Sigma DP1

[asabet]

For me, size is crucial — not pocketability, but really how less camera impacts the shooting experience for me and my subjects.

Today, Sean and others have the option of super-shallow depth of field with their M8's for when that type of creamy blur is appropriate to their vision. I'd like that option too, but in a cheaper, tiny manually controllable autofocus digital with however fast a lens is scientifically viable (the oft-dreamed-of digital Hexar).

I have similar wants. In fact, the ability to control DOF (ie - have the option to use a shallow DOF) using a small camera with manual controls has driven me to shooting film. In the past few months, I've picked up an Olympus OM-2N w/ OM 40/2 and a CV Bessa R3A with an M-Hexanon 50/2. My pocket camera these days is an Olympus Stylus Epic! Meanwhile, a relatively large and heavy Canon 5D gathers dust on my bookshelf. I'm not sold enough yet on the rangefinder approach to spend the $$ on a digital rangefinder. Instead, I continue to use what I have and hope for a relatively small and affordable digital body with autofocus and a wide-normal lens with a large enough aperture to narrow the DOF when desired.

The DP1 is interesting in that it really drives home how significant a determining factor the lens aperture is on photographic possibilities. By aperture, I'm referring not to the f-number but to the actual dimensions of the entrance pupil. The fact that the DP1 and GRD II have similar diagonal angles of view and relatively similar physical aperture size (4.15mm pupil diameter for the Sigma and 2.46mm for the Ricoh) pits them directly against one another in FOV, DOF control, and even signal/noise constraints. Differences in pixel and sensor size will generally affect things like DR and diffusion limits, and the unique qualities of the Foveon sensor are yet another matter to consider, but the physical aperture itself means quite a bit. I'm hoping for an autofocus digital camera with a normal or slightly wide FOV lens, an entrance pupil with a diameter of at least 7.5mm (preferably greater than 10mm), and a size no larger than an G9.

 

[jonoslack]

I have similar wants. In fact, the ability to control DOF (ie - have the option to use a shallow DOF) using a small camera with manual controls has driven me to shooting film. In the past few months, I've picked up an Olympus OM-2N w/ OM 40/2 and a CV Bessa R3A with an M-Hexanon 50/2. My pocket camera these days is an Olympus Stylus Epic! Meanwhile, a relatively large and heavy Canon 5D gathers dust on my bookshelf. I'm not sold enough yet on the rangefinder approach to spend the $$ on a digital rangefinder. Instead, I continue to use what I have and hope for a relatively small and affordable digital body with autofocus and a wide-normal lens with a large enough aperture to narrow the DOF when desired.

The DP1 is interesting in that it really drives home how significant a determining factor the lens aperture is on photographic possibilities. By aperture, I'm referring not to the f-number but to the actual dimensions of the entrance pupil. The fact that the DP1 and GRD II have similar diagonal angles of view and relatively similar physical aperture size (4.15mm pupil diameter for the Sigma and 2.46mm for the Ricoh) pits them directly against one another in FOV, DOF control, and even signal/noise constraints. Differences in pixel and sensor size will generally affect things like DR and diffusion limits, and the unique qualities of the Foveon sensor are yet another matter to consider, but the physical aperture itself means quite a bit. I'm hoping for an autofocus digital camera with a normal or slightly wide FOV lens, an entrance pupil with a diameter of at least 7.5mm (preferably greater than 10mm), and a size no larger than an G9.

HI Amin
Brian Mosely who is an occasional visitor here is using an Olympus E400 (which is very small and unobtrusive) together with hexanon lense(s) - I would have thought that this would at least give you the results you need?

 

[asabet]

Hi Jono, thanks for the suggestion. I have read Brian's posts with interest, and he seems to get excellent results with that setup. In part because of his experiences, I bought an E-410 with a KatzEye focusing screen and OM-1 eyecup magnifier along with some Zuiko OM primes including a 24mm f/2 lens. I really tried to make it work, but in the end, I had some difficulty achieving focus with that lens. When heading out the door with the choice of either an OM-2N and 40/2 or E-410 and 24/2, I was picking the former almost every time. I've noted that Brian tends to shoot a fair amount of short tele, which is a focal length range in which I was able to reliably manually focus using the E-410. However, I don't often find that shooting tele suits me.

 

[Arch]

Guy closed the other DP1 thread because it got, shall we say, a little off-track. So here's a new one that I hope will stick to photography as its subject.

