Poppy. (DP2m blows me away again!)

Discussion in 'Sigma' started by Ghosthunter, May 18, 2013.

  1. entropic remnants

    entropic remnants Hall of Famer

    Mar 3, 2013
    John Griggs
    Ahem. They are indeed a camera with superior imagery -- but the low light performance, autofocus, and battery life would seem to mean they are not a camera for "general" use. How many shots can you get on a charge, lol?

    That being said, I have to say that every shot I see from one is epic in terms of what that sensor can do. If Sigma can put that sensor in a real, modern spec camera body -- that would be a winner.
  2. Yeats

    Yeats All-Pro

    Jul 31, 2012
    New Jersey, USA
    Post enough of these, folks will be flocking to buy Sigmas! :biggrin:
  3. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    if they could put that sensor into a proper functioning camera AND have software that is isn't cripplingly slow they could put other camera makers out of business.
  4. ReD

    ReD Hall of Famer

    Mar 27, 2013
    Always impressed by Sigma photos - I assume these are RAW ?

    Jpeg only must be faster so how do they compare?
  5. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Not just that sensor, though - they'd have to somehow keep it as amazingly good as it is in good light and ALSO make it at least pretty good in low light, make it operate at reasonable speeds, and make it work with 3rd party raw processors. I think the tradeoffs are sort of baked in. They're specialty cameras, not general cameras. They give up doing everything well for doing one or two things incredibly insanely overwhelmingly well. I don't see these as ever being great general purpose cameras, although a lot of general cameras may come pretty damn close to catching up to them at their specialty if sensor tech keeps improving as it has.

    I'm hoping to be able to do some sort of comparison between the Ricoh GR and Nikon "A" in the coming month, and I'm almost certainly going to buy one of them and take it on my trip to Italy for July. And if I'm lucky, it looks like I may be able to take a DP1M loaner with me to Italy, in which case I can do some comparisons between it and the Ricoh/Nikon twins for scenic/architectural shooting in good light. And maybe get a better handle on just how much better the Sigmas are at their specialty at this point. Because without AA filters, the Nikon and Ricoh appear to be getting closer than I'd have thought.

  6. brownnoddy

    brownnoddy Rookie

    May 8, 2013
    I own the DP2M. There are several "urban-myths" out there about the cameras. The AF performance is fine, in fact quite snappy. AF sensors need light to work so none of them work that well in poorly lit conditions. The camera doesn't do too badly for high-ISO performance. Certainly 1600 is fine. Here's an example of 3200 ISO- not optimal by any means but not too bad either (still some banding going on and some grain). Having said this, I am still bewildered about the apparent obsession many people have with low light.

    I will give you battery life. I get about 100 images per charge. However, on the upside, you use the camera in a different way, more like a film camera, and you're not shooting 100s of images. That said, I would gladly take double the battery capacity.

    I thought you might have mentioned that the camera is slow to process and write files. It is, until you realise that it's having to deal with file sizes of over 60mb (raw).

    Attached Files:

  7. I find that the JPG's are very good. Not much room for editing like any JPG so you gotta get it as right in camera as possible but they are not bad. If i 'had' to just shoot JPG, I would not be overly upset at not being able to use the RAW files.

    This camera is much better as a normal camera than people think. OK the battery is poor and high ISO isn't great but everything else is fine. The IQ more than makes up for it's few small shortcomings.

    I was seriously considering changing my Canon 600D to full frame but having the DP1m and 2m I really can't see any point at all. I genuinely love these cameras and look forward to a summer of fun!!!
  8. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    I think that the Sigma difference is more than just pixel level detail. Plenty of camera/lens combos can be as sharp as a tack at 100%. I think that the Dpreview preview of the Ricoh GR had a great comparison between the GR, Coolpix A, and DP1M, which showed how much moire the two AA-filterless Bayer sensor cameras can generate compared to the Sigma.
  9. Isoterica

    Isoterica Hall of Famer

    Dec 6, 2011
    Superb detail! I looked at some in your Flickr gallery too and I have to say I am seriously impressed at the quality of the images. Of course the camera is only as good as the one using it so most of the credit goes to you :) but that camera seems to really do its job.
  10. Yeats

    Yeats All-Pro

    Jul 31, 2012
    New Jersey, USA
    From what I've read, it's not only the AF speed that bothers reviewers, it's the overall speed of the interface. In a vacuum, those aspects may not be problematic, only so when compared with modern DSLRs. The ISO 3200 image you posted exhibits more noise than ISO 6400 output from the Sony & Toshiba 16MP & 24MP sensors now commonly used. Many, many people shoot indoors in low-light situations, so I don't think that high-ISO performance is an unreasonable "obsession". High-ISO performance is also useful for freezing action in better light.

