Sigma DP2 Quattro Shots

[Future]

M vs. Q

100 ISO, Standard, F8, 2 clicks down on sharpening, 1 down on chroma and luma noise AWB on the Q, Daylight on M

Both tripod mounted w. 2 second self-timer

thanks for this.
colours aside, look at the wood, it looks very flat on the quattro, micro-contrast and texture aren't close to what the merrill catches.
sounding like a broken record by now...

 

[raist3d]

For those interested, a photographer blog where he compared Quattro vs Merrill in 8 parts. His conclusion was that he feels the sensor design sacrificed some detail/contrast/tone, and returned it, but it's still very interesting as he goes through wide set of subjects.

Is is part 4- B&W

Sigma Quattro DP2 Comparison – Part 4 – B&W | Landscape & Cityscape

- Ricardo

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

For those interested, a photographer blog where he compared Quattro vs Merrill in 8 parts. His conclusion was that he feels the sensor design sacrificed some detail/contrast/tone, and returned it, but it's still very interesting as he goes through wide set of subjects.

Is is part 4- B&W

Sigma Quattro DP2 Comparison – Part 4 – B&W | Landscape & Cityscape

- Ricardo

I have to question the methodology of the "details" page in particular. There is something very wrong here.

 

[The Ute]

I tried the Xitek EVF on the Quattro.

It does not work of course.

There is no video output from the USB port on the Quattro.

It's for the cable release and to upload photos.

I did notice a setting called "viewfinder mode" in one of the menus.

Not quite sure what it is used for ?

Anyway, I turned it on and it still did not help.

Lot's more "real world" testing today.

 

[ustein]

>whatever this means

Photo Pro allows to double the resolution and create about 60MP files. For the Quattros only Photo Pro allows to export 39MP files (but not for the Merrills). I think the 39MP version is a very realistic approach.

 

[pflower]

I'm afraid I am confused by this and wonder if you would be so kind as to elaborate a bit.

X3F files from my DPxM are about 44MB in size. A 16 bit Tiff is about 88MB.

What exactly is the reference to 39MP and how does that translate as regards the size of a 16 bit Tiff.

I have to confess that with the Merills I have never actually considered the pixel size - save that I note that printing an A3+ size tiff results in a ppi of about 240 in LR (which obviously is not the same thing but still of relevance).

So in real terms, i.e. size of file and ppi when printing what does DPP 6.0x do for the Quattro files that it does not do for the Merrill files.

Thanks for any clarification.

>whatever this means

Photo Pro allows to double the resolution and create about 60MP files. For the Quattros only Photo Pro allows to export 39MP files (but not for the Merrills). I think the 39MP version is a very realistic approach.

 

[ustein]

>X3F files from my DPxM are about 44MB in size. A 16 bit Tiff is about 88MB.

Forget file size. I am talking pixel dimensions (defined here in mega pixels).

 

[rjp85]

It's a waste of time to export the larger sizes in SPP.

I did a test, exported a normal and double size from SPP, enlarged the normal with PhotoZoom Pro and compared to the SPP double size, and PhotoZoom Pro was so much better, it was in a different universe.

Even if you export a doublesize, then downsize it to same size, and compare it to an original same size, the original same size wins!

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

Forget double size. Its S-HI that works best.

I also have Photozoom Pro. Lanczos works pretty well. I am not keen on their S-Spline algorithms because they introduce a painterly effect.

 

[rjp85]

Hi Quentin, same thing goes for S-HI, IMO. Just a tad more definition from PZ Pro, and the enlargement is not that significant enough to cause the painterly vector look.

 

[The Ute]

A few more comparisons from today's shooting.

1st set are slightly different lighting.

Setting are the same except the Quattro is on vivid instead of standard.

All tripod mounted at F8.

Set 1- Merrill, Quattro
Set 2- Quattro, Merrill
Set 3- Quattro, Merrill

 

[raist3d]

I have to question the methodology of the "details" page in particular. There is something very wrong here.

Quentin - on a 2nd more careful look I have to agree. Seems almost as if he used a beta version of SPP (though some could argue that SPP is always in Beta ).

