENSOR is completely independent from the gain. It is just during integration into the camera when the dependence of one from another is decided.

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

There you go with your pedantic notions again.
You’re thinking of electrical gain.

Perhaps you should be thinking in terms of photons. Or current. The amplifier gain we are talking about is more like a TIA. Not a Voltage amplifier.

You over analyze…

The sensor turns photons into current. The current charges a capacitor. The size of the capacitor directly affects the gain. (Volts per photon) Just like the resistor/feedback in a voltage amplifier affects the gain. (Volts per volt)

Why do you come up with crazy ways to argue every point!

Smaller capacitor means higher gain…

I am not confused.

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

He he for me dual gain would mean we start with charging on small cap and if we reach the limit we switch to bigger :D. Or this could be called staged gain :D.

Jul 18, 2021permalink

You two guys should form your own sensor company.

Jul 18, 2021permalink

Maybe, if we are living in the 1800-1900 when actually it was possible someone to start from scratch ........ Now with tons of patents and patent trolls this is absolutely useless. Does not matter how smart we are, or how bright is our idea.
Maybe we can think about some business on Mars .....
Anyway at least we can comment here.

Jul 22, 2021*permalink

drDaveH

I’d buy it in a second if they didn’t have the electronic shutter. The size, versatility and Leica lens compatibility are huge pluses. It can do gorgeous stills. But try to photograph movement and you have a banded warped distortograph. Get a clue Sigma. More properly, get a real shutter.

Jul 15, 2021permalink

It does seem like sigma considered so many aspects of the sensor design in choosing this sensor and completely neglected that they had no plans to put a mechanical shutter in front of it.

An A1 style sensor on this shutterless camera would make it a completely different beast.

Jul 15, 2021permalink

Probably electronic first-curtain would have been the best option, as full mechanical would have been at risk of causing shutter shock in such a small body. Even just a faster electronic shutter would have made quite a bit of difference to the usability.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

For me this is more like concept at the moment, and with the time will pass they could easily extend to faster and expensive sensors and/or leaf shutter lenses.
Also they are just starting with on-sensor PDAF. So if they have enough resources in time this could become very good system!

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

Mal69

The Sigma lacks detail and looks far too smooth in the test patterns, the pictures DPR took come out better but how much sharpening has been applied in post ?

The Canon seems to do far better with its anti aliasing filter than the Sigma, but between those four cameras I would choose Canon or Sony over the Sigma, I would even choose the Nikon over the Sigma as it looks far too soft and smooth, even if it’s just perceived detail on the other cameras it’s still better to my eyes.

I dont really like the design of the Sigma either, ugly, but they have a market, someone’s buying these.

Jul 15, 2021*permalink

oldtimes

Turn it on, let's see... opps, now it's dead. I don't care how good a camera is... simply won't buy one with a tiny battery when the design of a decent grip bulge would give it 3x as long lasting power, and improve ergonomics. Is it a stupid design thingy, or a camera? Sigma, what are you thinking?
240 cipa these days, at this price... well, it's simply ridiculous.

Jul 12, 2021permalink

FoxShutter

What does it mean flash sync speed 1/15? If it’s what I think than why it needs a flash at all ? Even an old Nikon 1J1 that also used electronic only shutter had 1/60 sync speed.

Jul 3, 2021permalink

The Nikon 1 cameras had far smaller sensors (1"), which had very fast sensor readout compared to the full-frame sensor in the Sigma. It's the speed of the readout which limits the flash sync speed.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

This is when people start to realize that their beloved "full frame" is based on very slow and backward technologies! Small sensors in last decade are much faster than more APS/135 format sensors. Just recently we start to see something is moving and developing but on very high price. Mainly because 10 years deep sleep from the so called camera vendors!

Jul 17, 2021*permalink

Just recently was the A9 release. 4+ years ago.
Not all the vendors were in a deep sleep.

Jul 17, 2021permalink

S Yu

The size of that EVF is ridiculous, so is the battery life. for that size the external EVF should definitely hold an integrated battery with the same capacity as the main.
And no a flip screen would not increase the size, 1mm thickness at the screen max. It only needs to flip on one axis.

Jun 27, 2021permalink

Reading the Jpeg related part of the review: Would anyone get this powerful a sensor and use jpeg?
On any camera that is. ( I am aware a review should cover most features if not all)

Jun 20, 2021*permalink

Ask all the Canon, Nikon, Olympus and (especially) Fujifilm users out there.

