why dont you own the best digital camera in the world anon?

>>3051797
>not a Sony
topkek

>>3051797
it's not a phase one so you can stop at best small format digital

>>3051808
>being a sonyfriend

>>3051797
I've always heard the foveon sensor was fucking amazing, but how good is it really? Does it out perform other sensors of similar resolution? What are the benefits to this design?

>>3051828
Poor in low light, like 800ISO poor in low light.

The benefit is that unlike a Bayer sensor, the pixels don't only receive a single color then try to fill in the gaps. This can affect the perceived resolution compared to a sensor of the same MPs. It is also claimed to enhance the smoothness of gradations as the colors are not interpolated.

>>3051797
>dare i say, the best camera ever?

that can't be right because it isn't film

>>3051830
>This can affect the perceived resolution

I always hear this as the main benefit. But is it true? This camera is 30mp for example. Would it rival the resolution of a 5dsr? Would you be able to print images sharper than a nikon d810? I get the idea behind it, I just don't see it truely benefitting. Not to say that the technology couldn't be great in the future. I think it would be great to explore this more, and maybe make an even better sensor

>>3051839
unusable after iso 400.
slow processing because muh large amount of data.

>>3051828
It's poor in low light in a different way from how Bayer filtered sensors work. Since the photosensitive bits are stacked together, and the red layer is at the bottom, red channel resolution (dynamic range, effectively, becoming inconsistent from less significant end but losing bits nonetheless) falls before green and blue.

Go find some high-ISO samples offa any Foveon sensor. Including OP's post. They look fucking awful in the reds, like, much worse than x-trans.

>>3051828
Its like a digital version of slide film
Sharp, detailed, needs spot on exposure.
And fucking shit for low light.
Niche camera, quite good all things considered, but it's not for everyone

that's not even the best sigma ya fuckwit.

>>3051839
From what I hear the way Sigma markets their MP count is in perceived resolution. "MP" most commonly refers to the actual millions of pixels for Bayer cameras. However, "MP" may also describe the effective resolution of an image despite it using less pixels than in its "MP" rating. It's easy to see why a lower pixel count image from a Sigma would still be able to match (or exceed) Bayer-produced images with a higher pixel count.

Beyond that I'm not sure how to convince you one way or the other. Some people will swear by the benefits but as mentioned >>3051850 there are issues regarding low-light and exposure flexibility.

Considering the ISO limitations, these are really only meant for situations where light is plenty but contrast is not too high. Theoretically, pixel shift cameras should be able to produce the "same" effect without the drawbacks of limited exposure flexibility. Instead you need completely static subjects.

As an aside, I would recommend looking at Andy Feltham's photographs (https://www.flickr.com/photos/61249924@N06/). He mostly either uses the Pentax K1 in pixel shift mode or a Mamiya 7 with Portra. Of course, his style is developed but there is a clear strength in the color fidelity of his images due to the technology chosen.

>>3051896
Lol, no, foveon is a stacked sensor.
Imagine 3 transparent, 10mp sensors stacked on top of each other, each takes an rgb color channel, then the 3 are merged in post making a 30mp image. Meaning every individual pixel is an accurate colour representation, whereas bayer filters give an approximation over a number of pixels.

File: 51A393ADDNL._SX355_.jpg (22KB, 355x224px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 355x224px

>>3051797
>why dont you own the best digital camera in the world anon

Because the Epson RD1 is still stupidly expensive and I have better things to spend a grand on.

>>3051899
It is two 10MP and the bottom red is around 3MP

>>3051914
New ones are yeh, not the real sigma bodies though.

In good light the foveon sensor is absolutely spectacular. Colors and resolution are incredible.

I used to have the old, very first DP2. It was a 6mp foveon sensor. You could process the RAWs at 17mp.

>>3052025
Is there any way they can make it more useful in lower light?

