Sigma DP3M

[pophoto]

Fun Times!

Sigma DP3 Merrill Pics And Specs Leaked | Mirrorless Rumors

http://www.dslrmagazine.com/digital/camaras-compactas-digitales/sigma-dp3-merril-la-version-tele-de-las-dp.html

 

[Tim]

Now I've just got my DP2 Merrill and am happy I opted for the 40mm (equiv) version and I am pleased to see Sigma extend the family... buuut. I'd rather have seen a 21mm (equiv) version. Sorry not trying to be a spoil sport...

Having said that I can see a lot of HQ photo opportunities opening up with this new FL!

Well done Sigma. :toocool:

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

Bit boring. Not sure why that focal length is of much use. It certainly is not the "allrounder" as the link suggests, more of an oddball.

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

I think one is enough for me till something interchangable comes along.
Athough 3 DPm's is not heavier as ons dslr with three lenses.

Michiel

 

[pophoto]

Well if anything, from the photos I see the built in Macro feature!

I most certainly won't be buying one, but will be very interested in the shots others who partake in it will produce!

 

[neilvan]

I would be interested in this if it was a 1:1 macro but then again, manual focus with the DP's isn't exactly fun...

 

[peterb]

I'm actually intrigued because there's a technique I'd love to use a DP Merrill (with a perfectly mated lens) for but it requires a 'longer' length lens. It's called the Brenizer method and it stitches together a bunch of images to create one composite image created by a lens that couldn't possible exist (like a 35mm f0.8). And the SD1 was just too much of an investment to dabble in that.

Here are two examples of the technique. Works really well with people.

 

[pophoto]

The only problem I see with the Brenzier method with people is the very long write times of the Merrils. My kids would freeze in the snow or I would have aged some, and missed their graduation, wedding and grandchildren by the time its done!

(Joking of course!) I love your two shots, btw!

 

[andrewteee]

I'm actually intrigued because there's a technique I'd love to use a DP Merrill (with a perfectly mated lens) for but it requires a 'longer' length lens. It's called the Brenizer method and it stitches together a bunch of images to create one composite image created by a lens that couldn't possible exist (like a 35mm f0.8). And the SD1 was just too much of an investment to dabble in that.

Looks little bit like tilt-shift, but different. I did a quick Google image search and it seems to be used a lot for wedding photography.

In regards to the DP3, I recall a comment a long time ago that Sigma's original plan called for 3 DP cameras. If true, I'm not sure why the DP3 took so long to arrive. I'll be curious to see how macro looks on it.

 

[peterb]

@Popphoto-So true! But the biggest issue is not so much the write times which certainly slows down at shot 6 when you need about a dozen or so to make the complete image but the computer dealing with these uber enormous files (even as jpgs converted from jogs in LR or your favorite pp program after SPP).

@andrew: You're absolutely right. The technique was developed by a rising star among wedding photographers named Ryan Brenizer. There's an interesting video produced by B&H in NYC featuring him and his technique.

 

[retow]

A combo of DP1M and DP3M could make for a nice and reasonably versatile travel set up. And an even better one if Sigma added a wide angle converter for the DP1M.
I'll stick with the DP2M for the time being.

 

[ggibson]

Peter, I really like your shots. I just recently started dabbling in stitching like this on my m4/3 camera with a 40mm f2 (80mm eq). The results are pretty cool.

Buying a fixed-lens single focal length camera is always a difficult decision. The DP3M's lens leaves a bit to be desired. I agree, the DP3M's longer lens fits well for the brenizer method, except for the fact that it's rather slow (being a 75mm f4.2 full-frame equivalent). I really wish the lens had been f1.4, or at least f2. That would make the camera far more interesting in my mind, and make it easier to hand-hold too, since the focal length is longer. The macro option adds some additional usability, but is it enough? The jury's still out for me.

 

[biglouis]

What intrigues me most is that on several occasions in the 'fun with DP2M' thread posters asked for a model with a focal length like the DP3M.

