Sigma DP2 Merrill Experiences

[ndevlin]

ndelvin !! this is a declaration of love  I feel you about to crack

Oh I cracked when I saw the files off a few test frames I shot when we were in Algonquin last week.  Just add another grand to the ledger of how much my friendship with Michael has cost me 

Seeing is believing.  I do wish the D1M was as good, but I'm not totally convinced.

- N.

[BarbaraArmstrong]

Just a reaction to KirbyKrieger's comments.  This camera is not slow-to-use; it is slow to process the files after you have used it.  If you don't have needs that exceed the capabilities of the buffer, you are good-to-go.  Also, I don't find the files awkward to use.  I easily and quickly convert the raws to tiffs in the Sigma software (this is indeed quick and easy), directing them to the same folder alongside the original jpgs and raws.  From there I import any files I want to use to either ACR via Bridge or right into Photoshop.  The files are so nice that very little editing is needed.  The files are real gems. --Barbara

[ndevlin]

I have to echo what Barbara says about ease of processing. SPP is crappy, but frankly I didn't find there was much to do beyond dialing-down the sharpening, setting WB and dark/light clipping points. These things SPP can do alright. Then it's over to LR. 

Not an ideal workflow, but not something that would keep one from using the camera.

- N.

[NigelC]

The buffer is the bugger, not the card.  I've used 30, 45, and 90 MB/s cards and can't tell any difference, even with drive mode at "as fast as possible".

Fwiw, there is very little about the camera that would encourage me to use it for action photography.  It is a relatively slow-to-use camera that has many of what are politely called "quirks", and makes files that are awkward to use well.  I see nothing about it that rewards creating excess data.

The buffer holds 7 RAW exposures.  If your situation requires that you shoot in bursts of more than 7, or more bursts than maybe one every minute (don't have a figure), this is (vigorously) not the camera for that situation.

RAW files are mostly c. 45 MB.

No this will used mostly on tripod one shot at a time.  I just wondered whether type of card had a bearing on write speed - I once had an Olympus 8080 that took 15 secs to write a raw file before you could take another shot - bit annoying really!

[idillic]

.... dialing-down the sharpening, setting WB and dark/light clipping points......

Could you explain how SPP sets a dark clipping point? (apologies if this is a silly question)

[michael]

The card has little to do with the delay. It's internal processing not writing that is the bottleneck.

Michael

[michael]

Turn on the clipping indicator, set white balance, sharpening if you wish, and then use the exposure sliders to set maximum white and black without clipping. (Having a proper original exposure really helps). It's like scanning a transparency. You simply want to capture as much "real" data as possible.

Export as a 16 bit TIFF in Prophoto RGB and Bon's your uncle.

Michael

[Hulyss]

Good B&W Michael Rozynski

More Candy for ppl who want it

[TMARK]

I wish you guys and gals would stop posting images.  I don't want to spend any cash right now.

Before I take the plunge, how is it for street photography?  I'm thinking of using the OVF.  I'm a Leica M guy who never really got on with the X100's MF, but loved the images.  Thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

[NancyP]

    Yup. More good intentions down the drain. Still, I currently have only one camera body, the Canon 60D, so it isn't unreasonable to get a second camera...... FWIW, the lens hood, extra batteries, and external optical viewfinder are on back order, but the closeup lens and circular polarizer filter are in stock. Now I am counting the days until the camera arrives....   

[Rand47]

OK, now I'm a gonner . . .  but where to buy?  B&H on backorder.
Has anyone purchased directly from Sigma (same pricing as far as I can tell)?
Does Sigma have stock?

Thanks for any insight.  
Rand

[BarbaraArmstrong]

I don't know if Sigma has stock right now, but that is where I have made my purchases.  --Barbara

[jimgoldring]

Sigma has stock. I ordered online over the weekend and a DP2 Merrill arrives tomorrow.

Jim

[Hulyss]

I'm very happy to share with ppl who understand how work this machine (not like in my country where trolls want to annihilate every foveon threads). As you seen, the DP2 Merrill is not really human friendly (skin) but I'm sure most of you know what this kind of details can bring at a PP level. This sharpness give a large amplitude in PP work.

More ppl will use it extensively, more you will see what Michael mean when he say "this camera is not for Sisi's" 

[joezl]

I'm very curious about this camera. Has anyone compared the raw files with the Fuji x-Pro1 raw files? I'm trying to decide between the two cameras. My prints are 24 x 30 inches and larger, usually from stitched files out of a Canon 5D2. Any help would be much appreciated.

[Rob C]

Looking at the portrait of the girl with the sunglasses, though her facial skin doesn't look too bad, her right arm (left of pic) has a horrid chalky look to it that I last saw from four-colour litho printing machine proofs in the 80s!

I really do understand that for people shooters, as has been indicated elsewhere, this sensor may not offer an ideal solution. This leads me to wonder: if we recognize failures in skin because we are so familar with it, how much failure does it hide in other subjects which we are less familar with to the extent that we don't notice? That we don't notice may not be justification enough.

However, as with everyone else here. I'm more than impressed with the detail and how it stands up to onscreen enlargement.

Rob C

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Looking at the portrait of the girl with the sunglasses, though her facial skin doesn't look too bad, her right arm (left of pic) has a horrid chalky look to it that I last saw from four-colour litho printing machine proofs in the 80s!

I really do understand that for people shooters, as has been indicated elsewhere, this sensor may not offer an ideal solution. This leads me to wonder: if we recognize failures in skin because we are so familar with it, how much failure does it hide in other subjects which we are less familar with to the extent that we don't notice?...

Can somebody please post a picture of a girl with (naturally) red/pink (instead of orange) lips? Pretty please?

[ndevlin]

I'm very curious about this camera. Has anyone compared the raw files with the Fuji x-Pro1 raw files? I'm trying to decide between the two cameras. My prints are 24 x 30 inches and larger, usually from stitched files out of a Canon 5D2. Any help would be much appreciated.

Very different cameras. I have shot with both recently (the X-E1 actually), but not side-by-side.  For what it's worth, the Fujis are much better cameras - as cameras. They will also provide amazing IQ at ISOs up to 6400.  The Sigma is more of a base-ISO beast.

The Fuji also produces superb jpegs, especially with skin tones. The Sigma is a RAW-only proposition.

In absolute terms, however, under ideal circumstances, the Sigma will produce a more detailed image.

Think of it like this: the Simga is a mini tech-camera with a fixed lens.  The Fuji is a modern system-DSLR type camera by comparison. Personally, I will end up with a Sigma and keep my Fuji X100, but continue to be tempted on the "X" series.

- N.

[Hulyss]

I'm 100% OK WITH Nick statement.

[joezl]

Thanks ndevlin. That's what I construed from all of the DPM2 files I've seen posted, though, judging image quality online is not something I put much confidence in. Having said that, the DPM2 files do have a hard to define reversal film like quality about them that I quite like. I tend to tolerate a lot of hassles if it means yielding the highest possible image quality. Thanks for your reply.