>>3052051
It's a transculent or wavelength transmission technology, it will have less light the deeper the light has to go and the layers need specific thickness due to physics.
They can improve it but foveon will always have to work with less light than the traditional bayer array sensors.
There are workarounds like the Pentax pixel shift but it also has (different) limitations

>>3052051
>make it more useful in lower light?
Why bother with sharpness, correct color, grading, etc. if you want to take crapshots in lowlight conditions?

File: 2000px-Bayer_pattern.svg.png (16KB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 2000x2000px

>>3051914
a 24mp bayer pattern sensor is really 6mp R, 6mp B, and 12mp G

>>3051828
>how good is it really? Does it out perform other sensors of similar resolution?

Similar resolution: yes.
Higher resolution: no.

Sony makes better sensors, although they are full frame.

File: _P2M0004.jpg (2MB, 2048x2048px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2048x2048px

>>3051797
>>3051849
>>3051830
>>3051828
I had several paragraphs written out and they disappeared while I was compressing my picture.

Basically, Foveon is crazy sharp and the DP2M is the only camera I can stand using. The poor low light quality is a semi-myth. If you're clever about how you process, ISO800 is fine for most subjects, and ISO400 is completely satisfying to a critical eye. B&W is a Foveon secret weapon. B&W performance is better than any conventional APS-C. If you select the blue channel (the channel that's positioned at the front of the sensor and therefore receives the most light) You can get critically good pictures up until ISO 32000.

The lens is also sterling, in this picture which I took at f/2.8, ISO 200 1/125, the foreground is pin-sharp down to 100% viewing, and not a single pixel is misrepresented. To a Bayer sensor, the twigs on the ground would be mush, But with Foveon married to such a sensor it's sharp throughout the entire aperture range.

My dream is that Sigma develops a small, focused MILC line. Size of the DP2M, APS-C or APS-H and with a small number of lenses amd tiny flange distance to make for easy 3rd party lenses. I wouldn't be averse to them using E-Mount just so I can get the adaptor for the Contax G lenses. The 45 f/2.0 on a Foveon sensor... a man can only dream. If I get that some day my life will be at least some portion complete.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SIGMA
Camera Model	SIGMA DP2 Merrill
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	45 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4704
Image Height	3136
Number of Bits Per Component	16, 16, 16
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:04:05 19:28:54
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2048
Image Height	2048
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	303034313639303531A5BD5839393938

>>3052115
>he doesn't know about bayer interpolation

>>3051899
That's what I was saying

>>3052190
post a BW ISO 32000 picture in full resolution

File: 2043698_l.jpg (993KB, 1599x2400px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 1599x2400px

>>3052190
Yep, per-pixel color information from the get go gives awesome results. Only some monochrome sensors from Leica and Phase had the image without any interpolation artifacts until Pentax came with their sensor shift. True per pixel RGBG from beginner body through mid-range and FF with limitations to movement makes some very unique opportunities.
Pic related

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX K-3 II
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5 (Windows)
Photographer	ANTONIO
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	150 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:17 12:20:14
Exposure Time	1/4 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3311
Image Height	4967
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Macro

i own a dp2m

the real flaw for me is not the low light performance but that raw files are not compatible with lightroom but only with sigma software

I use my old Eos M now that it's pretty much good enough for whatever.

I will switch to a full frame mirrorless some day though, but not any time soon.

>>3052190
>just ignore the purple and green blotching in the shadow areas and excessive midtone contrast

>>3052190
I own a dp2m

post a picture pls

File: sigma-foveon-sensor-merrill-quattro.jpg (28KB, 600x200px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 600x200px

>the whole point of Foveon was that there were three color layers with the same resolution
>now they reduced the resolution of the two other color layers
>making similar to a Bayer sensor

Why should I care about Foveon anymore?

>>3053817
1.5 values per pixel (quattro) is still better than 1 value per pixel (bayer).

>>3053850
nooooo they fucked foveon forever. they should go bACK TO THE OLD RECIPE OR JUST KYS THEMSELVES.

>>3053817
>more blue
>your eyes is less sensitive to blue
ayy

File: foveon_vs_bayer.jpg (31KB, 600x489px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 600x489px

>>3053817
All layers contain all color information at different rates. Blue layer doesnt just capture blue, it also contains G and R, just less. So they look at the layers underneath to determine how much. So they get to keep the resolution benefits and color accuracy compared to Bayer types. Quite genius.

