For those interested, a photographer blog where he compared Quattro vs Merrill in 8 parts. His conclusion was that he feels the sensor design sacrificed some detail/contrast/tone, and returned it, but it's still very interesting as he goes through wide set of subjects.
Is is part 4- B&W
Sigma Quattro DP2 Comparison – Part 4 – B&W | Landscape & Cityscape
I tried the Xitek EVF on the Quattro.
It does not work of course.
There is no video output from the USB port on the Quattro.
It's for the cable release and to upload photos.
I did notice a setting called "viewfinder mode" in one of the menus.
Not quite sure what it is used for ?
Anyway, I turned it on and it still did not help.
Lot's more "real world" testing today.
>whatever this means
Photo Pro allows to double the resolution and create about 60MP files. For the Quattros only Photo Pro allows to export 39MP files (but not for the Merrills). I think the 39MP version is a very realistic approach.
I'm afraid I am confused by this and wonder if you would be so kind as to elaborate a bit.
X3F files from my DPxM are about 44MB in size. A 16 bit Tiff is about 88MB.
What exactly is the reference to 39MP and how does that translate as regards the size of a 16 bit Tiff.
I have to confess that with the Merills I have never actually considered the pixel size - save that I note that printing an A3+ size tiff results in a ppi of about 240 in LR (which obviously is not the same thing but still of relevance).
So in real terms, i.e. size of file and ppi when printing what does DPP 6.0x do for the Quattro files that it does not do for the Merrill files.
Thanks for any clarification.
>X3F files from my DPxM are about 44MB in size. A 16 bit Tiff is about 88MB.
Forget file size. I am talking pixel dimensions (defined here in mega pixels).
It's a waste of time to export the larger sizes in SPP.
I did a test, exported a normal and double size from SPP, enlarged the normal with PhotoZoom Pro and compared to the SPP double size, and PhotoZoom Pro was so much better, it was in a different universe.
Even if you export a doublesize, then downsize it to same size, and compare it to an original same size, the original same size wins!
Forget double size. Its S-HI that works best.
I also have Photozoom Pro. Lanczos works pretty well. I am not keen on their S-Spline algorithms because they introduce a painterly effect.
Hi Quentin, same thing goes for S-HI, IMO. Just a tad more definition from PZ Pro, and the enlargement is not that significant enough to cause the painterly vector look.
A few more comparisons from today's shooting.
1st set are slightly different lighting.
Setting are the same except the Quattro is on vivid instead of standard.
All tripod mounted at F8.
Set 1- Merrill, Quattro
Set 2- Quattro, Merrill
Set 3- Quattro, Merrill
3 Member(s) liked this post
Yes, I don't consider it representative. It's too bad because the scenes he chose are indeed awesome for comparing. I wish he gave it another spin under latest SPP, and better yet- post the RAWS.
So yes, I agree. Too many issues going on.
So I recoup what L.Chambers said : Early buyers of Quattro are just beta testers. Nothing more, nothing less. Buying a gear in those conditions is like playing poker.
My reaction is the same on Nikon gears. D800/D800E/D810 ... what the hell ?? The former D800 sharpened with talent is excellent.
So we live in a time where we should jump DSLR/compact generations. I'll pass on Quattro. Let see in 4 years if real improvements come.
None like Fuji have used their customers as beta testers. OK, they fixed the flaws along time, but anyhow they did what they did.
I don't know if you guys noted Ming said a solution (for what I do not know) were ready next week?
I do not know when their chat took place, so next week might be last week or?
Last edited by G43; 25th July 2014 at 12:28.
I do like the output to a degree if you take it by itself. Its only comparing it that I prefer my Merrills. In reality all the criticisms of the Merrills don't affect me except for the lack of EVF. I have no problems with battery life and even the write speed hampers me little.
^^^ Ute's examples above ^^^
The Quattro seems to have more saturation compared to the Merrill, which we know often deliver flat files that need a tweak in saturation.
I assume these are straight out of the camera?
The "Beer Garden" shot guys - the one with the fuzzy yellow characters sure have been busy. They got now a new shot with same framing of the same shot with a yellow filter on top of the camera.
Interesting thing is, the Yellow resolution comes back to the letters, but now there's color moire(!) on the fence on top of the building. First Foveon with color moire :-)
This was predicted could happen by a few, I would imagine of a different nature than an AAless Bayer and it sure seems so- yellow alternating with luminance.
(conversion mine, SPP 6.0.4 from RAW)
The raws are here:
Normal (but shows resolution loss in some yellows)
With yellow filter (shows color moire, yellows look full resolution)
The very original shot that started this that shows the issue of yellow resolution loss:
The Quattro and the "Beer Garden" Issue
I can only guess is that this particular cyanish blue at that luminance level makes it hard for the algorithm to discern detail for Yellow vs the Blue, given it needs to pick from two layers that are 1/4th the color resolution of the blue.
Their is an EVF available.
I'm using it and works OK.
Not perfect but acceptably.
Go to the Xitek for Sigma thread I started and you can see for yourself.
Hope that helps.
"Creativity takes courage." ~ Henri Matisse
Darlene Almeda, photoscapes.com
Here's a few more w just the Quattro.
All using optimum shooting technique.
i.e., tripod, F8, etc.
5 Member(s) liked this post
Lovely results. I think you should start a new thread, "DP Quattro Best Practices," where we could have the distilled wisdom of your, and other thoughtful users', findings -in one place.
Just printed a Quattro shot at about 24" x 36"(or at least part printed it) and it looks good enough to be large format. Pin sharp. Now if it and the DP1Q, when released, will do large prints, I'll be happy.
Very simple. Works like Google drive. Make an account. Upload some stuff and link to here.
It's free of charge.
Basic accounts are free, Images saved in your "Public" folder are available - just "copy public link" and insert in your message.
Do they take TIFF's or only JPEGs ?
I am not sure if I am giving you the correct links but here goes :
My apologies if it does not work.
I'm new at this.
Last edited by The Ute; 28th July 2014 at 15:47.
Works fine The Ute
Quite a difference between the rendering of colors.
Q shows green as grey, Forrest.
M shows blue as green, Lake.
Q has higher resolution.
M shows better 3D pop.
Anyways... there seems to be a time displacement between shots since the light is different between the shots.
I never until now considered the price of the Q an object of concern. Many of you brought the matter forward here in the beginning. *Not worth the upgrade for the buck*.
This seems correct in my eyes, but there are other things that matters: Speed.
How do you like the rendering of the Q?
Last edited by G43; 28th July 2014 at 23:36.
I would use JPEG at larger sizes.
That might account for some of the differences.
That said, I do think the Q renders color a little more accurately but I can take care of most of what I want in PP.
I agree w your general assessment that the M renders better better micro detail and contrast.
It gives that "3d" look.
The Q is an excellent camera though and new users won't be disappointed.
I liked it's handling and usability better.
I am thinking I'll check out the DP1Q when it arrives.
Nice to hear you like the Q.
No doubt the 1Q will satisfy a lot of landscape photographers. The resolution alone counts a lot.
Q seems to lacks the 'bite', the main reason why I 'endure' my DP3 over my Nikon D600 which does not even come close for what i want.
6 Member(s) liked this post
Yes they are Masterclass
Thanks Hulyss and G43, coming from you guys, it's quite a compliment.
Hulyss, I had really liked your review of DP3 on LL, my decision to purchase it was based upon your review, and the many excellent photos I saw from Quentin, Ute, ustein and the others here.
1 Member(s) liked this post