SD1M & 35 1.4
SD1M & 35 1.4
6 Member(s) liked this post
I just want to say I do not have a problem with AF on my SD1M cameras, and I own two of them. My technique for focusing is to move the focus point in the viewfinder to the area I want to focus and it works as it should. There is a micro adjustment in the menu system if you feel you need to make fine adjustments with your lenses, but I have not had to do this.
I have read a few posts over the years from photographers saying their SD1M cameras are difficult to focus, but my two SD1M focus spot-on! Visit my website and look at my work as a lot of my current work was done with my SD1M cameras.
Photographer technique may contribute to out-of-focus pictures. I say this because I am a photography teacher and it blows me away when I see a higher-level student working with poor technique. In this day and age of AF, 399 focus points, etc., photography seem to be getting a bit lazy or equipment dependent. Photographers need to be in control of their image-making process, and understanding how to use the tools of the craft is most important.
Last edited by darr; 22nd September 2015 at 02:28.
"Creativity takes courage." ~ Henri Matisse
Darlene Almeda, photoscapes.com
I have problems with the focus of the SD1 depending on the lens. The 17-50mm was spot on, very reliable, and the 17-70 too, but the image quality was not good enough for me and i sold both.
The 18-35 A solved the image quality issue, but the focus is very unreliable especially wide open. So i use this lens mostly as an manual focus landscape lens (F5.6-F8) And thats not really what it was designed for.
The 8-16mm is a manual focus lens too on my camera. The AF is simply too bad.
The 120-300 OS is very good, except at 300mm where it is hunting even in good light. The macros 70mm and 150mm OS are ok after "in camera" focus fine tuning, but very slow and i use them in manual mode anyway most of the time for macros.
So i'm not sure if the lenses or the camera is the problem, but it is not a very enjoyable experience for a 7000 dollar camera. (yes, i have the original SD1 and yes i get some "free" lenses after the price drop.)
Dear Darr... no offence intended :
Sigma AF is loony, at best, and it's not a secret. No need to try to defend what can't be defended, please ...
In the word AUTO FOCUS you have AUTO... If you have a better definition of AUTO I'll take it. So when I say the AUTOFOCUS I do not say semi auto manual hybrid photographer technique focus. I simply say AUTOFOCUS.
AUTO focus mean that when you have a confirmation between what you see in the OVF and the green dot + sound, normally all is OK. AUTO focus mean that you can AT LEAST rely on the AUTOMATISM of your EXPENSIVE camera to nail focus SOME time. Of course ppl are not stupid and know how to fine tune a lens with lens-align or whatever technique, if necessary.
Even the CENTER FOCUS POINT can be unreliable sometime with a perfectly calibrated lens.
The fact you are photography teacher or not isn't at all IMPORTANT in this case.
The SAFOX AF of Pentax is not very advanced but it is MILES ahead of the SIGMA AF. Day and Night.
The CAM AF of my 2008 D700 Is MILES ahead of the SAFOX AF. Day and night also. You see the gap between ? Immense.
Manual focus with an SD1 is synonym to nightmare (also because of APS-C pentaprism) and, on top of that, we do not even have any live-view and contrast focusing...
I think the SD1 do have only the sensor and the ergonomy for him. The rest is lame.
There is nothing to teach about the SD1, apart being patient with a spec/outdated camera who roughly deserve the name of "DSLR".
The only attractive thing with the SD1 is being able to use focals who aren't available on the DP cameras such as long tele and wide angle. Today, with the DP0, wide angle is covered maybe in a better way than any wide angle lenses on a SD (because contrast AF >> reliable).
Sigma need to up the game big time and it is very probable that the next "camera" whatever it is, will be more reliable and serious than the SD1.
