Anyone else cut down their DP2M usage ? I find that when I'm leaving the house these days I'm back to grabbing my little Sony RX100 more again.
I still think the DP2m is a fantastic camera, but its one that I'm really only seeing myself grabbing for specific photo outings where I know it will excel.
Seems that for me at least, after a couple of weeks shooting random stuff just to see how much detail I can get, the thrill of the IQ alone has sort of worn off.
Again, its fantastic IQ, and with a good subject, composition, lighting etc, will produce some stunning images, but not everything the camera see's turns to gold.
I used to run around shooting tree bark, bricks, leaves etc just to come home and view them at 100% and oooh and ahhh over the detail. I think that got a bit old frankly.
Still impressive, but after several hundred images ran through SPP, just isn't that exciting or novel.
Anyone else finding their Merrill is now more of simply a high quality and very specific tool, rather than a new toy ??
The DP2 M I bought just last month was the first new camera I've had in years. The previous camera (and one I still use on rare occasion now) is Panasonic's G1 which was the first new camera I had since Leica's Digilux 2 (which was the first camera that I personally felt proved that a digital camera could produce images good enough to equal and possibly surpass film).
When DSLR's first arrived on the scene as much as I liked them I felt they were way too bulky. And, for the most part, they still are. When the G1 came out the first thing I noticed was that it was the same thickness as an M6 (that I ditched along with some really nice lenses when Leica said there was no way they would be able to produce a digital M).
While many didn't like the EVF in the G1, coming off the Digilux 2 which had a very crude one it was a dream! And I immediately took to it. I also liked the side angled articulating screen on the G1 which made off angle shots a pleasure as well. Perfect for just going about and shooting.
The problem was I had shots that galleries on Cape Cod (where I do most of my shooting) really liked but the images I wanted to print for sale were far too small at the resolution I wanted. So I was always on the lookout for a camera that could deliver the goods without being too bulky.
I looked at Sony's A900 and A850 which had great optics at an affordable (read non-Nikon D3x or Canon 1d prices). But I always imagined that I'd probably grow weary of toting them around. The higher pixeled APS-C cameras that came out last year (in particular the A65 and NEX-7) were intriguing but while they were certainly compact and lighter (well the a65 was certainly lighter) the images I'd see on Flickr and other sites (which are perfect way to compare camera/lens combinations) were just so-so. The Fuji X-Pro-1 with it's unique array sensor with no AA filter looked good but I wasn't wild about the 'feel' when I held one. The images were good but still seemed a bit 'off'.
Then I read a review of the DP2 M on Steve Huff's site. He, of course, sent it back but he waxed on and on about how good the color and image quality was. The images I saw on Flickr seemed bear this out as well. Thinking about my own photo process and the shots I typically took the camera became even more intriguing. With the G1 I also rarely shot anything higher than ISO 400. Anything higher I would make it monochrome which the G1 (and I predicted the DP2M as well) produced with a rather grainy, romantic film-like quality (noise was always something I embraced and made the best of I suppose).
For the images of Cape Cod that I'd do when I'd typically go out at 6 in the morning until around 9 or so to a destination that looked promising I felt the DP2 would be fine. No EVF? The OVF would be fine. And I could always double check with the LCD.
I now have the camera (with four batteries mind you!), the Sigma OVF and got John Milich' fabulous grip and put the whole setup in a small belt pack I got from a company here called Easter Mountain Sports. A nice tidy kit.
Issues with AF? Well my experience with the Digilux 2 and it's horrible AF was good practice in dealing with those situations. Even the G1 had low light AF issues that one adjusted to. (And, personally, I find for most situations that I shoot in low light, the DP2 M has found it's target easily and quickly plus its manual mode along with Sean Reid's recommendation on early iterations of this camera that also apply here to use Zone focusing also work. Finally, over the years I've learned to pick my targets well.
The other thing I like about the DP2 M is how unassuming it is. It's about as unobtrusive and simple as you can get. No scene modes. No mishmash of dials and buttons. No brand names people recognize. (And as good as their lenses have become, for the most part, Sigma is simply not a recognizable name as seeing Canon, Nikon or Sony emblazoned on the front of the body when you're out and about.) Just a simple deck in a simple brick-like form. Doesn't get any better than that.
But as many know, this year is exciting times in photography. With a plethora of truly sweet choices all beckoning ones wallet to open. At times I've considered getting an additional camera (like the Fuji's new X-E1 with same highly touted sensor as the X-Pro 1 or the NEX 6 which is the perfect body compromise between the NEX 7 and NEX 5N) but again those I've seen don't seem to have the output I've become quite fond of from the DP2 M's sensational Foveon sensor (which, by the way, I've always been enamored with conceptually but never really considered until they got the level of pixels to where I liked it).
Yes the new FF darlings, Nikon's D600 and the yet to be seen 6D from Canon are other tantalizing prospects that can deliver the goods I seek (and they are much less bulky). And while I've considered them like every other camera I've considered as a second fiddle to the DP2M I keep asking myself the same two questions, "With the way I shoot and the subjects I typically shoot under what different circumstances would you use it? And would the DP2 M still be a viable choice?"
And I keep coming up with the same answers. "Quite a few." And "Yes."
So call me among the hopelessly hooked by this intoxicating little camera.