Yes, I don't consider it representative. It's too bad because the scenes he chose are indeed awesome for comparing. I wish he gave it another spin under latest SPP, and better yet- post the RAWS.

So yes, I agree. Too many issues going on.

- Ricardo

 

[G43]

A few more comparisons from today's shooting.

1st set are slightly different lighting.

Setting are the same except the Quattro is on vivid instead of standard.

All tripod mounted at F8.

Set 1- Merrill, Quattro
Set 2- Quattro, Merrill
Set 3- Quattro, Merrill

Bit difficult to judge on the relative small files. The Ute how do you perceive the difference? You saw the full scale files.

 

[The Ute]

Bit difficult to judge on the relative small files. The Ute how do you perceive the difference? You saw the full scale files.

I think they are very close.

Almost a matter of taste.

I prefer the look of the Merrill and the value for the money.

The Q is definitely an excellent camera though.

You can't go wrong getting one.

I might take the plunge w the DP1Q if the lens is sufficiently better.

 

[G43]

Cool....

 

[Hulyss Bowman]

I think they are very close.

Almost a matter of taste.

I prefer the look of the Merrill and the value for the money.

The Q is definitely an excellent camera though.

You can't go wrong getting one.

I might take the plunge w the DP1Q if the lens is sufficiently better.

This is my point since the start. Anybody in his right mind should not buy a camera who give only very few improvements over the previous model. The Quattro is just a new camera, an another direction, but IQ wise, the jump is just little compared to Merrills. In + the soft is just a piece of crap, really.

So I recoup what L.Chambers said : Early buyers of Quattro are just beta testers. Nothing more, nothing less. Buying a gear in those conditions is like playing poker.

My reaction is the same on Nikon gears. D800/D800E/D810 ... what the hell ?? The former D800 sharpened with talent is excellent.

So we live in a time where we should jump DSLR/compact generations. I'll pass on Quattro. Let see in 4 years if real improvements come.

 

[G43]

None like Fuji have used their customers as beta testers. OK, they fixed the flaws along time, but anyhow they did what they did.

I don't know if you guys noted Ming said a solution (for what I do not know) were ready next week?
I do not know when their chat took place, so next week might be last week or?

 

[Tim]

So we live in a time where we should jump DSLR/compact generations. I'll pass on Quattro. Let see in 4 years if real improvements come.

I've been thinking about this idea of jumping generations for sometime. I also will be passing on the Quattro.

I do like the output to a degree if you take it by itself. Its only comparing it that I prefer my Merrills. In reality all the criticisms of the Merrills don't affect me except for the lack of EVF. I have no problems with battery life and even the write speed hampers me little.

 

[biglouis]

^^^ Ute's examples above ^^^

The Quattro seems to have more saturation compared to the Merrill, which we know often deliver flat files that need a tweak in saturation.

I assume these are straight out of the camera?

LouisB

 

[raist3d]

The "Beer Garden" shot guys - the one with the fuzzy yellow characters sure have been busy. They got now a new shot with same framing of the same shot with a yellow filter on top of the camera.

Interesting thing is, the Yellow resolution comes back to the letters, but now there's color moire(!) on the fence on top of the building. First Foveon with color moire

This was predicted could happen by a few, I would imagine of a different nature than an AAless Bayer and it sure seems so- yellow alternating with luminance.

(conversion mine, SPP 6.0.4 from RAW)

The raws are here:

Normal (but shows resolution loss in some yellows)
http://ichigo-up.com/Sn4/download/1405776566.X3F
With yellow filter (shows color moire, yellows look full resolution)
http://ichigo-up.com/Sn4/download/1405772202.X3F

For reference:

The very original shot that started this that shows the issue of yellow resolution loss:

The Quattro and the "Beer Garden" Issue

I can only guess is that this particular cyanish blue at that luminance level makes it hard for the algorithm to discern detail for Yellow vs the Blue, given it needs to pick from two layers that are 1/4th the color resolution of the blue.

- Ricardo