Jun 20, 2021permalink

Last i checked they didn’t have that

Jun 20, 2021permalink

My Olympus and Fujifilm cameras have capable JPEG engines that are able to take good advantage of their respective sensors.

Jun 20, 2021permalink

No 60 mp sensors

Jun 22, 2021permalink

Well Fujifilm has a 100MP medium format sensor.

Jun 22, 2021permalink

Ah and you use the Jpegs

Jun 23, 2021permalink

Why not?

Jun 23, 2021permalink

Johan Borg

Sigma's JPEGs are actually quite good these days (especially the dp Quattro cameras), but you're better off shooting RAW+JPEG since the fp L has a nice in-camera RAW converter so you can tweak files in the field.

Jul 15, 2021permalink

Sixpm

I was shopping in Star City (a well known 2nd hand camera mall in Hong Kong), one shop already has the FP-L with the viewfinder for sale. Definitely not a camera for the faint hearted, I consider myself a diehard fan of Sigma Foveon cameras and I waited for the Foveon sensor version of the FP, but as soon as I realised the release of the 60mp Bayer sensor, I just went ahead and bought the 24mp FP as the resolution is more than enough for printing up to 60 inches.

I really think Sigma have shot themselves in the foot with this 60mp camera because this camera lacks IBIS and wasted such a high resolution sensor, hence price new has dropped since launch. If Sigma cares about what we say, they should release a 100 ISO FP as I'm certain there'd be a huge cult following who would hand over their hard earned cash.

Jun 20, 2021permalink

(unknown member)

Lack of IBIS? No problem, just use it with one of Sigma or Panasonic's many available compact, image-stabilized lenses. Oh, wait.

Jul 15, 2021permalink

D Cox

I think serious landscape photographers like to use tripods.

Don Cox

Jul 23, 2021permalink

For everyone that is complaining about the lack of features, quirkiness, strange form factor, poor handling and confusing market segment (including me), I just want to remind you (and myself) that this is the second FF camera that Sigma ever made, one that is only meant as a Photography-version of the FP, and not as an upgrade or a successor. I am confident that they will take all the feedback they got from these 2 cameras and make an even better FP2. We just have to wait and support the company, otherwise, if we keep bashing every new camera that comes out, we won't get innovation, but only slight improvements from one model to the next.

I don't know about you, but I don't want to upgrade my camera every 1-2 years like I do my smartphone. I want my next camera to be a leap forward, not just to have minute improvements. I think Sigma, together with Zeiss are the only companies with the balls to actually redesign and rethink cameras, unlike everyone else that only do small upgrades.

Jun 19, 2021*permalink

Yes, this is mostly just an ‘R’ version of the FP.

Agree that everyone else is chasing the most popular design brief. But no way Sigma would be competitive there, so nice to see them do something different that can carve out its own niche.

I liked my Fp a lot and really enjoying this new Fp L even more.

Jun 21, 2021permalink

rrc1967

this isn't the first camera that Sigma ever made. the size of the sensor has little to do with a lot of its quirkiness.

Jul 16, 2021permalink

Darrian K

I have a huge fetish for tiny camera with big sensor, I use Sony because it's the smallest and it's still not small enough for me, my dream camera would be RX1RII body with E mount and A7RIV internals.
And I still can't get behind this fp thing, it just has too many deal breakers:
-no IBIS
-L mount is super dead you can't buy or sell any used lens in L mount
-no flip screen? there's totally space for a flip screen
-that huge add-on EVF is only 3.6 million dot, basically bargain bin spec at this point
-I don't care what shutter it is, it needs to sync to flash, and be free of distortion when I need it to

Otherwise I guess it's a great walk around casual camera with a vintage lens, but so is the original FP which is much cheaper, but then it also doesn't have IBIS where as A7C does, which is also compatible with my awesome Voigtlander APO lenses so yea I guess I'll stick with Sony even though it's not quite as small.

Jun 19, 2021*permalink

3.69m dot EVF is fine. Seems to be ok for the Nikon Z7 II. Did you also know that the Sigma EVF is the biggest EVF for a FF camera on the market? The biggest ever EVF for a FF camera doesn’t sound budget to me. Also you can get the APO 50mm in M mount which you can use on the Fp L as well as the Sony.