Dear Hulyss... no offense intended :
I have been using two different SD1M bodies with the following lenses: 12-24mm, 35mm Art, 70mm macro, 50-500mm and a very inexpensive 70-300mm zoom for close to two years. If I found either one of my SD1M cameras or any one of the lenses to be incapable of producing quality work, I simply would not use them. My other cameras include ALPA (Max Technical and TC) Hasselblad, Nikon, and the three Sigma DP Merrills. I use two different medium format backs, a Hasselblad CFV50c and a Phase One P45 with Schneider and Rodenstock lenses. I list my gear so you and others will have an understanding that I do know what high quality photographic files look like. Simply put: I do not have to shoot with my SD1M cameras, but I actually enjoy shooting with them because of the results.
I stated I am a teacher, (currently for a two year professional photography program for a tech school) because of how many photographers I find do not have a solid foundation in technique for using gear. I have taught inside and outside of professional photography programs since the 1990s. Maybe I am old school, but photography involves two domains: craft and artistry. It is the craft that I find a lot of photographers wanting to skim through and eventually it catches up with them, usually when they try to use high resolution gear, or lighting equipment when they have not studied lighting enough.
I understand you have been upset with Sigma for various reasons since I first read one of your posts. Sigma is not the only camera company that has had AF problems, but I do not have a problem with my SD1M camera's focusing. I like the simplicity of the SD1M. Yes, it does not have Live View, but guess what, I do not use Live View on any of my cameras except when I use my CFV50c on my tech camera because my tech camera does not have a viewfinder. When I came up in photography there was no Live View and I had to learn how to focus on the ground-glass and the image was upside down and reversed. People approach photography differently depending upon their experience and education.
This is the best time to be in photography as far as gear goes, but if I was learning photography today for the first time, and knowing what I have learned from the beginning of my career until now, what I do know is all the technology will not replace the common sense of knowing the craft.
The simplicity of use, coupled with its high resolution and color palette is what keeps me shooting the SD1M. You obviously have a different set of needs and the reason for your dissatisfaction. I am dissatisfied with the Sigma Pro Photo program, but I have found a workaround and hope someday either Sigma will get it together or Adobe or another software creator will develop their programs for the XF3 files. But until then, I appreciate what the SD1M can do for me when I choose to use it.
I started this thread for other Sigma SD1 shooters to share their work. It was never intended for non-current SD1 shooters to use this thread for complaints. I think maybe you are a very passionate person and when you are upset about something, you seem to fly off the handle with words and you state the same complaints over and over again. I am not trying to insult you, but I started this thread as an encouragement for others to share their work, and I would like this thread to remain "encouraging."
I do enjoy your photography and hope you have found the gear that satisfies you best.
"Creativity takes courage." ~ Henri Matisse
Darlene Almeda, photoscapes.com1 Member(s) thanked for this post2 Member(s) liked this post
Well... I do not possess such gear but many, including me, know what "High Quality" photographic files are, was, and will be (because we use this gear). You have a beautiful gear and that mean nothing in legitimacy you know, IMHO. How much men and women own tremendous gear and produce crap ?
It's not your case but we can show examples if we want, you know it. So, showing off material isn't the point here. I have a LOT of experience with SIGMA gear I'm sure I have legitimacy to tell yes or no about a piece of Sigma gear. You are a Merrill generation. I seen you luring Sigma gear, I seen you buying Sigma gear and starting to produce photography work with Sigma gear. Many years after I bought my first Sigma camera. The thing is I know the brand (maybe too much, thus my deception sometimes). I completely understand you when you have fun with your cameras BUT:
You never seen me pushing what I did with Sigma gear over the years to endorse my posts or statements. My work with Sigma went on National television, France2, on one of the most watched French Saturday night program (Million and millions of spectators). Before that it went on an another private television, M6, and it got 4 Million spectators at least; it was by the time of the SD15 and the brand new 17-50 constant f2.8 EX zoom. It also went into CD cover and poster of some European rock bands + many European celebrity went through my foveon Eye. You didn't knew it ? Personally I find it stupid. I do not feel any sort of proudness by saying it, really.
You do not have to show off you stuff and college graduations to have my respect or my hear, you have my respect even when posting nothing so, you see, I'm over this. I hope you understand.