>>3053850
What do you think about 4 values per pixel?

>>3052190
>>>3051828
>I had several paragraphs written out and they disappeared while I was compressing my picture.


bump

post an example

File: _P2M0002.jpg (3MB, 4704x3136px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4704x3136px

>>3053383
>>3053812
>>3054703
ISO3200, Blue channel only, no NR, no sharpening, exposed for middle gray. At 100% there is grain, yes, but the SNR absolutely exceeds all except the very newest APS-C sensors - look at the textures and you'll see that they're rendered precisely, even if there's a little bit of grain. I prefer this output 100% to my 5DM2, which will present less apparent noise, but with what is actually a significantly lower-resolution signal. Keep in mind this is JPG'd, a PNG crop to follow.

Because there actually seems to be some interest for once I'll post some shots of my technique for processing high ISO colour.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SIGMA
Camera Model	SIGMA DP2 Merrill
Camera Software	SIGMA Photo Pro 6.5.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	45 mm
Serial Number	90416905
Focal Length Range	30
Firmware Version	1.05.1.7093
Camera Software	SIGMA Photo Pro 6.5.1.4944
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:10 19:04:36
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4704
Image Height	3136
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	3030343136393035CDCAEB5841304245
Drive Mode	SINGLE
Resolution	HI
Autofocus Mode	AF-S
Focus Setting	AF-S
White Balance	Shade
Exposure Mode	M
Metering Mode	8
Exposure	0
Contrast	0
Shadow	0
Highlight	0
Sharpness	-2
Fill Light	0
Adjustment Mode	Custom
Quality	8

File: _P2M0002.png (4MB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1024x1024px

>>3054844
The cobweb in the corner at 100%.
I don't think you'd see this detail in a 24mp APS-C any higher than ISO 400.

File: _P2M0001.jpg (1MB, 1568x2352px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1568x2352px

>>3054844
>>3054846
Sigma's problem is that while they're sublime at hardware and optics. (DP2M and DP3M are literally perfect. They outresolve the sensor wide open and have very nearly 0 CA with very nearly 0 distortion) it seems that their software department is a bunch of retards.

Their cameras get a bad rap entirely because of the processing. This is the regular output of SPP in colour at ISO3200. (Incandescent WB, if you choose auto it gets it laughably wrong.)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SIGMA
Camera Model	SIGMA DP2 Merrill
Camera Software	SIGMA Photo Pro 6.5.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	45 mm
Serial Number	90416905
Focal Length Range	30
Firmware Version	1.05.1.7093
Camera Software	SIGMA Photo Pro 6.5.1.4944
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:10 19:21:57
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1568
Image Height	2352
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	3030343136393035DAC8EB5846393046
Drive Mode	SINGLE
Resolution	HI
Autofocus Mode	AF-S
Focus Setting	AF-S
White Balance	Incandescent
Exposure Mode	M
Metering Mode	8
Exposure	0
Contrast	0
Shadow	0
Highlight	0
Saturation	0
Sharpness	0
Fill Light	0
Color Adjustment	1
Adjustment Mode	Custom
Quality	10

File: _P2M0001B.jpg (3MB, 1568x2352px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1568x2352px

>>3054850
>>3054846
>>3054844
If you just split the colours using B/W mode (in so doing skipping all the stupid NR and sharpening steps where they fuck everything up) and recombine them in photoshop with actually sense-making NR, then you get this.
Colours are not true, but it's not too difficult to fiddle in photoshop to find the right look.

Once again, ISO3200! I've taken the camera out to the pub with my friends in the night and gotten satisfying pictures that I still treasure to this day.

If sigma fired their software guys they could fix all the bad press they get.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SIGMA
Camera Model	SIGMA DP2 Merrill
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	45 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	3136
Image Height	4704
Number of Bits Per Component	16, 16, 16
Compression Scheme	Uncompressed
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2017:04:10 19:31:31
Exposure Time	1/160 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	3200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1568
Image Height	2352
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	3030343136393035DAC8EB5846393046

>>3054159
>What do you think about 4 values per pixel?
Love it, assuming the 4th value is distance.

