Last edited by scho; 7th August 2016 at 09:26.
Gallery1 Member(s) thanked for this post4 Member(s) liked this post
Carl, thank you for sharing these full size JPGs. Are you happy with the IQ SDQ provides?
Last edited by scho; 6th August 2016 at 17:21.
Thanks for sharing. How's the handling, size and weight?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/grahamgibson/1 Member(s) liked this post
Wasabi batteries and compact charger designed for the Panasonic GH4, that work perfectly with sdQ. AF performance is lens dependant, perfect with the 18-35/1.8 Art, but unreliable with the 70 macro. I'm still trying to work out best processing routines for the x3f and x3i raw files, but otherwise no major issues using SPP 6.40.
Ithaca falls the day after some heavy thunderstorms replenished our dwindling water flow in the streams.
Taken in SFD mode , but quality of the composite was so bad I had to pull one of the better exposed frames for this image. Still a lot of artifacts and poor rendering. Seems like I can't get too far from still life shooting without running into image quality problems with this camera.
LOL yikes, so I guess SFD is doing some processing akin to a pixel-shift mode. These modes are intriguing, but seem like they are really difficult to take advantage of outside of a studio or still life environment. The Pentax K1 and E-M5II have the same issues with any motion at all. I wonder if a slow shutter speed to smooth all of the water would have helped?
Edit: Finally have a way of extracting x3f raw files from the 7 frames in the x3i SFD file. Need to first select the frame you want in the x3i edit window, click the copy x3f file button, then go back to the main file list window, paste and the x3f file is placed in the file list. Just as a trial exercise I extracted the 3 middle frames (-1, 0, +1) generated tiffs, and then composited the tiffs using Aurora HDR. Somewhat garish results, but at least no scatter of motion artifacts. Now I wait and see if Sigma can come up with a fix for SFD processing in SPP.
Last edited by scho; 12th August 2016 at 20:57. Reason: add info and image
Last edited by scho; 13th August 2016 at 08:11.
Gallery1 Member(s) thanked for this post1 Member(s) liked this post
SFD mode and SPP have some bugs to iron out even for still life scenes. Check out highlights on the watermelon:
Gallery1 Member(s) thanked for this post2 Member(s) liked this post
Thank you for sharing Carl. I appreciate you taking the time to share your findings with us readers.
"Creativity takes courage." ~ Henri Matisse
Darlene Almeda, photoscapes.com1 Member(s) thanked for this post
Wow, amazing to see the difference between a single frame and the combined image. The x3i version looks so clean by comparison.
Last edited by scho; 16th August 2016 at 13:00.
I'm not trolling, I'm really not. But I have yet to see anything which really wows me.
It is not the photography because the compositions are good.
There is something lacking in the character of the images at 100%. And at normal size there is nothing that jumps out.
I can only say that, for example, when I first saw Fuji Xpro shots, it was obvious this was something different. Likewise for the Ricoh GR. And, of course, the DP2M. So, it is not like I haven't seen samples and examples from respected cameras which jump off the page here at GetDPI.
Sorry! I'll keep looking, though, and thanks for posting.
PS I can see how the value proposition works because in theory at GBP 999 for the camera and art lens it is a bargain price.
wow scho, nice comparison between the Quattro and the 808!
The 808's optimum ISO is 64. Anything higher and full resolution image quality will suffer. That being said, the 808 does seem to resolve similar detail to the Quattro but the Quattro has the edge having the much cleaner and sharper image.
I too have the Sigma A 18-35 1.8 in EF mount adapted to my E-M1 via Speed booster ultra. Absolutely love the rendition from this lens, and on the E-M1 it becomes a f1.2 for light gathering which allows for very low ISO shooting is low light!
1 Member(s) thanked for this post
An old phone booth outside a pub in Watkins Glen. sdQ + 18-35A. Some purple fringing on the tree branches that I left because removing with the dropper in LR produced some horrible magenta blotching on the faded blue shirt of the man on the street.
You know how old you are when your grandson asks what the phone booth is for
Sorry for the off topic bit but I used to have some involvement in classic yachts and we (in the UK) have to be grateful for our American friends for preserving and maintaining a great wooden boat industry, especially on your East Coast. As the the $/£ rate fluctuates, these beautiful yachts move to and fro from across the Atlantic, between our countries.
Cayuga Lake Ithaca, NY. sdQ+18-35 Art with dust protector/hot mirror removed. Processed in SPP 6.4 and then converted to B&W using B&W adjustment layer in Photoshop. Custom cool toning with icc profile.
This is the original full spectrum file before processing in Photoshop.
Earlier commentary I've seen on the SD Quattro has expressed skepticism that an infrared capture is possible, by removing the thin internal dust cover/ir filter over the sensor, as one could do with the SD1 and earlier Sigma interchangeable lens cameras. But each of these commentaries has provided no further detail. Is the dust filter you refer to like the removable ones in the earlier cameras? It appears that your image includes the infrared range. Infrared capture on the earlier cameras required removing the thin sensor cover, so as to admit IR, and adding a visible-light-blocking filter on the outside of the lens. Does it appear this would work with the SD Quattro?
Last edited by scho; 21st September 2016 at 13:03. Reason: add images
Scho/Carl, thanks for the reply! Those are some nice IR images. I do prefer the higher wavelength cutoff. I take it you have found it requires a longer exposure than, say, something at 650? I have very much enjoyed getting some infrared captures, and ensuing lovely prints, but haven't done enough work in IR to make that observation. I only have two visible light cutoff/IR pass filters, and I am sure both are at the higher wavelength. I would like to ask: how do you manage to focus doing IR with the Sigma? With only IR making its way to the sensor, there is very little to use to discriminate for focus. I've found myself using a focus-stacking technique with multiple shots to find the best one. Do you have a better solution? I did very much enjoy your results! Thanks for your feedback!
Last edited by scho; 22nd September 2016 at 07:15.
Another IR shot. This one at the local marina shot handheld using a 665nm filter on the lens. Exposure data: sdQ + Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Art lens + 665nm filter - dust shield/hot mirror ISO 100 f/8 1/250sec x3f tools processing
x3f tools has a couple of bugs that I hope will be fixed in the next release, but otherwise very quick and decent processing compared to SPP. One of the bugs is the PDAF AF points matrix of black dots overlaying the image and the second is the stripping of all exif when exporting to a dng file.
Two hand held shots from a walk at Buttermilk Falls. sdQ +18-35 - dust shield/hot mirror + 720nm filter on lens.
Ferns and lichens (100 % crop from larger image)
Bone dry Buttermilk Falls