veroman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.2 #2 · Any SD14 love? - Full review! | |
kofron wrote:
Hi Scott,
I've shot with the SD10, and use the more expensive version of the SD14 (the one I bought 2 years ago for $1K... :-) ). I will say that Steve (veroman) has been very consistent in his message over the years, but all my Canon shooter friends who get to see my printed photos in person like my results (in general) better than their stuff, with regard to finished product (and I'm not a photoshopper...). I look at Steve's G7 photos and say ugh---no comparison to DP1. Much less dynamic range and acutence.
So, I like my SD14 with some reservations. You have to be very careful not to underexpose. If you do---the shadows can go to noise (ugly chroma stuff) very quickly. And it's like dropping off the edge of a cliff. -2/3 EV? No problem. -1 1/3 EV? Yuck. And it's not just in tungsten light (it is worse), but bright daylight. My SD10 never pulled that stuff on me. So be careful with regard to exposure. Tungsten light (no blue?). Be careful as well. I would not want to shoot poorly lit churches doing weddings with the SD14.
I use my camera a lot for portraiture, using strobes (flashguns) to light---works very nicely. Colors of of the camera can tend to the green side when using AWB---but SPP is reasonable for balancing once you figure it out. SPP (the Sigma software) is quirky, and I have two versions for my Mac depending on what I'm doing (2.4 and 3.1). A lot of my work ends up to be B&W, and I find the SD14 is great for that---the high ISO 'noise' converts to a beautiful grain, and I don't have any issues shooting ISO 800/1600. If I needed to shoot that high routinely for color, I'd grab a Nikon...
Operationally, I like the camera. There's little dependence on the menu system for actual shooting, which I find to be refreshing. AF is OK, not in league with Canon/Nikon, although it is lens dependent. Battery life is decent, but not great. But you will not find a better image maker for $350---there's simply no problem cranking out 12x18" prints, and getting to 20x30" is pretty easy with good glass and a steady hand (or tripod). You'll either love the Foveon imager for it's unmatched pixel sharpness and excellent microcontrast, or you'll find that the niggles drive you nuts and you'll head back to a more conventional camera system. The 50 EX is a great lens---the 18-200 not so much (IMO---and I don't own it). I like the 70-200 EX, the 10-20 EX, the 30 EX is OK for certain situations (too much CA for contrasty scenes like Steve's last photo above).
...Show more →
If one edits your comments (which I obviously did) about the SD14 and keeps things almost clinically review-like, here's what we end up with:
• You have to be very careful not to underexpose. If you do, the shadows can go to noise (ugly chroma stuff) very quickly. And it's like dropping off the edge of a cliff. -2/3 EV is no problem. -1 1/3 EV? = Yuck.
• In tungsten light it is worse, but holds true in bright daylight as well. So be careful with regard to exposure.
• Tungsten light (no blue?), be careful as well. I would not want to shoot poorly lit churches doing weddings with the SD14.
• Colors of of the camera can tend to the green side when using AWB---but SPP is reasonable for balancing once you figure it out.
• SPP (the Sigma software) is quirky, and I have two versions for my Mac depending on what I'm doing (2.4 and 3.1).
• A lot of my work ends up to be B&W, and I find the SD14 is great for that---the high ISO 'noise' converts to a beautiful grain
• I don't have any issues shooting ISO 800/1600. But if I needed to shoot that high routinely for color, I'd grab a Nikon.
• AF is OK, not in league with Canon/Nikon, although it is lens dependent
• Battery life is decent, but not great.
• There's simply no problem cranking out 12x18" prints and getting to 20x30" is pretty easy with good glass and a steady hand (or tripod)
• You'll either love the Foveon imager for it's unmatched pixel sharpness and excellent microcontrast, or you'll find that the niggles drive you nuts and you'll head back to a more conventional camera system
So I ask you: if you read a review like that of a new Canon or Nikon or Olympus or Pentax or whatever, would you buy it? ... especially considering the underexposure and noise issues, much less the quirky software, battery life and color casts. These issues just don't exist anymore in any of the modern cameras, not even at the entry level.
I guess for $350.00 (current pricing), it's a camera worth exploring. Believe me, I've been tempted! But the "niggles" have already driven me nuts (same niggles as the previous models), and I'd long ago gone back to a "more conventional" camera system, with no difficulty at all producing gorgeous 20" X 30" prints and larger. I just don't feel like giving the Sigma the benefit of the doubt anymore.
- Steve
|