>>3054850
>and have very nearly 0 CA with very nearly 0 distortion) it seems that their software department is a bunch of retards.

Don't they fix CA and distortion with processing?

File: _P2M0030.jpg (3MB, 2352x1568px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2352x1568px

>>3054856
Before SPP got usable, I used X3FTools. There you can see the genuine raw information, there was not any more CA then in the files SPP produces, though it is clear that SPP fixes radial colour casts that depend on the lens focus distance before it displays the file to you, in addition to the aforementioned non-optional NR and sharpening.

I can't complain about low ISO colour though, the DP2M gets it oh-so right.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SIGMA
Camera Model	SIGMA DP2 Merrill
Camera Software	SIGMA Photo Pro 6.5.1
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	45 mm
Serial Number	90416905
Focal Length Range	30
Firmware Version	1.05.1.7093
Camera Software	SIGMA Photo Pro 6.5.1.4944
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:08 18:19:32
Exposure Time	1/80 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	200
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2352
Image Height	1568
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	3030343136393035F0CEE85835453536
Drive Mode	SINGLE
Resolution	HI
Autofocus Mode	AF-S
Focus Setting	AF-S
White Balance	Shade
Exposure Mode	M
Metering Mode	8
Exposure	1.5
Contrast	0
Shadow	0
Highlight	-1/2
Saturation	0
Sharpness	-2
Fill Light	0
Color Adjustment	1
Adjustment Mode	Custom
Quality	12

File: _DSC9718.jpg (866KB, 1568x2352px) Image search: [Google]

866KB, 1568x2352px

>>3054850
>>3054853
looks like trash though.
This is a crop from full frame to about crop sensor size with no NR at iso 3200, I exported at the same size as yours to keep it fair.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	118 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	118 dpcm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated

>>3054865
thanks for nothing i just lost my lunch

>>3054865
I was not establishing that you can get good colour at 3200 from a Merrill, (in my first post I said ISO800 is as far as I'd go.) I was saying that you can squeeze far better quality out of the raw than is implied by SPP's regular output.

The only assertion I made regarding comparisons to APS-C Bayer are in B/W, and I think you'll have a hard time beating the SNR of the shot I posted earlier at 3200.

File: sigma-sd-quattro.jpg (28KB, 740x384px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 740x384px

>>3051797
Sigma made a mistake with the flange length of that camera. It's basically 44mm DSLR length flange, but without the advantage of the mirror.
They should have made it shallow like E-mount, then their camera would be compatible with every new future optics designed for E-mount.

Right now they have gone against their own camera, and are making new special lenses just for Full Frame E-mount, and those new lenses will not even be compatible with their own SA-mount.

It didn't have to be this way... Now they end up designing lens for competitor against themselves.

>>3054862
>I used X3FTools

Oh man, I just discovered last night that x3f_extract can convert DP2 Merrill X3Fs to DNG in the more recent versions, and I'm ridiculously excited about this, and I can't share my excitement with anyone because maybe like 10% of my friends know what "raw" is in terms of photography, like 2% of that knows what the company Sigma is, and basically 0% know why it would be exciting for me to convert an X3F to a DNG.

>>3053411
>raw files are not compatible with lightroom but only with sigma software

Here, I will share my joy with you:
https://github.com/kalpanika/x3f/releases

>>3054907
How slow is dng processing in lightroom compared to x3f in spp?

>>3055051
Processing the converted DNGs in lightroom feels like editing any other sort of raw file.

Editing X3Fs in SPP feels like a fat old hobo is gripping your balls and slowly, slooooowly increasing pressure, all while maintaining eye contact and drooling slightly, and you know that at some point he's either going to release them and you'll be fine or he's just going to have a seizure and pull really hard and you don't know which it's gonna be but you know one of them's coming, and you can smell the whiskey on his breath and the pressure is increasing and a slight smile is ticking up at the corner of his lips and

File: M6 + 70-300 II Adapted.jpg (148KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 1200x800px

>>3051797
>dare i say, the best camera ever?