I find it somewhat funny giving the Sigma EVF a hard time and then saying you’ll stick with the A7C (which I also have) which has the smallest and lowest resolution EVF on a FF camera.

IBIS... meh doesn’t bother me. Never has.

I’ll take the highest resolution sensor in a FF camera + the largest EVF + some of the best high ISO performance (despite the resolution) + the tiny size (not mentioning the build or colours coming out of this thing).

Jun 19, 2021*permalink

I am not trying to defend this camera, because I am also shocked that the only improvement from the FP is the sensor pixel count but:

- If it had IBIS it would've been the size of an A7C, which defeats the purpose of the FP/FP L
- L mount is not "super dead", 3 of the biggest lens manufacturers in the world are making L mount lenses and new ones have already been announced
- there is space for a flip screen, but that would make the camera larger, again defeating its purpose
- 3.6 million dot is a lot better than A7Cs 2.4 EFV.
- you say you don't care what shutter it is, but then you demand flash sync. IN that case you have to care what shutter it is, because ES can't flash sync.

Sadly, Sigma missed a great opportunity with this camera. They released a camera targeted at photographers, but with the exception of the higher MP count and the addition of phase detect points, they really didn't improve on the photography side, when comparing it with the FP. Too bad :(

Jun 19, 2021permalink

Darrian K

Larger EVF needs more resolution to look good, I thought that would be obvious.
It's an external device already, there's plenty of space, it's brand new, why not just stick the best 9million dot EVF in there?

I am not sticking with the A7C, I don't have an A7C because of the EVF

Well then find a way to make it smaller, that's what you have to do to compete, nobody wants to buy a camera without IBIS now days.

3 of the what biggest lens manufacturers? You mean the biggest other than Canon Nikon Sony? Also I don't care what new lenses are coming out I'm talking about the used market.

A1 can flash sync with ES, please educate yourself.

Jun 20, 2021permalink

Ok mate. Not for you. Got it.

Jun 20, 2021permalink

Fastguitars

No IBIS?
Im out.

That was easy.

Jun 19, 2021permalink

eliehbk

I tried to live with its little sister the fp and, unfortunately, I couldn't live with the e shutter as I am a 100% stills shooter. Otherwise, the camera is solidly built and the output is fantastic, the Sigma colors are great!!!

Jun 17, 2021permalink

forest dream

If Sigma fp come with latest stacked sensor, electronic shutter no longer has rolling shutter issue. Problem solve.

Wish Sigma buy stacked sensor from Sony / Canon.

Jun 18, 2021permalink

bobo2018

What is the problem in photo with an electronic shutter?

Jun 20, 2021*permalink

The main problems in photo due to ES are:

1. Slow flash sync speeds of 1/30 shooting jpeg and 1/15 shooting raw
2. Distortion of scenes and objects when shooting fast-paced scenes or fast-moving subjects
3. Banding issues from flickering light sources such as fluorescent or led lights

Jun 21, 2021permalink

coasttocoastphoto

"Main Problems" revisited:
1. If you want to use flash, use one of your other cameras.
2. If you want to shoot fast moving subjects, use one of your other cameras.
3. If you don't want banding, use one of your other cameras.

Now, consider the benefits of the fp/fp-L and enjoy the small size and beautiful output. Not having a physical shutter has benefits including no moving parts or shutter shock, and it's dead silent. The small size and lack of viewfinder makes it very stealthy. When photographing people or animals, not putting a camera up to your face keeps the subject more at ease. I like my fp and the ability to put Leica, Zeiss, and Voigtlander glass on it. The Sigma 45mm DG DN lens is small, lightweight and is a great inclusion. The camera makes a lot of sense with the combo of a pleasing sensor and superior glass. I also don't own any cameras with a flip screen or IBIS. A flip screen would just get in the way, and I haven't noticed blur to the point where IBIS is required.

Jun 28, 2021permalink

But how are you photographing subjects without putting the camera to your eye when the screen is fixed? Anything lower than chest level is impossible to frame and focus. At least they could've made the screen articulate up and down. There's a Chinese guy that makes a flip screen mod kit using carbon fibre parts and it adds only a few millimetres to the thickness. If some random dude on the internet can make it, I'm pretty sure Sigma could've made it even better. I don't want the FP L to be like an A7III or a S1H, but at least to have basic photo features since they are marketing it as photo camera, unlike the FP which was marketed as a cine camera.

