The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Sigma DP2 Quattro Shots
- Thread starter Quentin_Bargate
- Start date
octagone
New member
Nice picture. Rendering (high-contrast micro-details) might suggest that the photo was made with a DP2 Merrill.Just a "context" shot to reference the location of the driftwood in the image posted above.
Original
Although I find the nice photo, I would have preferred less contrast in micro-detail, with a smoother look. Rendering as proposed quattro without adding contrast to micro-details.
scho
Well-known member
I agree and should have backed off on the detail enhancement in this image.
The Ute
Well-known member
scho
Well-known member
I know, but I just love what she can do.Easy to fall too much in love w Topaz Scho.
scho
Well-known member
A comparison between the Sigma DP2Q and my Nokia 808 PureView. I resized and cropped the latter to same pixel dimensions as the Q. The 808 is an unlocked cell phone so it will come along with the Q on my trip to Greece and provide both backup imaging to the Q and cell phone duty. The 808 has a very sharp zeiss lens, but as you can see it does have some distortion that I left un-corrected in this shot. It produces a very large 41 MP file.
Sigma DP2Q
Original
Nokia 808 PureView
Original
Sigma DP2Q
Original
Nokia 808 PureView
Original
Hulyss Bowman
Active member
So far : The Nokia has better colors.
scho
Well-known member
I processed the Sigma DP2Q raw file in neutral color mode which tends to produce low saturation color.
Quentin_Bargate
Well-known member
Sorry, but the Nokia version is an abomination. Simply awful, with excess noise and distortion. So yes, good for a camera phone, but that's like saying a big Mac with Cheese is good for a burger!
scho
Well-known member
I agree that the Sigma DP2Q produces a superior file, but the Nokia 808, given the limited dynamic range of the small sensor will make a reasonably good image for web use and smaller prints. See this thread for examples.
darr
Well-known member
I do not want to sound mean, but your logic points to using two cameras when one camera alone can get superior results.
The Nokia file compared to the DP2Q file looks over-saturated. Are the colors in the Nokia file true to the scene, or are they a little cooked where as the DP2Q file colors are under-saturated/non-processed?
scho
Well-known member
I'm not actually using two cameras. I will carry the Nokia for the cell phone capability and use it's camera if the Q should fail for any reason. Neither is spot on. The Nokia color is actually closer and just slightly more saturated. The Q is undersaturated because I used the neutral color setting. I noted that the Nokia has limited dynamic range, but it does have a built-in ND filter that helps in challenging lighting such as in the gorge image below. This was a tripod mounted shot with ND filter engaged.I do not want to sound mean, but your logic points to using two cameras when one camera alone can get superior results.
The Nokia file compared to the DP2Q file looks over-saturated. Are the colors in the Nokia file true to the scene, or are they a little cooked where as the DP2Q file colors are under-saturated/non-processed?
Last edited:
Hulyss Bowman
Active member
The nokia files are wrong, of course. It is physic. But I bet that in reality, the nokia colors and tonal renditions are more close to reality than the Q. For example the colour of the doors. My point is that generally, bayers have more accurate colors, period.
I was for many years spoiled by 100% pixel sharpness but I'm cured now. This is a bad habit and distract us from the essential.
So far, with SIGMA cameras, You spend more time viewing file at 100% on your computer than printing them or even publishing them
So, to be clear, if you print A3+ only, need resolution, versatility and accurate colors, this sigma device is not what you need. I'll write an article about this to be more clear because I think it is important to wake up, at some level.
I was for many years spoiled by 100% pixel sharpness but I'm cured now. This is a bad habit and distract us from the essential.
So far, with SIGMA cameras, You spend more time viewing file at 100% on your computer than printing them or even publishing them
So, to be clear, if you print A3+ only, need resolution, versatility and accurate colors, this sigma device is not what you need. I'll write an article about this to be more clear because I think it is important to wake up, at some level.
Last edited:
Hulyss Bowman
Active member
So, I'm not a friend of diglloyd. I think I should meet him one day to sort this out. But, as far as I know, he kinda trashed the Quattro and IMHO, he is right.
When you own or test a lot of different gear, seriously, you can trash the Quattro. Ok, is good at 100 ISO but DR wise ??? ... little problems wise ???... I do not put me in danger to say that the Quattro is not that optimal even at base ISO. Your lightening should be optimal but the camera is not.
Like every manufacturers, SIGMA is not proofed toward errors and I think the Quattro is an error. When it was announced, I was excited like all SIGMA announcements.
At the end, it just bring some more TECHNICAL comfort like battery and all... but not real improvements on the IQ. It turned different in the bad way, IMHO. So what ?? 3MP more ?? Is that an improvement ?? A new sensor raping the original foveon 1-1-1 concept ?? Is that an improvement ?? No way.
I use SIGMA gear since the first DP1. Back in the days, it was just awesome for its price. Then the DP2, DP2s, DP2x ... just awesome little good camera priced correctly for what it does compared to concurrence.
Then >> Merrill legacy ... wow !!!! what a jump. Ok it was different but damn !! What a visual blast !! I never ever experienced a visual blast that strong.
Now SIGMA tend to sell this product as an evolution, insanely priced at 1k, like it is a major jump over the Merrill ... >>> It is not. It is a joke for anyone who have basis in PP, really. I tested it and returned it to Japan asap without any regret, disappointed.
It is a joke for every sigma lovers, like the Nikkor 58f1.4 is a joke for every lens lovers. It is an error and diglloyd, like many of us, would have wanted something more ... serious ? tangible ?
The Quattro should be priced at 500 US$. No more.
When you own or test a lot of different gear, seriously, you can trash the Quattro. Ok, is good at 100 ISO but DR wise ??? ... little problems wise ???... I do not put me in danger to say that the Quattro is not that optimal even at base ISO. Your lightening should be optimal but the camera is not.
Like every manufacturers, SIGMA is not proofed toward errors and I think the Quattro is an error. When it was announced, I was excited like all SIGMA announcements.
At the end, it just bring some more TECHNICAL comfort like battery and all... but not real improvements on the IQ. It turned different in the bad way, IMHO. So what ?? 3MP more ?? Is that an improvement ?? A new sensor raping the original foveon 1-1-1 concept ?? Is that an improvement ?? No way.
I use SIGMA gear since the first DP1. Back in the days, it was just awesome for its price. Then the DP2, DP2s, DP2x ... just awesome little good camera priced correctly for what it does compared to concurrence.
Then >> Merrill legacy ... wow !!!! what a jump. Ok it was different but damn !! What a visual blast !! I never ever experienced a visual blast that strong.
Now SIGMA tend to sell this product as an evolution, insanely priced at 1k, like it is a major jump over the Merrill ... >>> It is not. It is a joke for anyone who have basis in PP, really. I tested it and returned it to Japan asap without any regret, disappointed.
It is a joke for every sigma lovers, like the Nikkor 58f1.4 is a joke for every lens lovers. It is an error and diglloyd, like many of us, would have wanted something more ... serious ? tangible ?
The Quattro should be priced at 500 US$. No more.