Menu
What's new
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!

SD Quattro early lemon review -

Hulyss Bowman

Hulyss Bowman

Active member
Malina DZ said:
For 7 bracketed exposures... it is not bad for a landscape shot. How many days does it take to open one such SFD raw file in SPP?
Click to expand...
Well, from my point of view it is pretty bad. Take a DP2 Merrill and bracket 3 shots then merge them in PS; you'll have a far more natural look, yet probably even more sharp. there is also a space-time anomaly in the center of the picture, on the tower.

As I said... 336 Mb for that ? you gotta kidding me ! Since the picture is very dark I assume that in day light it might reach 400 Mb +.
 
biglouis

biglouis

Well-known member
Hulyss Bowman said:
Well, from my point of view it is pretty bad. Take a DP2 Merrill and bracket 3 shots then merge them in PS; you'll have a far more natural look, yet probably even more sharp. there is also a space-time anomaly in the center of the picture, on the tower.

As I said... 336 Mb for that ? you gotta kidding me ! Since the picture is very dark I assume that in day light it might reach 400 Mb +.
Click to expand...
I agree with Hulyss, you'll get equal or probably even better results using the DP2M. Possibly even doing a panorama with a DP3M.

It is worth remembering the Camera Store review of the DP2M and especially the end part where they produce massive prints from the DP2M.

LouisB
 
scho

scho

Well-known member
I've seen some SDQ images taken with the Sigma macro lenses that look quite good. If I do purchase either the Q or H it would be for use primarily as a full spectrum camera with the IR block filter removed, but I would need to see some FS images from these cameras first.

180mm Macro

70mm Macro
 
X

xpatUSA

Member
scho said:
I've seen some SDQ images taken with the Sigma macro lenses that look quite good. If I do purchase either the Q or H it would be for use primarily as a full spectrum camera with the IR block filter removed, but I would need to see some FS images from these cameras first.
Click to expand...
A wise decision. I've been searching the Sigma sites for anything that says, or even implies, that the dustcover is actually an IR blocker. Lots of people have assumed that it is but nowhere in the Sigma literature does it actually say that sd Q models can shoot full spectrum. If they have exactly the same sensor as the dp models then, obviously, they can not shoot full spectrum.

A gentleman in Japan has posted on DPR a couple of times but has yet to step outside and shoot some greenery as I asked him to do.
 
Last edited:
Hulyss Bowman

Hulyss Bowman

Active member
Well... the guy is right. We reached masochism level 60 here. For the average IQ delivered by the Quattro it absolutely not worth the hassle. Llyod use computational power way beyond common mortal people. His mac system is maxed out at all levels and yet, the app is slow as hell (AND CRASH...). I understand his frustration.

SIGMA is the only camera maker who disappoint me that much. Even more, it exasperate me because I was fervent evangelist of the brand back in the days with Rytterfalk. The only thing who come close, in my experience, was a famous enterprise in gaming industry who has gold between their hands. Every thing was just over fine till they messed up the product so much that now,on the web, you find numerous dedicated forums to bash this very enterprise, full of marketing lies, full of PR. Consumers got pissed big times, betrayed. Of course, we can still see a dozen of masochists continuing again and again to defend what can't be defended.

Sigma as the date of today is in the same league IMHO. The Quattro sucks, the whole system is broken by now. Yes it make pictures (hopefully) but we are so far to what it was ...

The reviews show so much gruesome lifeless pictures... Clarity is gone.

SIGMA need to know they should back pedal and iron a real 64bit software who at least allow cropping (and multi-core usage ...).

We can expect such blind behaviour from big rich brands, but no. Big brands seems to listen consumers more than sigma ever did.

:deadhorse:
 
Stoneage

Stoneage

Member
Hulyss Bowman said:
SIGMA need to know they should back pedal and iron a real 64bit software who at least allow cropping (and multi-core usage ...).
Click to expand...
The funny thing is: It does "use" multi-core. :D

Sigma said, that the Quattro-decision was also to improve performance, but SPP 6.x with Quattro files is even slower than Merrill files on SPP 5.5.3.
This is unbelievable. The files are not bigger.
And i use a 12 core (24 threads) Mac Pro.

Regarding image quality: The quattro is special (or weird). It looks like it was made for test charts. The parts who are perfectly lit and in focus show an impressive amount of detail.
The spray of sand™ looks like, or increases the feeling of sharpness. But if you lift shadows a bit or look at out of focus areas or slightly blurred corners, you see the whole mess.
It looks so technical, with no soul.
Test charts are usually perfectly lit and in focus, so the crowd will take this as a proof that Quattro is better than Merrill.
 
Hulyss Bowman

Hulyss Bowman

Active member
That is so sad ...

My Fujigma 3M is gathering dust actually but I know, as a photographer, that this camera as well as the DP2m will stay at the pinnacle of eye dazzliness. The SD1 fit in this category now, with the art lenses.

SIGMA, innovation do not mean MESS. You messed up on this one, BIG time. Aren't you ashamed to see that most sigma users over this little planet are all about the Merrill ? the 1/1/1 structure ? Buying second hands DPm and new SD1m if they can ? That the quattro is bashed ?

For God shakes you are opticians !! Craft yourself some pair of glasses if you can't see it !!
 
X

xpatUSA

Member
Stoneage said:
Regarding image quality: The quattro is special (or weird). It looks like it was made for test charts. The parts who are perfectly lit and in focus show an impressive amount of detail.
The spray of sand™ looks like, or increases the feeling of sharpness. But if you lift shadows a bit or look at out of focus areas or slightly blurred corners, you see the whole mess.
It looks so technical, with no soul.
Test charts are usually perfectly lit and in focus, so the crowd will take this as a proof that Quattro is better than Merrill.
Click to expand...
The sad part of all these Quattro compaints, usually justified, is that the underlying principle is perfectly sound!

We all watch TV without complaint. We happily post images that are sub-sampled 4:2:0 JPEGs and they look just fine unless one goes seriously low on the % quality slider.

So maybe they haven't got the conversion quite right yet?

Certainly the raw layer renditions in RawDigger are not particularly unusual - apart from those lines of stupid over-exposure detection pixels in the top layer.

I repeat, the principle of luminance plus two sub-sampled color channels is as old as the hills, so something must wrong elsewhere IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top