Here's the screen mod: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g9bEuGcguU

Jul 3, 2021permalink

rrc1967

@coasttocoastphoto

so basically spend $2500 on a camera and have to carry around another camera as well because of the limitations of this one?

Okay..

Jul 16, 2021permalink

coasttocoastphoto

@Victor Stan
I can focus my fp at eye, chest or waist level simply by positioning my body. I can stand sit or lie on the ground. If I'm not looking at the screen, I can point and shoot by zone focusing. Some cameras don't have a viewfinder or a screen. Many lenses have a distance scale. The fp is small and inconspicuous, and there is a huge selection of lenses available going back to the 30's.

@rrc1967
Photography is my lifelong passion. I have several cameras. I carry whichever one suits me at the moment. If I'm in my RV, I can carry a hundred plus pounds of equipment and have multiple bodies and lenses at the ready. If I were to hop on a jet to somewhere, maybe I would just take the fp and a couple of lenses like my Voigtlander Nokton 35mm 1.4 and my Leica Summicron 90mm 2.0. The fp is solidly built, easy to use, and is a very capable machine.

Jul 16, 2021*permalink

hindiscitech

great post

Jun 17, 2021permalink

Yes BossMan

Problem UNDERSTANDING?

"You can't fault the fp L for its level of detail capture."

I must be missing something. Need explanation to understand. Thanks in advance

Jun 17, 2021permalink

deep7

They simply mean the camera is capable of capturing a level of detail which is higher than most other cameras. Therefore, while you could fault it for other things, you couldn't for that.

Jun 18, 2021permalink

Yes BossMan

THANKS deep7

The missing perspective as you outlined explains it all. Thanks again.

Jun 19, 2021permalink

Djehuty

Its size is perfect for crash cams tho. Just needs an APSC version that's video focused and slightly bigger than a gopro.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

thx1138

For video the sensor scan speed is woeful, they'd need to greatly improve that.

Jun 18, 2021permalink

How are going to capture high-speed action shots, when everything moving faster than a well-fed housecat is turned into jello?

Jun 19, 2021permalink

bclaff

For techies, sensor analysis is now available at PhotonsToPhotos (https://www.PhotonsToPhotos.net)

Jun 16, 2021permalink

ybizzle

Wow that website is like a time machine. The layout is 1996 all over again! ;)

Jun 18, 2021permalink

bclaff

That's called "retro" :-)
Considering the site was created around 2005 it was already fashionably late.

Jun 18, 2021permalink

Content is king.

Layout is overrated

Jun 20, 2021permalink

Kona Mike

is that a vent on the top plate?

Jun 16, 2021permalink

Yes

Jun 16, 2021permalink

It goes all around the display, it's actually a heatsink sandwiched between the display and the camera.

Jun 19, 2021permalink

forest dream

Sigma should release Sigma fp which :
1. 12MP full frame stacked sensor with faster readout speed so that electronic shutter no rolling issue.
2. Support 4K 120 fps.
3. Built-in electronic variable graduated ND filter (optical). Since 12MP sensor's larger pixel has better low light performance, the ND filter can always on with lowest setting, ND no need mechanical part change ND to clear filter. Can achieve built-in ND in compact body.
4. Above graduated ND filter auto mode which can auto normalize (AI) light for properly exposed.

Jun 16, 2021*permalink

The issues with a model such as this is a stacked sensor would cost significantly more than a traditional sensor increasing the price of the camera. Sigma's strategy is a compact, lower cost model. Creating it the same price or more expensive than other models probably won't get anyone else on board as it still lacks features that many may want.
1. It solves the problem of flash sync and rolling shutter, but with the fp models limited buffer and C-AF it doesn't take much other advantages of the stacked sensor's features. Image quality would remain the same as a non-stacked sensor in other modes, and 12MP would push it to a mostly video only camera like the A7S models.
2. 4K120p would be limited to internal, and maybe certain external recorders. It's biggest video feature is cinemaDNG, and 4K120p is simply not going to work with current SSDs. The bandwidth is way to high. Mostly all drives couldn't record the sustained 1500MB/s needed.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

3&4. Variable NDs do not have a clear setting. They still need to be movable. Most run a 1-5 stop or 2-7 stop (like the fs5) so without moving it you would always have a fixed ND in front of the sensor even on the lowest setting. Not practical inside or for lower light. Making it moveable would need a full redesign to fit the moveable filters. It would be much larger.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

Not sure why people are asking for 4K 120. Why on earth do you need that for? Do you even have lights capable of supplying the necessary refresh rate?

