Sigma DP2 Merrill: Have any of you tried it?
/forum/topic/1150855/75

1       2       3              75      
76
       77              91       92       end

edwinIII
Registered: Apr 15, 2011
Total Posts: 246
Country: United States

A couple more from the James River in Virginia. Taken with the DP2M. Still getting use to the color response. I have been looking at Canon files for so long not sure how to deal with it.

Edwin













itai195
Registered: Aug 08, 2011
Total Posts: 1181
Country: United States

Kibsgaard wrote:
GeorgW wrote:
Kibsgaard wrote:
ricardovaste wrote:
Why can't they just make these things quick/responsive ? It surely can't be that difficult I'm sure people would pay a little extra for a quicker processor.



Foveon sensor is different from Bayer Mosaic, and engineering art is not yet developed to handle these files quickly - Bayer Mosaic've been there a long time.


Yes. And its much more data. Its not even slow. You can continue shooting while it works...
I wouldnt pay extra...


I would, and I also shoot with high MP/ Bayer-sensor, and it is much faster, so you have to get used to it, but because of the IQ I accept it, and are even thinking about buying one Merrill more.


I wouldn't mind the cameras being faster, but I think Sigma have several higher priority issues to resolve. Improved post-processing workflow, reducing green/magenta splotching, an EVF, and better battery life to name a few.



Kibsgaard
Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Total Posts: 214
Country: Denmark

itai195 wrote:
Kibsgaard wrote:
GeorgW wrote:
Kibsgaard wrote:
ricardovaste wrote:
Why can't they just make these things quick/responsive ? It surely can't be that difficult I'm sure people would pay a little extra for a quicker processor.



Foveon sensor is different from Bayer Mosaic, and engineering art is not yet developed to handle these files quickly - Bayer Mosaic've been there a long time.


Yes. And its much more data. Its not even slow. You can continue shooting while it works...
I wouldnt pay extra...


I would, and I also shoot with high MP/ Bayer-sensor, and it is much faster, so you have to get used to it, but because of the IQ I accept it, and are even thinking about buying one Merrill more.


I wouldn't mind the cameras being faster, but I think Sigma have several higher priority issues to resolve. Improved post-processing workflow, reducing green/magenta splotching, an EVF, and better battery life to name a few.



Agree, but the day they also have solved the slow "handling" then the Foveon could make Bayer to "history"

I am OK with the PP, I just do some minor things, then save as Tiff and work another place.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15370
Country: Germany

Yes, if they have also solved the colour casts, the ISO problems, and so on



Kibsgaard
Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Total Posts: 214
Country: Denmark

I very seldom get color cast, and I only shoot landscapes and cityscapes with it in good light, but it is also OK for portraits IF - IF - you use neutral color mode.

If I need high iso I take another camera.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15370
Country: Germany

I am not saying that it is weak in all situations, it certainly has its strengths. But at the moment, they are quite far from being general photographic tools, and improving the handling wouldn't fix that, there are technical changes needed too. The colour improvements of the DP3M look promising, but even this plus handling fixes would never make the Foveon sensor relegate the Bayer sensor to history. Foveon is owned by one company, and no one else would take it on until it was free to all.



Kibsgaard
Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Total Posts: 214
Country: Denmark

Yes, it is improved in the DP3M and it will continue, and if they put the right people and effort and money in it, the advantages of the Foveon sensor could very well outperform the Bayer Mosaic.

I remember how awfull Nikon D70 was in the iso-performance

Bayer mosaic have had many years to improve.

And they could sell the patent ?

But I agree, that I would never have it as the only camera ....for the time being, but some has and are happy with it.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15370
Country: Germany

Sure, I could also imagine owning one, but I doubt that it will ever pass Bayer. We will see.



sculptormic
Registered: Feb 05, 2012
Total Posts: 1322
Country: Netherlands

Carsten, it is a photographic tool as it is already. To have that file quality in such a compact size is pretty groundbraking. My other cameras are trembling. And it is very seldom that I encounter colour casts, even in long exposure night/evening shots. It is pretty good for making pano's as well.

But it is not versatile in deed, in the sense of fast lenses, a viewfinder and advanced flash systems. And I like to play with different lenses, so I use my other "trembling" cameras for that.

It would be neat if Sigma can develop this sensor further, bigger, high ISO et., And the cameras with it, of course.

For now I feel sometimes frustrated that I have to grab that box for image quality instead of the NEX with a nice viewfinder and it's better handling.

But it want stop me from using it because the files are way better.



ReneMurea
Registered: Aug 23, 2004
Total Posts: 1512
Country: United States

carstenw wrote:The colour improvements of the DP3M look promising, but even this plus handling fixes would never make the Foveon sensor relegate the Bayer sensor to history. Foveon is owned by one company, and no one else would take it on until it was free to all.
I have both, the DP2M and DP3M and trust me, there is no color improvement. Reading your posts in this thread I understand you don't own any. How do you know there's an improvement? All over the Internet there've been countless tests to show there are basically the same. I've heard about the so called color differences from a guy Bowman (or something like that) but that was the only way to draw traffic on his blog. I don't see any differences.



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15370
Country: Germany

sculptormic wrote:
My other cameras are trembling.


Haha, quote of the day

More in my next reply...



carstenw
Registered: Dec 26, 2005
Total Posts: 15370
Country: Germany

ReneMurea wrote:
I have both, the DP2M and DP3M and trust me, there is no color improvement. Reading your posts in this thread I understand you don't own any. How do you know there's an improvement? All over the Internet there've been countless tests to show there are basically the same. I've heard about the so called color differences from a guy Bowman (or something like that) but that was the only way to draw traffic on his blog. I don't see any differences.


