At ~$2k (eventually less for a used copy), converting the mount to Leica R might make it more enticing to some who've already done so on the SD14. I imagine they can cannibalize the replacement hardware from the older body.
So, it is plausible to convert the body to an EF mount ... no worries then ... my (alt) glass lineup is good to go (except I'd need to add something wider to offset the crop factor AOV).
j.liam wrote:
At ~$2k (eventually less for a used copy), converting the mount to Leica R might make it more enticing to some who've already done so on the SD14. I imagine they can cannibalize the replacement hardware from the older body.
There is an off the shelf Leitax mount available for Leica R lenses. There seems to still be a lack of convincing reviews on the SD-1 (lot's of previews and first impressions by not many actual reviews and the few out there look suspect/ disappointing). Even at 2K, this camera might be a hard sell for most.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
There is an off the shelf Leitax mount available for Leica R lenses. There seems to still be a lack of convincing reviews on the SD-1 (lot's of previews and first impressions by not many actual reviews and the few out there look suspect/ disappointing). Even at 2K, this camera might be a hard sell for most.
True enough. Over at Luminous Landscapes, one of the more thorough reviews was done and is worth a perusal:
Seems that the technology's time came and went without adequate exploitation by Sigma. With the passing of the old guard, perhaps younger management will be more circumspect about Sigma's place in the photo world and act more nimbly and expeditiously when new opportunities are at hand.
Seems that the technology's time came and went without adequate exploitation by Sigma. With the passing of the old guard, perhaps younger management will be more circumspect about Sigma's place in the photo world and act more nimbly and expeditiously when new opportunities are at hand.
Yes, I saw that review back when it was posted. There are a few issues with it (dramatic dof differences between the small and larger sensors for instance which can easily throw off the comparisons, lenses used, etc.) but it is what it is. Having owned a Sigma DP previously, I also know how important processing and PP procedures are with the Sigma files and, as suggested by Nick in the followup/ second opin., I'm not convinced the methodology used was ideal. We need more data points. It sort of boggles my mind that at least three different major review sites (DpReview, Imaging-Resource, Pop Photo) gave initial previews and first looks for the SD-1 yet none has of yet finished their reviews (despite suggesting they would). What's up with that? Sigma deciding they don't want the camera thoroughly reviewed or what?
Tariq Gibran wrote:
It sort of boggles my mind that at least three different major review sites (DpReview, Imaging-Resource, Pop Photo) gave initial previews and first looks for the SD-1 yet none has of yet finished their reviews (despite suggesting they would). What's up with that? Sigma deciding they don't want the camera thoroughly reviewed or what?
No, Sigma deciding to price the camera such that it was entirely irrelevant. Had nothing to do with Sigma providing review samples. Had everything to do with these sites not wanting to waste their limited resources on something no one was going to buy and thus was irrelevant to their readership.
Now that the price is sensible DPR has said they are advancing it back up in the queue for a review because at the new price it is actually interesting. So expect to see some reviews now!
kwalsh wrote:
No, Sigma deciding to price the camera such that it was entirely irrelevant. Had nothing to do with Sigma providing review samples. Had everything to do with these sites not wanting to waste their limited resources on something no one was going to buy and thus was irrelevant to their readership.
Now that the price is sensible DPR has said they are advancing it back up in the queue for a review because at the new price it is actually interesting. So expect to see some reviews now!
Ken
That could make sense. I guess the Sigma SD-1 should have an even better chance of a decent IQ showing now since recent firmware and software improvements have been made since it's initial release.
Snopchenko wrote:
A good attempt to save face.
*applause*
The new DPxM series look like they have the new NEX/MFT lenses welded to them though (conspicuously similar FL/apertures). Why couldn't they just release a E mount camera.
They may share the same focal lengths but both of the "welded on" on DPM lenses are completely different lenses to the new DN versions for NEX/MFT...They have completely different numbers of elements/groups for a start but they also have different numbers of Iris blades.
The new Sigma 19mm f2.8 EX DN has 8 elements in 6 groups and a 7 blade Iris but the DP1M 19mm f2.8 lens has 9 elements in 8 groups and a 9 blade Iris.
The new Sigma 30mm f2.8 EX DN has 7 elements in 5 groups and a 7 blade Iris but the DP1M 30mm f2.8 lens has 8 elements in 6 groups and a 9 blade Iris..
There is no dought that Sigma will have taylor made the DPM lenses exclusively for the DPM's, because the SD1/DPM sensor is so reliant on having the very best lenses in front of it...It also means they should be even better than the DN's.