I'm not here to desperately rant the same song again and again, even if it look like it for the usual suspects over here. I'm here as a warning/reminder for the newcomers. I will never teach, as the date of today, someone to buy a Sigma dslr. It would be a fault. I'm not here to let my "passion" speak, I'm here to speak about 2015 photographer's LOGIC especially when it come about MONEY. I'm a very passionate guy, yes, my life is about imagery. But every of my words / post are maturely thought, aiming the factual truth without passion but instead with wide-open eyes.
I have in my hands, at this very moment, a little plastic fantastic Nikon F65. I'm cleaning it because I use it a lot. This camera is EASIER to use than the SD1, to produce photography (not coffee). This is not to piss ppl off, this is actually the factual truth. You can completely trust this camera, exposure and focus. Photography have never been easier and cheaper (and full frame by the way).
It work with the latest G lenses I own and even screw-drive lenses. This is just awesome, ant it is ridiculously light weight, more than an A7 camera.
The SD1 is a "modern" expensive Digital SLR. As all modern digital SLR we need contrast detect focus, at least as a second chance if we run into problems. The SD1 do not have it and this is plain dangerous for a work. I went into this situation, I worked as a pro with Sigma gear and I had some unfortunate problems on the field (misfocus into paint reproduction). Hopefully I had a B plan but... I imagine a landscape photographer, today in 2015, making DIGITAL landscape photography with a SD1 ONLY... error. It can result in a disastrous disappointment. The SD1 isn't a camera you can TRUST. The very old Nikon F65 is a camera you can trust. Sad but TRUE. The DP (every generations) are cameras you can trust.
I do not want to see someone coming here in the next few months, saying "hello I just bought a SD1 I wanna share pics with you". If it is an EXPERIENCED photographer who have money to waste (and even then ...) I might understand ... or not. An experienced photographer know that the foveon power lye into the DP and the Sigma power into the lenses but not into the SD line.
So, some of you do have fun with the SD1 and buy Sigma SA mount lenses. That's fine, you bought it at a time it was "en Vogue". Hopefully we are able to factory convert the mount if necessary. Continue to share the good work but make the nuance : Someone asked a question, I just answered the question, Russian style I admit, but I answered the question with the technical truth based on experience. Not my personal and passionate opinion. Just photographer and technician experience.
So, I enjoy photography, I enjoy many brands including Sigma and I have enough material to do what I want to do. But I'm not a brand guy. I just use what is working and put money spent into the balance.
I fly off the handle with words when I see a SoCalled "community" lying to themselves and endorsing huge brand errors/regressions. I fly off the handle with words when I see the most valuable and professional websites around the world mocking Sigma, so destroying every bit of reputation gained the past few years with the DP Merrill awesomeness.
If the "community" would have admitted the truth, without denial, about the Quattro regression in file quality, if the community was a real lucid and pragmatic pack, Sigma would have made public explanations about it, since months, trying to reassure the user base. Without this tinny user base, Sigma camera do not exist. In + Sigma CEO say that he is here to listen us, the user base... So it is maybe time (or too late) to pack again, saying the truth and making the brand evolution. This is my job.
English isn't my first language thus I might have difficulty to defend my opinion with political class.
Threads going off-course seem to be a sad fact of forum life. In another Sigma forum, I've often been corrected for bitching when "my" threads get hijacked into some intense side-discussion.
So, with all due respect, once "your" thread gets into the public domain, anyone can post whatever they like in it until such time as a Moderator cries "enough!" and takes action.
Hulyss does have a point, not that I particularly care for his style (nor he mine, I'm sure).
1 Member(s) liked this post
I'd like to say some small thing in support of the Quattro.
Not because I own one (I don't) but simply to relate some facts. Rick Decker, one of the Sigma forum mods over on DPReview, kindly organised a European "print" tour which I was lucky enough to participate in. A large cardboard tube stuffed with 48" inch wide prints from various Sigma cameras arrived chez nous here in the SE suberbs of London. It contained a bunch of shots of Hawaii and bits of U.S. red rock scenery. They were a mix of DP merrill, DP Quattro and (I think) SD1 shots. I found the prints a bit too large for my taste but they were still pretty good quality. The key point for me was that there wasn't any significant difference in image quality between the lot of them. This makes me think that rants that the Q sensor is not really Foveon and some kind of mistake is overblown. If a DPM and a DPQ are indistinguishable in a 48" print, I can't see the Q being so awful as some suggest.