    The Sigmas are what they are, somewhat specialized and definitely unique cameras that provide gobs of detail, tonality and depth that aren't to be found in other cameras. It would simply be nice if there were some usability improvements.
  11. entropic remnants

    entropic remnants Hall of Famer

    Mar 3, 2013
    John Griggs
    They aren't urban myths, lol. Many respected reviewers have knocked the limits of this camera -- and NONE knock the image quality. 100 shots on a charge? You're doing well -- most report much less. Since the camera needs the sensor to do AF, ISO limitations probably account for it's poor focus in low light. I don't find that image you posted compelling to show it has good high ISO performance -- though it isn't bad.

    You are quite right that this cameras sensor technology challenges processing -- but Sigma simply doesn't have the internal tech to turn out a dedicated, high speed, low power processing engine like a Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Panasonic, etc. can. This alone severely limits this camera and probably accounts for much of it's "problems". With a the kind of tech those other companies have, that slow processing and high power consumption might not be an issue.

    I respect your comments: but I stand on my premise which is that this is NOT a camera for general photography. It's a "specialists" camera, a "technical" camera and not something you could own as your only camera and make it meet diverse needs. Really what it seems to be is an engineering prototype that never advanced before being put into production.
  12. Horses for courses......... and I LOVE this horse!!:biggrin:
  13. Simon L Jones

    Simon L Jones Rookie

    May 11, 2013
    Salisbury, UK
    Simon Layton Jones
    I would agree - it is a specialist camera which can be used for particular types of work. But is it worthwhile for the image quality, outstanding lens and, a point that is often ignored, a very simple yet outstanding design that makes it easy to use within its limitations.

    With preparation it can be used for a number of things but it forces one to think about the shot before pressing the shutter - comparing it to a film camera shooting slide film is about right (limitations with ISO, number of available shots, speed of processing etc).

    But it is quite good.

    Merrill does people too | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

    Cold morning | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

    Time By Tiffany | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

    Kind regards,

  14. Xuereb

    Xuereb Veteran

    Nov 5, 2010
    W. Australia
    You are perfectly correct. However, putting the sensor in a real modern camera body would mean that some of us Sigma owners would no longer be seen as eccentrics, a minority with a camera that is a niche within a niche and might have to give up our tripods as constant companions. I am not sure I would be willing to give up these badges of oddity. Please appreciate that some of us need these emotional props.

    Oh, and apart from that, these cameras provide what we ask of a landscape camera.
  15. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    The way I shoot there would only be a relatively small portion of work that it would be unsuitable for. The most limiting feature of a DP camera for me would likely be the fixed focal length, not the high ISO or slow performance.
  16. brownnoddy

    brownnoddy Rookie

    May 8, 2013
    With great respect to John and Chris above, you really do need to own one of these cameras to comment, save in general terms, on how they perform.

    As for the ISO 3200 image I posted, I was careful to say that it was "not optimal by any means" and "had issues". I went to ISO 3200 because if you believe the myths on the web, you can't shoot above ISO 200 or 400 with a DPxM before noise becomes an issue. This simply is not the case. Also, I didn't mean to suggest that the camera in any way competes with large-sensor Bayer compacts in low-light situations.

    My comment about low-light photography was a bit tongue-in-cheek. However, my opinion remains that photography is all about light and it therefore mystifies me how so many people seem to be obsessed with making images in situations when there is almost none.
  17. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Jul 3, 2010
    Having used a DP1 for a pretty long while, I don't agree. There's plenty of kinds of photography a person can do with one of these cameras, including landscape, street, portrait, closeups, etc. Much like using a film camera with a fixed prime lens and slow film. It isn't a good choice for most people, but it's a great choice for general photography for some people.
  18. pdh

    pdh Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    brownnoddy, Amin - exactly ... a DP is just a camera. You take photographs with it.

    The "mytholgising" of DP cameras that's been going on since the advent of the Merrills drives me up the wall. The worst of the lot was this idea that you can't shoot a DP without a tripod because you can't shoot above 200. Extraordinary!

    Some perspective: Many street photographers of the first half of the last century were using cameras with a lens of maximum aperture f/3.5 or less and on film the modern equivalent of ISO100 or less. Without a tripod ...
  19. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    As an experiment I just checked the details of 1200 images I had taken with my Oly E-M5 in a month of travelling. Despite being the camera which I use in the largest variety of conditions, and would be more likely to use at higher ISOs because I set it to "S" mode and 1/500sec for street photography and also use it at night, a full 75% of the images were taken at base ISO. I would therefore agree even if a camera could go no higher than ISO 200 it would still be useful as a general purpose camera.