If you are right, that is sad. If you just look through this very thread and compare the colours with other threads, there are definitely colour problems on occasion. Just look at the images at the top of this page.

Btw, I don't find your "I don't see any differences" any more convincing than someone else's "I see differences". When people started posting in the DP3M thread, I immediately noticed the absence of the colour issues which have bothered me often in this thread. If you are right and there is no difference, then it was just random chance I guess.

Btw, if the Bowman who wrote in his blog is Hulyss Bowman, then I am inclined to believe him. He posted here a while ago, and is clearly a talented photographer, and also a fan of the cameras.



itai195
Registered: Aug 08, 2011
Total Posts: 1181
Country: United States

I go between thinking there are differences and thinking there aren't. I can pick out the green/magenta splotching in pretty much every DP2M image I've made, but I don't think I've even seen it in my own DP3M images. I even saw a DP2M review online where I could easily see it in every single sample image. I also have had an easier time with skin tones from the DP3M, though they can still be problematic particularly in shadow areas. That said, these are just non-scientific, anecdotal findings, and they could just be down to the fact that I've shot different subject matter with each camera and in different lighting.

No question that color is generally more difficult to get right with these cameras than my others. Black and white is a whole other matter, it's excellent. It doesn't help that SPP itself is often a major source of issues from the contrived white balance setting to its general lack of responsiveness to setting changes to its tendency to screw up color management.



corposant
Registered: Jul 14, 2010
Total Posts: 2781
Country: United States

http://madshutter.blogspot.com.es/2013/03/the-sigma-dp-merrils-and-their-colors.html



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 10499
Country: United States

corposant wrote:
http://madshutter.blogspot.com.es/2013/03/the-sigma-dp-merrils-and-their-colors.html


Nice. So the WB presets are much better on the DP3 vs the others. Since it appears to only be an issue overall with the presets, that could be addressed via firmware for the DP1M and DP2M. This does explain why we are more likely to see images with better color rendering posted from the DP3 since not everyone is going to use custom WB or perfectly correct color afterwards.



ReneMurea
Registered: Aug 23, 2004
Total Posts: 1512
Country: United States

WB can affect two identical cameras outputting 'different colors'. Different white balance doesn't mean different colors or better colors. What I noticed on my DP3m is the WB is a bit warmer, colors looking richer than on the DP2M. Bring the WB to the same level in SPP and they are identical



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 10499
Country: United States

For a casual user, correcting the WB (and knowing to correct the WB and exactly how to do it properly) could be a big deal and that certainly explains what myself and others have observed with regard to the images in this thread vs the DP3 thread. The images at the top of this page are a great example of this. For a casual user using WB presets, the "different colors" of the DP3 presets are indeed also better colors (and more accurate colors) as compared to the DP1M and DP2M WB presets.



edwinIII
Registered: Apr 15, 2011
Total Posts: 246
Country: United States

Tariq Gibran wrote:
For a casual user, correcting the WB (and knowing to correct the WB and exactly how to do it properly) could be a big deal and that certainly explains what myself and others have observed with regard to the images in this thread vs the DP3 thread. The images at the top of this page are a great example of this. For a casual user using WB presets, the "different colors" of the DP3 presets are indeed also better colors (and more accurate colors) as compared to the DP1M and DP2M WB presets.


As far as my post above is concerned, you are correct that I am a casual shooter of the DPM's. I got them with Black and White landscapes in mind knowing that that the ability to produce accurate color may be an issue for me. I am so drawn into the files by the sharpness and clarity that I don't want to grab my canon for tripod based landscapes. For the above images I just used Auto for white balance and neutral for color mode with a little clarity and vibrance in LR and thats it.

Edwin



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 10499
Country: United States

Hi Edwin,

Just want to mention that I meant no offense at all in using the term "casual user" in reference to you are anyone else. As far as the overly blue auto white balance in your shot, I think simply using "sunlight" for the white balance might give you dramatically better color in most daylight type shooting. That's what I have found to be the best "canned" WB of the choices for daylight.

I think these cameras produce some of the best digital B&W possible.



Kibsgaard
Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Total Posts: 214
Country: Denmark

carstenw wrote:
ReneMurea wrote:
I have both, the DP2M and DP3M and trust me, there is no color improvement. Reading your posts in this thread I understand you don't own any. How do you know there's an improvement? All over the Internet there've been countless tests to show there are basically the same. I've heard about the so called color differences from a guy Bowman (or something like that) but that was the only way to draw traffic on his blog. I don't see any differences.


If you are right, that is sad. If you just look through this very thread and compare the colours with other threads, there are definitely colour problems on occasion. Just look at the images at the top of this page.

Btw, I don't find your "I don't see any differences" any more convincing than someone else's "I see differences". When people started posting in the DP3M thread, I immediately noticed the absence of the colour issues which have bothered me often in this thread. If you are right and there is no difference, then it was just random chance I guess.

Btw, if the Bowman who wrote in his blog is Hulyss Bowman, then I am inclined to believe him. He posted here a while ago, and is clearly a talented photographer, and also a fan of the cameras.


Carsten, yes I also trust this very skilled person:

Do not know if posted earlier:




Some lines about different colors from DP3M (and a lot more)


"..... I wanted to illustrate the new color mode and especially the new neutral, standard and vivid modes. With the SD1m and the DP2m, shooting in neutral mode was kind of mandatory. Using vivid mode was like using acid, and standard was a little bit too saturated to my taste. I never use the other modes. "

"..Now, standard mode is just great, AWB is accurate, AF is as fast as the DP2m and I set my custom AF from 2 meters to infinity for fast action. For landscape, using vivid mode render gorgeous colors especially the greens."



1       2       3              75      
76
       77              91       92       end