The introduction of the DP1 invites an interesting question for photographers who like small sensor pocket cameras. That is: is it the size or the drawing of these little cameras that matters most to one? Is it both? For some, the portability of these cameras are really what is of interest. For others, and we all know Mitch is one, the specific visual qualities of the format are very interesting.

I think my own answer is that I have some interest in both aspects. What say you?

Cheers,

Sean

Thanks for cleaning up a thread that got a bit messy. I have a feeling that the little Sigma is really showing a way forward for small cameras. Camera size really matters for me, much more than sensor size. As it happens, the so-called entry-level DSLRs with their small sensors are happily absent from this particular forum, even if it's called "small sensor cameras".

What is missing in DP1, though, is zoom. Sooner or later, the "prime" lens calls for converters which make their size less useful. That's a sad compromise when size matters. DP1's digital zoom doesn't help.

The way forward is towards sharper, cleaner images with a wonderful dynamic range. My wish is that these cameras could finally enter the essence of the digital era by offering a customizable firmware. The user could manipulate their "drawing" qualities towards Rodinal, Tri-X or whatever they wish, by uploading their preferences from their software. This could already be done with the existing models. Just create the software.

 

[Robert Campbell]

Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.

Cheers,

Sean

From Gray's Elegy:

Let not Ambition mock their useful Toil,
Their homely Joys and Destiny obscure;
Nor Grandeur hear with a disdainful Smile,
The short and simple Annals of the Poor.

 

[johnastovall]

"I may end up thinking William Blake is the greatest photographic theorist of all time."

Now THAT'S interesting! Would you care to elaborate, or to point us to some of his work?

Cheers!

Irenaeus

“To see a world in a grain of sand and heaven in a wild flower Hold infinity in the palms of your hand and eternity in an hour.”

“The eye altering, alters all”

Then there's Tiger.

Blake is all about light long before photography...

 

[Lili]

I have been thinking about the question Sean posed earlier and tried to prioritize my needs/wants in these cameras as follows;
1-Size; if the camera is left behind you don't get any pictures. I think the small sensor cameras now have the capacity to fufill many of the same niche that the first Leica's (the Barnack ideal) fufilled.
2-Speed of Operation/effortless interface. As Sean said of the G9's ISO dial, if you can operate it perfectly in the dark it meets my benchmark. In regards to speed of shooting, the camera should NOT hold you back. While I don't want to machine gun images, conversely I do not want to wade through a ton of menus or have to wait for the camera to achieve focus.
I want to shoot NOW, when I want to.
3-Absolute optical quality. No distortion, or at least as little as possible. If I do PP it needs to be because I WANT to do it, not because I HAVE to fix image quality issues. Yes, I am lazy, deal with it
4-As much control of the image parameters as possible in-camera. See item 3 above.
5-A large, sharp and clear LCD. I have come to be quite fond of using these. They allow you to track the entire scene while still framing with extreme precision. Also people relax a bit more when nothing is masking your face as you shoot. If I could have my Cake and Eat it too, I would like to see such a screen be either tiltable, twistable or both. Also either a brilliant inbuilt or add-on optical view finder is an occassionally nice thing in to have in super bright or very cramped conditions, but it is not absolutely required IMHO.
Please note that I have not mentioned totally noiseless images, I quite like that I get with my GRD. I prefer detail with some noise to the smeared, water-color look that some cameras give at high ISO.

 

[Photon-hunter]

I am new into small sensor cameras. I have never owned one and am in the process of purchasing one. My main reason for buying one is definetely the size and the ability to "pocket-it". As Lili said, if the camera is left behind, well...and lately I feel very lazy about carriyng my Canon DSL to certain places. On the other hand, some of you are managing to achieve very interesting results with this small sensor cameras that resemble the B/W 35 mm sort of thing that we all associate with some of the most powerfull images of the XX century.

Now I believe that the "size or drawing" question may be answered with another question:

If Ricoh or Sigma or Canon (or whoever really) managed to produce a camera with the aprox. size of the DP1, with a sensor on the 4/3 or APS range, with 8-10 Mpix. and with a fixed lens in the 28-35mm range, with a max. aperture of f 1.8 or f 2 (or even better, a little 28-50 zoom with a speed of 1,8-2,8...), and that was reasonably priced, would you still prefer shooting with the GRII?

No doubt that such a camera would have a character and drawing characteristics of it´s own, nothing to do with a GRII, so I wonder how many of you would still prefer a so called "small-sensor" camera due to it´s specific character?

Me? As I said, I am new to this and really look forward to start playing with a GX100 or LX-2 and find by myself whether the special nature of this cameras is going to empower my image-creation process or not..