3 Member(s) liked this post
Yes Dave. The most visible complain isn't in the print here but on screen at 100%. If you look at the Dp3 thread over here, most of my pics are 100% crops. Such vivid and crystal quality at 100% was/is not obtainable (at all) with DP1/2/3 Quattro. It start to be better with the DP0 Q and even, we are not at the Merrill Level at 100%. The core success of foveon is the original 1/1/1 structure and ultimate per pixel clarity paired with good lenses.
For me, the best Quattro is the DP0. Ok the design make my eyes bleeding... but the lens is awesome.
The complain is about the grain at base ISO ... and the highlight clipping. The Quattro do not perform "better" than the Merrill and many serious photographers even find that it perform less than the Merrill. I agree on this point and I'm not a hater. Many also proved by the numbers that the Quattro isn't as efficient as the Merrill. So yea, with PP and the few more pixels, Quattro do the trick on paper but we loose the crystal clear, vivid and almost alive 100% crops we are used for.
If you can make a worldwide pool with "Would you want us to come back to the original 1/1/1 structure ??" you might be impressed. Many voters do not print A0 prints, but one of the core joy of Merrill foveon was the ocular blast when you click "100%". With the Q, a lot of this wow factor vanished, maybe only when you bin the pixels in low def mode.
This is the only complain and Sigma NEVER communicated on this despite the sever internet warning and major disappointment from USA to Germany, from France to Japan. Just saying : "Ok we hear about the complains, we are working on it. It is only SPP related give us some times" OR "We hear about the complains and can't do anything more because it is bound to the sensor design. We are back to the drawing board stay tuned".
Meanwhile, I prefer a SD1 shoot for his sheer 100% clarity than any Quattro shoot. This problem is only visible in one brand
Please guys, who have the SD1, continue to share photography. I will not disturb the thread any-more... till someone ask about the SD1. I will just link my posts in the future.
I bet that the next Sigma announcement will be all but not a SD camera.
Last edited by Hulyss Bowman; 23rd September 2015 at 14:54.
Kind regards - Hulyss - hulyssbowman.com2 Member(s) liked this post
SD1M + 35mm 1.4 lens.
30 sec exposure under a full moon.
5 Member(s) liked this post
SD1M + 35mm 1.4
6 Member(s) liked this post
Light & Glass #1
SD1M + 70mm macro + 1/200 @ f/2.8
Light & Glass #2
SD1M + 70mm macro + 1/125 @ f/4
First shots of 2016. Happy New Year Everyone!
"Creativity takes courage." ~ Henri Matisse
Darlene Almeda, photoscapes.com9 Member(s) liked this post
Curious if there are any options these days for Sigma SD1 to adapt Canon or Nikon mount lenses?
Looks like the website is no longer supported/updated and most of the image samples are missing.
I'm aware of only Leitax offering Leica R lens conversion currently. SD1 owners seem to be quite content with native lens selection.
Very true Hulyss, I just wish Sigma made tilt-shift lenses...
A few first walkabout shots with a new, user sd1m and the 17-50 lens. Working fine but a sensor stain/spot on the upper right. We are currently enjoying a January thaw and breathing fresh air and soaking up as much sunshine that we can get while it lasts. All raws developed in Kalpanika Wrapper and DNG files processed in Lightroom. I didn't see much evidence of color casts with this lens/sensor combination so didn't need to use the color correction script.
Gallery1 Member(s) thanked for this post1 Member(s) liked this post
I just tested the Kal. Wrapper with some older SD1 images taken with the 8-16mm and 17-50mm lens and there is indeed no color cast.
Same time i think, these conversions lack a bit of the special "Merrill/SPP/3D" look. Textures are less pronounced. Not so good for landscapes but interesting for skin tones/portraits.
(similar to Iridient Developer actually)
Good to have options.
Last edited by scho; 24 Minutes Ago at 18:15.