Perhaps Sigma is one of the few manufacturers actually following threads at GerDPI?

 

[simonstucki]

Peter, I really like your shots. I just recently started dabbling in stitching like this on my m4/3 camera with a 40mm f2 (80mm eq). The results are pretty cool.

Buying a fixed-lens single focal length camera is always a difficult decision. The DP3M's lens leaves a bit to be desired. I agree, the DP3M's longer lens fits well for the brenizer method, except for the fact that it's rather slow (being a 75mm f4.2 full-frame equivalent). I really wish the lens had been f1.4, or at least f2. That would make the camera far more interesting in my mind, and make it easier to hand-hold too, since the focal length is longer. The macro option adds some additional usability, but is it enough? The jury's still out for me.

I agree that for the Brenizer method this lens is not very well suited, since the Brenizer mehtod doesn't defy the laws of physics you can only increase the apparent sensorsize, that means you get images that look like images with a 50/2.8 lens but with a larger sensor (depending on the number of images you sticht).

if you use a 75/1.8 on a mft camera that method will of course give you a smaller depht of field as a 25/1.4 would give you with the same angle of view but your not going to get a shallower depht of field as with a 75/1.8 (you can of course get a wider angle of view than with a 75/1.8 on a full frame unstiched)!
so in my opinion the best camera system for this technique is 35mm with a fast and long lens. (or medium format but that is going to be expensive)


but I don't agree that they should have mad it a 1.4, nooo thank god they didn't. if they did, the lens would be inferior, larger and more expensive. or equal in quality, much much much larger and much much much more expensive. it is perfect the way it is. if you want a faster lens, get a sd1 with a 50/1.4 (or if something else entirely).

 

[simonstucki]

I'm actually intrigued because there's a technique I'd love to use a DP Merrill (with a perfectly mated lens) for but it requires a 'longer' length lens. It's called the Brenizer method and it stitches together a bunch of images to create one composite image created by a lens that couldn't possible exist (like a 35mm f0.8). And the SD1 was just too much of an investment to dabble in that.

I think the Brenizer method is more accurately described as a way to increase sensor size, since that is what it really does I think. it doesn't really matter for practical reasons, but it might be easier to predict what you are able to get with a certain lens. for example don't expect any wonders with a 75/1.8 for mft if you only take less than say about 9 shots, you could get the same with a 85/1.8 with a fullframe one shot... however if you take a 200/2 and a full frame you are going to get some much more extreme images.
also I think it is impossible to make a lens faster than f/0.5 so of course you can say it looks like a 35/0.3 (I know you said 0.8 which is possible of course, but that is not my point) but that doesn't make sense in a way.

 

[simonstucki]

What intrigues me most is that on several occasions in the 'fun with DP2M' thread posters asked for a model with a focal length like the DP3M.

Perhaps Sigma is one of the few manufacturers actually following threads at GerDPI?

or maybe they are just as smart/stupid as getDPI contributors are

but seriously, I think they would have been pretty fast if they did that as a reaction to posts in this forum.

 

[JSRockit]

A dedicated portrait camera with merrill resolution ...it could work for some.

 

[corposant]

A dedicated portrait camera with merrill resolution ...it could work for some.

Yikes - it would be a retouching nightmare... too much detail. It's one of the reasons I prefer the Fuji cameras for portraiture.

 

[JSRockit]

For every person that wants to flatter a model with soft lenses, there's another trying to make super detailed photos of an exotic looking person with a bit too much life lived.

 

[corposant]

For every person that wants to flatter a model with soft lenses, there's another trying to make super detailed photos of an exotic looking person with a bit too much life lived.

I can't speak to that 1:1 ratio, but for those detail-oriented photogs, this camera should make them pleased.

BTW I have done some self-portraits with the DP2M (for trying out lighting scenarios) and I have definitely seen more detail of myself that I'd ever want to see again!