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!

Sigma sd Quattro Images

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?
 

scho

Well-known member
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?
Yes, it will work. Just add an IR pass filter of your chosen wavelength to the lens after removing the dust protector which is a hot mirror filter that blocks IR. It would be nice if Sigma would offer a replacement dust protector made with an IR pass filter to allow IR shooting without the need to use filters on the lens. Below are a few IR sample shots using the sdQ with dust shield removed and 850nm filter on a 30mm lens. Camera was in monochrome mode which made it easy to preview results. All raws just quickly batched through x3f tools and then Photoshop ACR. The last image was also split toned during ACR processing. There is a bug in x3f tools 0.55 that leaves a matrix of black dots from the PDAF screen on the image.



 
Last edited:

scho

Well-known member
Yes, it will work. Just add an IR pass filter of your chosen wavelength to the lens after removing the dust protector which is a hot mirror filter that blocks IR. It would be nice if Sigma would offer a replacement dust protector made with an IR pass filter to allow IR shooting without the need to use filters on the lens. Below are a few IR sample shots using the sdQ with dust shield removed and 850nm filter on a 30mm lens. Camera was in monochrome mode which made it easy to preview results. All raws just quickly batched through x3f tools and then Photoshop ACR. The last image was also split toned during ACR processing. There is a bug in x3f tools 0.55 that leaves a matrix of black dots from the PDAF screen on the image.



If you want to shoot hand held, but still use ISO 100 then use a 590nm filter instead of the higher wavelength pass filters. Similar results in monochrome with much faster shutter speeds. A 590nm sample below.

 
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!
 

scho

Well-known member
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!
The sdQ is a mirrorless camera so live view makes it very easy to focus (I just use auto focus with no problems) and frame. Also, I set the camera color mode to monochrome and image quality to raw so there is no distracting red color. You see exactly what the final monochrome image looks like on the LCD or EVF. The 850 nm filter is completely black to the naked eye but still delivers a crystal clear IR monochrome preview in the camera EVF/LCD. I use the camera on a tripod when shooting with this filter and camera set at ISO 100. In bright sun and f/8 exposure times are down around 1/50 sec. A 590 nm filter would expose at about 1/400 sec under similar conditions.
 
Last edited:

scho

Well-known member
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.
 

scho

Well-known member
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

 

TClair

New member
Thanks scho, I appreciate the comment. I believe the sdQ deserves a little more respect than it gets!

 
Last edited:

scho

Well-known member
Cornell arboretum. sdQ 18-35 A - dust protector + Kolari CC filter on lens. Camera, spare battery, 18-35 lens, R72 filter, and CC filter comprise my IR/Vis walkabout kit. Dust protector/hot mirror is in storage.

 

TClair

New member
how this?^^
Foveon, for me the sdQ works very well but it is not for everyone. For landscape and still life images I think it is hard to beat the detail and color. The button layout is good when you adapt and even manual focus works well, better than my Sony A7, even with the Sigma EVF which lacks detail but is quite usable. For sports or action it is a poor camera by today's standard but I don't shoot that much anymore if I do I have other cameras. Post processing is a little more work but worth the effort. A normal day shoot for me is between 50-75 images using a tripod at ISO 100 so slow and deliberate. If anyone else shoots this way I believe the camera is about perfect. Now if Sigma just come out with a great "A" series wide angle lens. Looking forward to seeing the 12-24mm "A" lens!
 

foveon

Member
Foveon, for me the sdQ works very well but it is not for everyone. For landscape and still life images I think it is hard to beat the detail and color. The button layout is good when you adapt and even manual focus works well, better than my Sony A7, even with the Sigma EVF which lacks detail but is quite usable. For sports or action it is a poor camera by today's standard but I don't shoot that much anymore if I do I have other cameras. Post processing is a little more work but worth the effort. A normal day shoot for me is between 50-75 images using a tripod at ISO 100 so slow and deliberate. If anyone else shoots this way I believe the camera is about perfect. Now if Sigma just come out with a great "A" series wide angle lens. Looking forward to seeing the 12-24mm "A" lens!
You are right if you compare the SDq to a Sony but not if you compare to a Merrill; q is a step backwards and not forwards,
 

TClair

New member
You are right if you compare the SDq to a Sony but not if you compare to a Merrill; q is a step backwards and not forwards,
I have both a dp2M and sdQ, I use to have a SD1M but sold it to get what I thought would be the ideal camera the Sony A7, I was wrong. I do love my Merrills but enjoy the operation of the sdQ and I am happy with the image quality, it is still better than the A7. I don't know if the new Quattros will ever be as good as the Merrills but I do believe it will get better in time.
 
Top