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 vs. Sony A7rII vs. Sigma DP3M

ggibson

Well-known member
I picked up a Sigma SD Quattro with 30mm f1.4 kit lens last month and tested it against my Sony A7rII and Sigma DP3M. I thought I would share some comparison images and impressions here for folks who might be curious to how image results from these cameras compare. Standard disclaimer--I'm not a pro reviewer here so you must take results with whatever grain of salt you would like. I don't have a perfectly comparable focal length to compare across each camera, so the framing is obviously not perfect between the different cameras (I'm using primes here). These shots are taken by moving the camera/tripod setup to keep the object approximately the same size in the frame. This gives a pretty good look at resolution of the sensor. I also ended up shooting these wide open so that I could see the different bokeh/compression results from each lens. Focus is on the green leaf in the center.

Processing: for the Sigma X3Fs and X3I, I process them in Sigma Photo Pro and export them as 16-bit TIFFs. Then, I import these into Lightroom with the Sony RAWs and the Sigma DNG. After attempting to color-match these results and find the best balance of noise reduction for each file, I exported the Jpegs here. This part is difficult to find a single process that works well for all files (Sigma DNGs and X3Fs behave a bit differently in my experience), so insert your grains of salt here as needed. They are the best results that I could come up with for each file type in a reasonable amount of work.

Here's the lineup all together:


Large jpg files for download:
Sony A7rII + Leica 40mm Summicron-C f2
Sigma SD Quattro + 30mm f1.4 DNG
Sigma SD Quattro + 30mm f1.4 X3F (Single Shot)
Sigma SD Quattro + 30mm f1.4 X3I (Multi Shot/Super Fine Detail)
Sony A7rII + FE Zeiss 55mm f1.8
Sigma DP3 Merrill 50mm f2.8 Macro

Bonus:
Sony A7rII + FE 28mm f2
Sony A7rII + FE 16-35mm f4 @ 35mm f4

My takeaways:

Sony vs. Sigma: Not too surprising that the A7rII wins in terms of detail and clean files. Not really surprising considering the A7rII costs 3x more. The Sigma Quattro files (DNG and X3F) and Merrill X3F were all relatively noisy even at ISO 100. Much less latitude to push/pull these files in post than the A7rII.

Sigma Quattro DNG vs. X3F: Detail-wise, they produce similar levels of output, but I think that Sigma's noise reduction in SPP is more finely tuned to the particular Quattro signal noise than the tools in Lightroom. Like DPR mentioned in their review, it was impossible for me to color-match between these files. The DNGs come out looking closer to the Sony A7rII files color-wise, although there are still differences. I liked the X3F files slightly more, but DNG is definitely more simple for me to process. At least you have both options, but for "the" shot, I'd go with X3F or X3I.

Super-Fine Detail Mode on the SDQ: I feel like SFD mode on the SDQ produced some of the most spectacular files I've ever used. Super clean signal/noise with noticeable improvements in detail. Maybe not quite as high-res as a single A7rII RAW, but close enough and with beautiful colors. I might actually prefer SFD's files if I could use it all the time. The biggest downside is obviously that it's a multi-shot mode and subject to movement artifacts between shots. This can be remedied with extra effort by extracting a single image and cloning if you're willing to put in the work. If you're shooting in a studio with controlled lighting, however, the SDQ delivers amazing results at a fraction of the cost of the A7rII. Another takeaway for me after using this mode is that I should try some multi-shot processing with the A7rII at some point. I know the Smooth Motion app does this in-camera, although it does not bracket to increase dynamic range like the SDQ.

Sigma DP3 Merrill: This little camera continues to impress me with its output. While it doesn't deliver the same level of resolution as the A7rII, the micro-contrast/edges on the Merrill file can stand out more distinctly. I definitely plan to keep it at least for panoramic stitching. In my experience with the camera (not just from this test) it really does have some distinctly different look to its files. Clouds and night shots especially can look completely different. The Merrill output can be very noisy, so maybe some shot stacking would be a good technique with these files as well. Overall, quite a bargain for its image-quality if you can shoot within its limitations (ISO 100, slow AF).

Conclusions? Well, I sold the SDQ but mostly because I didn't want to start investing into another lens system and also ultimately my goal is to move towards a smaller camera kit. I like Sigma cameras pretty well as a specialized compliment to a bayer system, but I rely too much on fast continuous AF, high ISO, and high dynamic range in most of my shooting to let me keep the SDQ. For certain photographers they can really be great cameras. I found the SDQ to be the most usable Sigma camera I've tried so far (I've had the DP1x, DP2Q, DP3M, and now SDQ). If Sigma can come up with a new smaller DP camera, I'd be really interested. Until then, I can get my foveon fix from the DP3M.

I hope this comparison is useful or interesting. Let me know what your experiences are or what you think of the examples I've shared.
 
I'm not sure what you did to that Quattro DNG file, but it ended up looking horrible with the noise, I haven't seen anything that bad from shooting DNG on my dp2 Quattro.

Other than that I agree with your conclusion, I'm going to be holding on to my DP2M+DP3M until a A7rII quality sensor gets within a reasonable price or maybe a new Foveon generation comes along.
 