If you need to shoot slo-mo, better get a slo-mo camera. 99% of users never shoot slo-mo, it's a very narrow niche, that's why slo-mo cameras exist.

Jun 21, 2021permalink

Djehuty

4k120 is awesome for B-rolls and the A7S3 can leverage on its low light performance for scenarios that need for more light but even then its use is rather limited.

Also Phantom slowmo cameras start at 50k upwards, there are cheaper ones like freefly but they are still like an unfinished product. Anyway I have no idea what the Sigma is for nor a niche that it could fit, maybe as crash cams?

Jul 15, 2021permalink

Fotoni

The most obvious benefit of Sigma fp series is the most compact body design of full frame camera on the market.

Other features are more questionable like lack of mechanical shutter, no internal EVF and no IBIS. These matter less in video shooting (gimbal > IBIS) and internal CinemaDNG recording means it is optimized for high quality video. Then there are strange things like pixel-binned raw video (also fp L?) and AA-filter. These pretty much nullify the benefit of CinemaDNG compared to Panasonic S1/S5 Prores raw.

So, compact full frame body, unpolished high quality raw video and restrictive stills because of slow electronic shutter. Also some features for lazy people like ISO 6 (image stacking) and some photo presets which everyone can copy for raw photos. It is a strange camera which tries to please everyone, but does that with tons of compromises. Sigma fp is a more balanced for that, if 24 MP is enough. The cheapest high quality raw video camera, but unfortunately pixel-binned.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

ISO 6 is for lazy people?

Jun 16, 2021permalink

I'd rather say that AF and IBIS is for lazy people. Learning how to pull focus and what body posture means for more stable shots are more important that having more AF points.

Jun 21, 2021permalink

That high ISO performance is really impressive! It's not a touch ahead, it is around 0.5-1 stops better than any of the other three compared even from sane ISOs and all the way up to extremes.

Try looking at them in comparison tool. Then try putting each of the other three cameras down to a stop lower ISO (say 6400 for Sigma and 3200 for the others). The Sigma is pretty darn close to them all, while being a stop brighter. It may not be a full stop, but geez it ain't far off. That's pretty remarkable in this current time (and even more so considering the camera is relying on purely electronic shutter).

The Nikon is the next closest.

Jun 16, 2021*permalink

Johans81

Sigma continues to make strange Quirky cameras and you can see that they are not in the camera business to make money but i love it, Every other cameras are the same so its fun when zeiss and sigma tried to make something different . It you hate it then just move along and buy something else

Jun 16, 2021permalink

I don't get the hate. I am like you, I'm SO glad someone is doing something different. Every other FF MILC looks exactly the same and then people quibble of minutia of how much travel a certain button has between models / brands...

Jun 16, 2021permalink

Sa7724473

Strange and quirky is great. What’s not so great, is cameras who nobody knows who they are for. Because that’s often a signal for users finding the actual photography with it to be a frustrating experience practically and creatively.

Said as someone who had a DP2Q, found it interesting but not valuable, sold it on, and has not found a reason to buy another Sigma body….

Jun 16, 2021*permalink

Djehuty

Or be actually good at what they are doing, modularity is good for video cams because you'd be adding stuff anyway like cages and mounting points for a monitor etc, not so much for photos where you just want to slap on a lens and be done with it.

Next was the actual usability of it, CinemaDNG is nice but bloated, not a big deal with BRAW and Prores options but it doesn't have a log profile, again not a big deal if you're shooting raw but just about every manufacturer out there has a log profile when you're not, what am I gonna do with teal and orange PP?

Stills? Well its AF is so so, well there's always manual focus but there's no mechanical shutter or IBIS. Well now its not great for videos or photos.

I guess its a very good low light gopro if you use a WA lens at F4 or F8 and set the focus to infinity mounted on some Z-axis arm or something and plug in an external recorder for a crash cam that does 10bit, tbh that doesn't sound too bad, well the FP at least.

Jun 16, 2021*permalink

Log is a workflow nightmare and it's only a workaround for cameras that can't shoot Raw. Raw is so much easier to work with, gives better results and is pretty much the future. When Raw video will be available in high end mirrorless cameras, nobody will be shooting log. We already have 10-bit log internally on high end cameras and 12-bit externally, how long do you think until RAW will be available externally? I bet it's less than 5 years.