The best mirrorless camera would be the Canon EOS M5/M6. I'm not joking. Canon lifted their game at last.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 77D
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	42.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto

>>3052191
>bayer interpolation
yep building information from where there is none based on the information surrounding the point you want the information for.

ie
green pixel is magenta because no information has been recorded and the surrounding red pixels are hot and the blue pixels are moderately exposed.

really no information has been recorded for that pixel but it has been interpolated so the camera company must count it as x number pf pickles

File: _P2M0036.jpg (437KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 1000x667px

>>3054907
>https://github.com/kalpanika/x3f/releases

this is pure gold
thank you so much anon, this is the best thing I found in this board

and I know your feeling about this

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SIGMA
Camera Model	SIGMA DP2 Merrill
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.1.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	45 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:04:12 03:46:33
Exposure Time	8 sec
F-Number	f/7.1
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/7.1
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	30303431313537349B486E5835363237

>>3055633
>>3055054
>>3055051
>>3054900
X3F tools is very limited in some regards. As I showed, there's lots of detail that can be resolved still at high ISO, contrary to general knowledge. X3F tools presents basically the same view as SPP, but including severe colour casts due to the lens design which SPP fixes.

>>3055868
I'll take lightroom processing with some slightly-off color casts over perfect output from SPP any day. The hassle of using SPP means that my DP2 Merrill was effectively unusable.

>>3055175
shit video though.
the 1080 looks like 720p.

>>3051797
because I still use polaroid

this isn't the a7r2 tho... Must be one of those silly 'pic unrelated' threads

>>3054884
I agree wholeheartedly. Sigma completely fucked themselves. They could've released a product that was a perfect blend of all the positives of previous products, but instead they made a series of bizzare compromises: reduced total pixel colour sampling, SLR SA mount (literally any other solution would've been better - new mount, E mount, ANYTHING!) Digital viewfinder right in the middle (it's not even oled) so you get nose grease all over your display, even though they had the space for a mirror box and proper viewfinder.

They were already releasing mirrorless lenses for the E mount! They could've retooled them for their own mount, or just used the E mount - all the Sony users that feel unsatisfied with the A7s, or users upgrading from A6000s, could, conceivably have been a lucrative market for Sigma.

Instead we have a camera that does nothing especially well, and alienates the core users who came to Sigma for something no one else does - absolute 100% resolution in very interesting form factors.

No idea what drove their decision making with the SD Quattro.

>>3051797
why don't sigma try to make 1 normal and conventional camera?
it might take off and be a sleeper hit.
>use off the market parts
>sony sensor with pdaf
>bayer
>panasonic processor
>mirrorless mount with official adapter support
>classic body design like olympus em5
they might sell more cameras than their repeat customer niche market.
someone email yamaki.

File: 1475611409823.jpg (42KB, 500x441px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x441px

>>3056028
http://www.d-motions.de/sigma/FoveonComp2.jpg
Here is a perfect example of how sigma fucked it, look at the water.

>>3056036
Foveon is all Sigma has, they have to leverage it. No one else has the intellectual property and there are people like me who adore foveon and would buy any camera with it in that isn't compromised. If you want a bayer sensor there's already an entire market full of perfect choices. What you've mentioned has already been satisfactorily accomplished by many camera manufacturers.

>>3056028
To me it's Evidence that Sigma had absolutely no plans to make Full Frame mirrorless lenses, until very recently.
Otherwise that Quattro would have had proper mirrorless mount which would be compatible with Sa lenses and future morrorless lenses.

It's going to be interesting to see what they will do in their next camera though.

>>3056040
foveon camera is the epitome of compromise.
>muh magical image quality
>performance? a-at least it's faster than film, almost.

>>3054884
it's designed as a successor to their SLR line, so that people who bought SA lenses aren't left in the dark.

