p.62 #1 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
Kit Laughlin wrote:
Re. the lovely marcatkins images: They could be made with a 28mm equivalent, I feel, but the Sigma DP1M would definitely not be my first choice. I use a CV 12/5.6 on a Fuji X-E1 (18mm EFOV) for this kind of work and it is surely a case of "ƒ8 and be there" (with the manual distance scale set to 1–1.5m). And that lens on the X-E1 is spectacular.
Thank´s Kit for your opinion.
Don´t you think that 28mm seems not to be wide enough at least on some of Marc´s images (and yes they´re lovely)?
Why not you first choice (DP1M)? The 28mm or the other camera characteristics that aren´t the best for street photography?
p.62 #2 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
To Luis: far better to pair a wider lens with the X-E1 than that lens on the 5DII; completely different size/shape/handling proposition.
No to DP1M simply because of the very slow file writing times; for street photography, this is important. My "CV 12/5.6 on a Fuji X-E1 (18mm EFOV)" approach is about a third of the weight, and half the size. IQ? better on the X-E1, in my view.
p.62 #3 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
What is latest verdict on optimum ISO? I've read ISO 200 for max DR, and ISO 100 for best noise characteristics. Is this true? Maybe somewhere in the middle (ISO 125/160 anyone)?
Apparently Sigma considers ISO 200 as the default (native?) sinced its Auto ISO feature first goes to ISO 200 before dropping toward 100.
p.62 #7 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
Kit Laughlin wrote:
To Luis: far better to pair a wider lens with the X-E1 than that lens on the 5DII; completely different size/shape/handling proposition.
No to DP1M simply because of the very slow file writing times; for street photography, this is important. My "CV 12/5.6 on a Fuji X-E1 (18mm EFOV)" approach is about a third of the weight, and half the size. IQ? better on the X-E1, in my view.
I guess you´re right the combo 5D+20mm is still heavy and big.
The Sigma is a slow camera.
What do you mean by "CV 12/5.6"?
Thanks.
p.62 #9 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
Pardon my ignorance. I know the brand but not by "CV" ,-)
Yes Cosina+Voightlander; great glass. I think now it´s just Voightlander, so the lens you and Kit refer are older lens?
p.62 #10 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
No, current (when you can find them). Cosina began leasing the Voigtländer name in the late 90s, from memory. Some refer to these lenses by just "Voigtländer", but many refer to the lenses with both names. The 12/5.6 is a small lens, as is the 15. And the 12 I bought new last year came with a filter attachment, too. I have a 77mm Cokin ring screwed into mine, and I use grad filters for most outdoors images.
The optical quality of the 12/5.6 is stellar, and I have shot many interiors with it. Distortion is less than the now-fabled Nikon 14–24/2.8 (I owned two copies of this lens and know it well) at the wide end.
For the work you were considering, either the 12 or the 15 would be very suitable, I feel.
p.62 #14 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
nandadevieast wrote:
Why is there a highlight slider...isn't it for recovery?
The highlight slider interestingly enough does not recover highlights at all (when reduced). Both highlight/shadow sliders in SPP are only about shifting the upper/lower ranges of tones towards whatever direction you move the slider. You can see why they don't recover anything if you look at how the controls adjust the histogram, bringing Highlights down kind of stretches the highlights toward the middle while keeping higher values pinned to the end of the histogram (and the opposite is also true for Shadow).
The two things that do effect recovery of highlights are Exposure (the main control I use) and Fill Light (which as noted in earlier messages brings down highlights). However too much fill light can give you a strong HDR effect so my general rule of thumb is no more than +0.3 on that.
The "Recovery" adjustment under the main controls affects the color of recovered data - slide to the left and recovered details go monochrome. I guess you might use that if the recovered highlights were wrong in color but I've not seen that happen (or at least not a case where I preferred monochrome recovery).
For some extreme recovery (where you are near -2.0 exp in highlight recovery) you may be better off bringing exposure down in SPP to recover all the highlights, adding +0.3 fill light and then exporting a 16-bit tiff - you can then bring that tiff file into something like Aperture or Lightroom, and bring back up exposure. At that point the recovery sliders will generally work (in Aperture at least) where it would not with an overexposed 16-bit TIFF file from SPP, you may also want to bring back up exposure again or use curves to bring back the darker regions.
The nice thing about overexposing slightly with the Merrill sensor cameras is that you can recover the highlights totally, and the shadows are cleaner. I shoot at +0.7 exp almost all the time (and for something like a very white scene would adjust that further to +1.7 or whatever is needed).
p.62 #15 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
Appreciate
These are your observation, or you read somewhere?
It will be good to have a online resource on SPP...i don't know of any yet...
kgelner wrote:
The highlight slider interestingly enough does not recover highlights at all (when reduced). Both highlight/shadow sliders in SPP are only about shifting the upper/lower ranges of tones towards whatever direction you move the slider. You can see why they don't recover anything if you look at how the controls adjust the histogram, bringing Highlights down kind of stretches the highlights toward the middle while keeping higher values pinned to the end of the histogram (and the opposite is also true for Shadow).
The two things that do effect recovery of highlights are Exposure (the main control I use) and Fill Light (which as noted in earlier messages brings down highlights). However too much fill light can give you a strong HDR effect so my general rule of thumb is no more than +0.3 on that.
The "Recovery" adjustment under the main controls affects the color of recovered data - slide to the left and recovered details go monochrome. I guess you might use that if the recovered highlights were wrong in color but I've not seen that happen (or at least not a case where I preferred monochrome recovery).
For some extreme recovery (where you are near -2.0 exp in highlight recovery) you may be better off bringing exposure down in SPP to recover all the highlights, adding +0.3 fill light and then exporting a 16-bit tiff - you can then bring that tiff file into something like Aperture or Lightroom, and bring back up exposure. At that point the recovery sliders will generally work (in Aperture at least) where it would not with an overexposed 16-bit TIFF file from SPP, you may also want to bring back up exposure again or use curves to bring back the darker regions.
The nice thing about overexposing slightly with the Merrill sensor cameras is that you can recover the highlights totally, and the shadows are cleaner. I shoot at +0.7 exp almost all the time (and for something like a very white scene would adjust that further to +1.7 or whatever is needed).
p.62 #18 · Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
kgelner wrote:
The nice thing about overexposing slightly with the Merrill sensor cameras is that you can recover the highlights totally, and the shadows are cleaner. I shoot at +0.7 exp almost all the time (and for something like a very white scene would adjust that further to +1.7 or whatever is needed).
That's right! That's why I always try to expose for the shadow.