Jun 19, 2021permalink

Polacofede

i like the photos, but the camera is quite weird to me.
Can't imagine using such body could be quite impractical, not sure why they insist on that kind of shapes.
that said, I would love to see some zoom lenses to be produced again for K mount, i know... keep dreaming.

Jun 16, 2021*permalink

Welsh

I doubt that the low Pentax sales which prompted Sigma (and Tamron) to drop the mount have changed significantly.

Jun 17, 2021permalink

Polacofede

@welsh that's what i meant. They will never come back.
I doubt Sigma cameras sales are bigger. But hey! Their cameras, their lenses , can do whatever they want.

Jun 18, 2021*permalink

Leicalika

a full frame camera which looks like it's 1/2 the size of some massive Micro 4/3 models, neato

Jun 16, 2021permalink

Breakfastographer 2

To my eyes, the moire is best controlled on the Sony. But the four selected cameras have completely different lenses, so we can learn exactly nothing from this exercise.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

The Sony did surprisingly well. The Sigma does the best actually weirdly. The softness compared is barely existent.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

Photoman

I like that Sigma like to do things differently. At least it isn't boring.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

aris14

I find it enjoying, if not relieving, that hard core gearheaded people cannot understand this cam.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

Banding caused by the tungsten light used AND shutter speed.

Jun 15, 2021permalink

"The viewfinder will cost $699 if purchased on its own, but only adds $500 to the cost of the camera when bought as a kit."

"Only $500". LOL. What's it worth? $50?

Jun 15, 2021permalink

Yeah ok, why don’t you make them an EVF the same (or better) for $200 then?

Jun 15, 2021permalink

MrHollywood

500 does seem a bit high.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

forest dream

Canon M6 Mark II :
1. Body only $849
2. Body + 15-45 kit lens + optional EVF only $1099

Jun 16, 2021permalink

And these are the same because?

Of right and I assume the sensor also costs the same? And they both have a battery, so they're the same. They both have a processor... So they are the same.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

Elisam
That's an unreasonable statement! I am not an electronics manufacturer. The profit margin on these optional EVFs is excessive and apparently, DPR agrees. Here's what they said back in 2013 about the optional EVF for the Sony RX1R which was "only" $450.

" At around $249 the thumb grip isn't cheap, although it does improve the camera's handling. Likewise, at $599 for the optical viewfinder and $179 for the lens hood, the mark-up on these items appears to be rather excessive, to say the least. The electronic viewfinder will set you back $449.99 - $100 more than the equivalent unit for the NEX series of cameras."

You can be an apologist for these manufacturers but I will not.

As forest dream pointed out. Canon charges only $250 for the kit lens and EVF for the M6 ii

Jun 16, 2021*permalink

The EVF for the Canon M6 II is a 2.4m dot unit with 0.62x magnification. It is made from cheap plastic. The Sigma is weather sealed and far better made with much sturdier connection. Furthermore it is a 3.69m dot (and much bigger panel) with an industry top 0.83x magnification. That’s higher than pretty much every EVF out there.

You’re comparing two things because they appear similar without looking at details. It’s like saying that Canon make a 35mm equivalent lens for the M6 II for like $200. So why aren’t all 35mm lenses $200?

It’s absolutely silly to talk about it in comparison to the Canon.

As for the Sony, I can understand DPRs point because it was the EXACT SAME EVF as the previous one, with a different connector. Incidentally that EVF was also similar to the Canon one, with higher magnification. But again nowhere near this Sigma. AND it was only $50 less.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

What's unreasonable is to act like all EVFs are the same. The Canon M6ii evf is a 0.39" 2.36M 0.63x EVF comparable to what is inside the A7C, which isn't seen as a great viewfinder by most. The Sigma EVF-11 is a 0.5" 3.69M 0.83x EVF similar to what inside the Lumix G9, which has always been acknowledged as a great EVF. As with most electronical things, better quality costs more.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

I don't care. It still is overpriced. I just bought a 4K 50" TV for $400. I can guarantee it cost a lot far to manufacture than that dinky chip inside the EVF. As long as there are apologists making excuses for manufacturers ripping us off things will never change.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

I haven't made an apology. I guess you can call me a observationalist as it's just the principle of how producing goods works. There's a reason certain products cost less. Sigma makes some of the most reasonably priced photography equipment for the quality offered. They could definitely make a pathetic rx100 evf for super cheap but I'm happy they don't.