Stoneage

Member
My takeaways:

Sony vs. Sigma: Not too surprising that the A7rII wins in terms of detail and clean files. Not really surprising considering the A7rII costs 3x more. The Sigma Quattro files (DNG and X3F) and Merrill X3F were all relatively noisy even at ISO 100. Much less latitude to push/pull these files in post than the A7rII.
Thanks a lot for your effort. As you wrote, it's difficult to make conclusions because of the different focal length and aperture. But over all, the Merrill wins for me by a large amount.
It's the cleanest and most "realistic" (plasticity, textures) image of them.
The Quattro file (without SFD) is horrible. Smeary NR-look and yet noisy. Not acceptable in my opinion.
SFD looks good, but honestly i don't understand the hype. This is how the Quattro should look with one shot. And of course we can bracket our images with every camera and get cleaner files.
 

tagscuderia

New member
SFD looks good, but honestly i don't understand the hype. This is how the Quattro should look with one shot.
That's pretty much how I feel about it, plus it's a 7-shot burst with 3 redundant exposures if metered correctly :facesmack:.

A warning regards DNG, White Balance must be correct at time of shooting! It's not scene referred, think of it as a TIFF.

@OP, (to me) Quattro files look anaemic/brittle. Things improve slightly if you minimise SPP's processing; a neutral conversion is Detail 0.00, Sharpness 0.00. You should then be able to use Chroma/luminance NR 0.00 for further processing in Lr.
But luminance is still captured solely from the limited spectral response of the (noisy) top layer, sacrificing the Foveon 'look.'
P.S, it's incredible how well the Merrill (and F13 for that matter) sensor compares, even when held against today's mirrorless/DSLRs.
 
Last edited:

ggibson

Well-known member
Quattro vs. Merrill: I feel like they both have some merits. Keep in mind the SDQ shots were at f1.4 while the DP3M was at f2.8, so some of the detail loss may just be from the shallow DOF. Otherwise, IMO the Quattro colors are generally better, and is able to capture more detail. The overall "look" of the Quattro files is somewhere in between Bayer and Merrill (if you have a similar-resolution Bayer camera, although the A7rII outclasses both). But yeah, still quite noisy shadows even at ISO 100 unless you shoot SFD (so is Merrill). I'll hang onto my Merrill camera for now, since it is so different from the A7rII in the way it renders some scenes.

Here are some other shots I took. These are taken without moving the tripod, so the framing differs on each (Leica 40 is pretty close to the Sigma 30mm APS-C though). These are all shot at f8, so details are much more visible here. No DP3M shot here--I took one, but AWB failed massively even in RAW, and I was unable to recover the colors properly in post.

Sony + Leica 40/2
SDQ 30/1.4 DNG
SDQ 30/1.4 X3F
SDQ 30/1.4 X3I (SFD)
Sony 55/1.8

 

Stoneage

Member
I don't know what to say, i'm on a Macbook Air now and maybe it's broken, but these images look horrible. (compression/web/processing?)
The SDQ (X3F) sample looks like ISO 800.
I have to check it on my main screen tomorrow. I also can't believe, that the DP3m wasn't able to produce a satisfying image.
It's important to choose the right white balance from the settings and then, if necessary, doing a correction with the color picker.
Auto WB unfortunately mostly isn't good enough with the Merrills.
 

ggibson

Well-known member
Not sure what you're referring to in the images specifically. I see noise in the DNG and X3F shots. That is typical for the SDQ at ISO 100, and frankly the DP3M too. These do have some minor contrast/exposure adjustment as well as color tweaking to try to get outputs to look similar, but nothing outside of what I would expect to do with processing any other images (generally less in these examples).
 

tagscuderia

New member
Not sure what you're referring to in the images specifically. I see noise in the DNG and X3F shots. That is typical for the SDQ at ISO 100, and frankly the DP3M too.
I've seen your shots on Flickr and there are some absolutely stunning images on there but... the Quattro shots here have been oversharpened; perhaps more accurately, you're fighting SPP's dreadful luminance NR with sharpening creating a stippled effect globally.
Edit: I see the same in the Sony's OOF areas, which sharpening tool and radius are you using? Hope that you don't mind my asking (?).
Have you tried exporting a neutral conversion from SPP and sharpening et al elsewhere, that should eradicate the stippled effect?!
 

Rachael Alice

Not Available
Look terrible DNG shooting with some noise added in it. its' quite annoying for me. As per this choice i stick with my DP3M because as quality sensor as compare to A7rII.
 

ggibson

Well-known member
Here's a nice article I found that shows how to manually stack images somewhat like what Sigma is doing with their SFD mode (SFD also brackets exposures so it is able to improve dynamic range as well):

https://petapixel.com/2015/02/21/a-...eating-superresolution-photos-with-photoshop/

Of course, the Sony A7rII sensor already has vastly superior signal/noise ratio and dynamic range to X3Fs, so SFD is only really able to level the playing field a bit. I like the DP3M results, so I will definitely give this technique a shot with the Merrill sensor, but it is very cumbersome especially if you're doing any stitching or dealing with any movement in the scene (wind, foliage, etc.). Time can also be a factor for situations with changing light. Sometimes it's just nice to have the A7rII and take a single shot.
 

Paul Monaghan

New member
I've seen your shots on Flickr and there are some absolutely stunning images on there but... the Quattro shots here have been oversharpened; perhaps more accurately, you're fighting SPP's dreadful luminance NR with sharpening creating a stippled effect globally.
Edit: I see the same in the Sony's OOF areas, which sharpening tool and radius are you using? Hope that you don't mind my asking (?).
Have you tried exporting a neutral conversion from SPP and sharpening et al elsewhere, that should eradicate the stippled effect?!
I feel the same, my Sigma imagse don't look like this.
 
Top