Gallery1 Member(s) liked this post
Gloomy Sunday. Broughton Grange, Oxfordshire. Stephen Hester's gaff. Ex CEO RBS bank.
After shooting loads of dp0Q pics, I gotta say, the Quattro images just don't match the Merrill images for every day, practical shooting. Look closely and there is too much noise all over the shadows and no amount of faffing around in SPP and LR solves the problem. And as for photos of people, forget it as skin is either sandpaper or a deathly, Madame Tussauds wax works. I want a dp0 with a Merrill sensor. This dp0 Quattro is the last (new) Sigma camera I'll ever buy until Sigma come to their senses and return to fitting Merrill sensors in their cameras.
Steve3 Member(s) liked this post
Gallery3 Member(s) liked this post
(no offence, i'm just interested )
"Testing and fighting and trying to like it.
Quattro isn't for me, its image quality isn't good enough for my purposes"
This. The same for me. Producing the photo shouldn't be so difficult and when it is done, the doubts over quality remain.
Sometimes, if the Gods Line up, the dp0 can deliver but only for select subject matters. The trouble is it disappoints more often than it satisfies.
I'm sure if you are one to take pics of charts, stone walls and cats etc you can prove the Quattro is the best Sigma camera ever made but in practical day to day use it is just frustrating, particularly as I know I don't have those frustrations with my DP2 &3 Merrills.
I'm keeping my dp0 because the lens is great and in a very narrow field of operation it can work. And who knows, Sigma may finally give us a version of SPP that we can live with for processing more that half a dozen pics in one session before we go nuts and a version that improves the final image quality.
Steve1 Member(s) liked this post
Gallery1 Member(s) thanked for this post
DPO as X-pan substitute.
5 Member(s) liked this post
Two more from a road trip.
3 Member(s) liked this post
Blustons, Kentish Town, England was until it closed last year (2015) was a rare example of an arcade shop and as such was afforded a Grade II listing. Unfortunately, it sat empty for a while but it has recently opened again and appears to be continuing in the 'smattah' (Yiddish for clothing) business - just like it had been since 1932. It is great to see this iconic shop in use again.
Thank you TN Args. A while back, I too did have another crack at that file and got a small improvement, as you have. But that shot was taken at a f/13 and I think this is the problem as it looks like diffraction is ruining the image. I now never use a smaller aperture than f/6.3 on the dp0Q. Plenty of DoF even at f/4.5. If I need something at the front of the image to be in focus with a good DoF , I'll step back and crop later. Looking back, I ruined a lot of photo opportunities in places I'll probably not re-visit.
Also, I've screwed up a lot of images using SPP with the wrong settings for the Quattro. I now start with Chroma and Luminance at second from right and sharpness at -2.0. Crispy, I normally leave in the middle. The rest I do in Lightroom.
Steve2 Member(s) thanked for this post
Should have removed the blue rubbish on the stile, never mind
6 Member(s) liked this post
Tucking into some of their 2015 Rose. Their white is russety and dangerously good. Banyuls wine and in my books, worth a punt.
Domaine da le Rectorie
Steve7 Member(s) liked this post
Last edited by furtle; 21st September 2016 at 14:41.
Steve1 Member(s) thanked for this post6 Member(s) liked this post
Gallery4 Member(s) liked this post
^^^ Excellent ^^^
Well worth looking at on Flickr at full screen size, or full size. This is where any Sigma DP really shines. I suspect you'd have to be using a MF camera to get anywhere close to the IQ at 100%
Steve1 Member(s) liked this post
The DP0Q remains the most precocious, erratic, fickle, annoying and unpredictable camera that ever produced a fine photograph that makes you want to keep it rather than toss it in the bin. Is there a cure?
[QUOTE=biglouis;708207]The DP0Q remains the most precocious, erratic, fickle, annoying and unpredictable camera that ever produced a fine photograph that makes you want to keep it rather than toss it in the bin. Is there a cure?
That's the best review I've read for the dp0 Quattro. Short, accurate and to the point. Many camera scribblers could learn a lot from that. Oh, you know the answer. Perhaps you could start a therapy group?
Steve1 Member(s) thanked for this post
Another two from Royal College Street in Camden Town, on an afternoon when the camera worked well. If anyone can explain why one day it produces trash and the next day pearls I would love to hear it.
My explanation (rant): The Quattro cameras have a very limited comfort zone. They always try to make "happy, colorful and sharp postcards" and then they fail if the conditions are not perfect or the dynamic range exceeds 5-6 stops.
My DP0Q also always wanted to be in the range of F4 to maximum F8. I don't know why, but F11 with the Quattros look bad.
long time ago I learned about lenses 135 you can use up to f8, 120 up to f16 or f22 and LF to f64 if it does.
1 Member(s) liked this post
Well you all have given me a lot to think about, I am getting ready to borrow a DP-0 from a friend this weekend and having been someone who only used a SD-9 and SD-14. I think I will get my old Sekonic studio deluxe Incident light meter out and see if that helps with the blowing out the highlights issue.
What if any is the recommended version of SPP I should use with the DP-0, any thoughts or ideas would be greatly appreciated.
Last edited by agfa100; 2 Weeks Ago at 19:04. Reason: spelling
I can recommend you try it and enjoy getting the most out of it. But it is not a camera for a casual user and it has frustrated the hell out of me. I don't think I am in the minority here.
Once again I raise my eyes to the heavens and ask "Why oh why, Sigma, did you not stick with the Merrill sensor?????".
My DP2M and DP3M have never frustrated me. OK, you can't shoot above iso400 but at least you can go above iso100.
But each to his own and it is an individual decision which should not be influenced by the meanderings of someone else.