>>3056047
I know that. But it could have been made smarter, a short mount would have kept the compatibility with optional mount extender.

>>3056047
>>3056048
The really smart move would be to ask to borrow sonys e mount as they already have e to sa adapter.

And being a sony fag, the only thing that lures me towards any other camera on the market is sigmas foveon sensor.

>>3051797
Spectacular colour what means "shitty" in many cases.

>>3052190
is this a 100% crop? if so it's pretty impressive

>>3056282
Yes, 100% crop (2048x2048 section of a 4704x3136 image,) To match that kind of high frequency rendition you'd have to purchase the best of FF, something like a D810.

>>3056047
They should have made an SLR if they were going to keep SA mount, otherwise it's an unbalanced, large camera with no real up sides. They could've made two cameras, or best of all, made just one with a short mirrorless mount and an included or very cheap adapter.

>>3056200
No I think that would be too much. They need to respect the old SA-mount and make it electronically compatible with SA lenses so they work perfectly with extension.

Other lens manufacturers will port their E-mount lenses to new-SA as well.

>>3056300
Cross compatibility is always good for the consumer, if sigma had used e-mount, imagine how many sony users who had always kind of wanted to try out foveon would buy one on a whim, knowing it would work with all their preexisting lenses (e-mount is now in a really solid state, there are AF adapters for almost anything. As >>3056200 mentioned, they already have an e to sa adapter.

>>3056303
>if sigma had used e-mount, imagine how many sony users who had always kind of wanted to try out foveon would buy one on a whim

I don't know for sure, but I would bet a nickel there's some legal barrier to this. E.g., maybe Sigma has an agreement with Sony that Sony will license them the IP for making E-mount lenses but they're not allowed to make an E-mount body that would compete with theirs.

>>3056321
They'd have to licence it, yes, just like Fujifilm did with the F-mount before they started the X mount, but I'm pretty certain Sony would play ball - look at how Sony gives out the specifications for the pin layout and communication structure of the e mount to 3rd party manufacturers so they can develop full electronic adapters, it's completely conceivable that a deal could be made, were sigma willing to make it.

>>3056328

Sony has licensed e-mount to other manufacturers before.

Rumor has it Olympus was looking into licensing the FF version. Even patented a few lenses.

>>3056337
Oh god please. I would love it if E-mount became the new micro4/3 for Olympus and Sigma.

>>3056044
An EOS 1V or similar will shoot a roll, rewind it, and be reloaded faster than a Sigma camera will take 36 RAW shots.

File: 32030326970_153e8f46b4_o.jpg (2MB, 4203x2802px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4203x2802px

>>3056532
For the use cases for which the DP1/2/3M and Quattro are designed, a buffer which fits 8 raw shots is satisfactory, it's only an impediment when you want to take a look at the pictures immediately - the AF precision is completely trustworthy so as long as it locked I move on, no need to chimp.

Picture not mine.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SIGMA
Camera Model	SIGMA DP2 Merrill
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	45 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2017:01:19 16:55:32
Exposure Time	1/60 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	30.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	3030343133343232D3AA805837313242

what do you think about a dp3m for scanning negatives?

>>3059522
great,
you'll add another laborious step to your already long workflow.

>>3059522
Doesn't have the close focus ability to do a decent job.

An sd1 and decent macro would kick ass though.

>>3059529

that's how we sigma users like it

>>3059538

they sell this sort of macro rings that work well with dpm

>>3060439
>macro rings

The distortion and softness added is the anti-thesis of what makes a decent scanning lens. Enlarger lenses or $1000 macro lenses are the only real choices if you want good results.

>>3060455

got it

thank you

>>3059522
>>3059538

The DP3 is reported to have a minimum focus distance of about 22cm.

I did a quick test with some negatives and a 50mm lens, and at that distance a 4x5 negative barely fills the frame.

So if you want an "easy" quick 1-shot option for good quality 4x5 scans and don't need mega resolution, I guess the SD3 could be a good match. For smaller formats, or if you need mega resolution from stiching, you'd be better off with something else though.