The made it optional so you don't have to get it. I didn't.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

‘I don’t care’ - great argument. ‘I bought a 4K TV for $400’ - you don’t say? I bought a bag of marbles for $10, so your TV was overpriced, ripping off the poor little consumer.

Jun 16, 2021permalink

coasttocoastphoto

I like the term "observationalist".

Jun 16, 2021permalink

Richard Head III

I love you guys😁 I cancled Netflix, because reading your bs is far more entertaining!

Jun 17, 2021permalink

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1503487-REG/canon_3938c001_oled_viewfinder_for_c500.html

I'm just going to leave this here:

Jun 18, 2021permalink

havanna60

There are only two tilting EVFs on the market Fuji GFX50S/100 and this Sigma FP. This high quality EVF alone would be enough reason to buy a camera for it, if that camera would be at least semi decent. The FP implementation is so pathetic and disappointing that even this brilliant high quality tilting EVF cannot make it appealing. If this EVF were made for FX3 that would be excellent.

Jun 18, 2021*permalink

While I would never consider a tilting EVF a reason to buy a camera I can see its usefulness.

Jun 18, 2021permalink

Impulses

I'd buy one with the A1 sensor, so it can sidestep the shutter issues...

Jun 15, 2021permalink

D Cox

The A1 sensor would obviously be ideal for an fp. I presume it isn't yet available for use by other companies, or it's extremely expensive, or both.

Don Cox

Jul 23, 2021permalink

Dissapointing RAW softness...

Jun 15, 2021permalink

deep7

Did you read the explanation about the AA filter? It's exactly what you should expect.

Jun 15, 2021permalink

Your explanation does not solve this issue which is real... and no, it's not what I have expected... R5 has also an anti-aliasing filter and its RAW looks great, as good as Z7II without AA filter. Sigma RAW softness is really dissapointing. I thought it can be great landscape cam but with such mushy files it is not.

Jun 16, 2021*permalink

Jack Hogan

R5 seems to have an AA in one direction only, so it's not a good comparison.

Jun 17, 2021permalink

deep7

Mateus1, it seems your expectations don't have much experience behind them. Anyhow, if you re-read the relevant section of the article, you'll know that the apparent softness hasn't lost detail in the image. If you live in a city, or anywhere with repeating patterns, you will find the filter to be an advantage in your landscape photography. Given the massive resolution, it has a healthy head start on the other cameras that you prefer. Of course, there are other reasons to go with those options but "softness" is not one of them.

Jun 17, 2021permalink

Ok, I was refering to the image in Studio scene and it looks quite soft, maybe in real landsape situaction it is another story, but what I see here is dissapinting.

Jun 18, 2021permalink

Jack Hogan

I have come full circle on this over the years. At these pixel pitches I still prefer an AA in spite of the extra sharp look: aliasing looks like oversharpening that can't be undone. Once you see it, you can't unsee it - and then you see it everywhere. I think Sigma and Fuji made the right call putting one in there in this iteration , even for landscapes.

Jun 18, 2021*permalink

alan_b

I'd love a camera with this form for use on a mini view camera like Arca M2 or Cambo Actus. (My use would be architectural interiors.) It would need a faster flash sync speed though.

Jun 15, 2021*permalink

FuhTeng

huh. Anyone else see more detail with the Z7 II (which is right with a7R IV) than the higher MP sigma? Interesting. For example the little colored floof balls to the left, and then it just gets more pronounced the farther from center you get?

I expect that's due to the lenses used, but at f/5.6 I'm surprised I see more with the Nikon as I'd expect the very expensive L mount lens to be at least as good.

Maybe it's field curvature?

Jun 15, 2021*permalink

Yes, there is definitely something off, I'm not sure if something is misaligned, but it gets worse towards the bottom. The text on the honey vinegar appears out of focus, and not a lack of detail.

Jun 15, 2021permalink

Urbex Mark

Agree. Do they specify which lenses were used for these tests anywhere?

Jun 15, 2021permalink

Yes, click the small "i" under the preview screen. The Lumix 50mm 1.4 S Pro lens was used. A lens that has more than enough resolving power.

Jun 15, 2021permalink

FuhTeng

Good point amw. I didn't look at the extreme top center. huh.

Jun 15, 2021permalink

pollup

It's because the Sigma is using an AA filter, which blurs the image.

Jun 15, 2021permalink