Hmmm! Fun..

Erik.

 

[Photon-hunter]

Regarding the so called "storm" on the other thread there is something I would really like to comment and hope won´t bother anyone, just my opinion.

I feel very sad about members having to be "removed" from any forum. But I must say regarding members like "lucridders": Well, he certainly was allways moaning about the crappy results he was getting from his Ricoh and to be honest I never read a positive comment from him, but in any case, he was (and is) entitled to have whatever opinions he wants, and if the guy wasn´t capable of producing acceptable images from his machine, well, sorry for him, but i don´t think that is a reason to ban a person from a public space like this one. I failed to find a post from him that was unrespectfull or rude (please if he was rude at any point, excuse me for not finding such posts), and I don´t think he deserved being punished just for giving an unpopular opinion..

I understand that moderating a quickly-growing place such as this is not easy, and I know I wouldn´t do it any better than Guy or Jack, but such decisions need to be taken very carefully..

Now, back to photography and light-capture devices!!

Erik.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Thanks Erik it was a little more involved in this decision on him that went back several weeks and he was on a temp. ban and sadly he did not get the message real well. Trust me , i do NOT like doing this stuff but it is a decision that Jack and i thought was best. I wish them well to be honest

 

[Photon-hunter]

Guy, I am new to this place and under any circumstances would I want to tell you how to do your work..obviously I know nothing about past issues, and for sure this things are far more complex that they look.

So as I said, back to our lovely-shiny machines..

Erik.

 

[Will]

I was interested to read on another forum that the hood on the DP1 is going to be threaded to accept filters and could therefore accept third party lenses as well.



(People who know Lucridders don't need to read or respond to the following!

I can understand why he had to be excluded. I admit to not really having a problem with him but for the fact that he absolutely has to have the last word, so any thread he posts in becomes bogged down with his repeated postings until they become unusable. There is a place for eccentrics in the world but that doesn't mean that they have to be in every place.)

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Guy, I am new to this place and under any circumstances would I want to tell you how to do your work..obviously I know nothing about past issues, and for sure this things are far more complex that they look.

So as I said, back to our lovely-shiny machines..

Erik.

Believe me questioning me is not a bad thing. We all need to make a call good or bad and that will always bring up questions. Nothing wrong with questions that is how we learn to grow on all fronts. I hope everyone understands.

 

[Lili]

HI Amin
Brian Mosely who is an occasional visitor here is using an Olympus E400 (which is very small and unobtrusive) together with hexanon lense(s) - I would have thought that this would at least give you the results you need?

Jono, do the Hexanon lenses fit directly on the E400 or did they need to modified?
Did Brian use the famous Konica 40/f2 pancake?

 

[jonoslack]

Jono, do the Hexanon lenses fit directly on the E400 or did they need to modified?
Did Brian use the famous Konica 40/f2 pancake?

Lili
I'm really sorry - beyond the fact that there is a small (and simple) modification to be done I'm really not up on all of this - might be worth sending him a private message to get him back here and explain (I'll give it a try).
For me this is absolutely the territory of my M8.

 

[Maggie O]

To get back on-topic, I'm most curious as to how the DP1's files will work in B&W. It seems like the Foveon is almost a dedicated color sensor and that it might not work well for B&W.

It'd be nice to have an M8-like compact for backup.

 

[Lili]

Lili
I'm really sorry - beyond the fact that there is a small (and simple) modification to be done I'm really not up on all of this - might be worth sending him a private message to get him back here and explain (I'll give it a try).
For me this is absolutely the territory of my M8.

It is ok, i will try PM'ing him then. That particular lens is very nice and I was curious how it performed on a DSLR.
I am not a huge DSLR fan, given the choice I will take my Hexar AF or my Ricoh GRD (or perhaps, to stay OT, the Sigma DP-1). I wish some of these previews of the DP-1 showed what the LCD view looked like.

 

[Maggie O]

I wsh some of these previews of the DP-1 showed what the LCD view looked like.

Personally, I'm waiting for Jono to lick one! :ROTFL:

 

[Lili]

Personally, I'm waiting for Jono to lick one! :ROTFL:

Ok that image just made me snarf my tea all over

 

[Robert Campbell]

To get back on-topic, I'm most curious as to how the DP1's files will work in B&W. It seems like the Foveon is almost a dedicated color sensor and that it might not work well for B&W.

It'd be nice to have an M8-like compact for backup.

It is a dedicated colour sensor; which makes me wonder if a sensor without a Bayer array would work as the perfect B/W capture. And if so, would anyone make one?