Sigma's secret weapon - SD Quattro review, an incredible filmic 8K timelapse tool with infrared capabilities

[PannySVHS]

hey ed, gotta take off in a minute. the models are DP 1,2,3 Merrill, each with a different lens. yours has 4.5 or so counted megapixels, merrills line has 14 something.

Sigma likes to multiply them by 2 or three due to three layers of the sensor.

 

the gf1 is an old mft photocam. i love it for its desingn and size.

cheers

[SWRick]

On 8/18/2017 at 6:27 AM, BTM_Pix said:

There is a 10 page argument about it (without a single photograph) here if you've got the patience for it.

https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/3650127

Meanwhile....

I took a couple of shots for you at ISO400 on my DP0 which is the fixed 14mm version of the SD sensor.

The DR issue (as hotly debated in parts of the DPR thread) is one that partly comes down to what can be measured and what you can use based on what you can do with it in Sigma's RAW editor.

The RAW editor gets a lot of abuse (and not without foundation it has to be said when compared to stuff like Lightroom and Aperture) but its not dramatically worse than Hasselblad's Phocus app for example but at least you can open their files in something else, unlike Sigma's. Well, you have the DNG option now in the Quattro range and there is a freeware app who's name escapes me that can open the .X3F files but Sigma's open app is the key to getting the absolute best out of the files as they're the gatekeepers of the Foveon voodoo! Yes, its slow, but so is the pace of photography you will largely do with these cameras so its no big deal to me. Its not like I'm dealing with a DSLR where I've been machine gunning my way round a sports field and its more akin to film photography where you come home with a couple of rolls of 36 exposures.

Anyway, so here is an illustration that I shot for you (at ISO400) to show you what's possible DR wise and the key to this is the X3 Fill Light function which will bring back a ton of shadow information so you know you can ETTR and recover usable info

The top picture is the JPEG from the camera to show how it was shot and the bottom one is after using the X3 Fill Light.

Next is a comparison between ISO200 and ISO400 as I needed a coffee after looking at those old ruins (what do you mean, I see one in the mirror every day).

............................

With the Quattros, the native ISO is 100 and AFAIK there is a drop from 100 to 200 but its not so marked between 200 and 400. Basically, once you've taken the hit by moving away from 100 then you might as well take the extra shutter speed/aperture opportunities on offer by shooting at 400

Top picture is ISO200 and bottom is ISO400 with 100% crops from each to show the untreated noise in both.

If anyone wants to have a play with it themselves then I've put the original .X3F file here and you can then go over to Sigma's site and download their SPP software to edit it with.

https://mega.nz/#!BiYwRCQZ!1725R1XDQlhRPliyTdnpusi3rqspEWirIvByYqvA-tI

As everyone says, these cameras have as many quirks and limitations as they do different models but if you're prepared to accept them then you're getting a hell of a lot in a compact form and price.  

I started off with the DP2m and if I had to have just one then I think that is the sweet spot for me in terms of size, focal length (stitched comps for faux wide angle are great from it) and price. 

Well, price is only ok for now until @Mattias Burling does one his reviews on it

 

Thanks for the file.  Haven't seen it mentioned here (or very often), but Iridient Developer will open the Sigma files- much faster.  The developer is a one man shop, but is able to handle the Sigma files (and does better job than Adobe on Fuji raws)- interesting Adobe couldn't.  I did open file in both programs, think I like the initial rendering in Sigma a bit better.  In any event, when conditions are right, Sigma can knock it out of the park!

Rick

[HockeyFan12]

I finally got a tripod working so I took some photos. The DP2 Merrill has big problems (the LCD is terrible, shooting photos is so slow... it really is awful for street photography IMO) but the sharpness with difficult textures can't be beat.

Blurry grass up front is due to a strong ND filter. These aren't the best photos I took but it illustrates the DP2's strengths best.

Unfortunately shadows have serious green/magenta banding at a very low frequency. The camera has a really messy rendering up close, too, not quite aliasing but just odd banding sort of. But the detail on these is great imo. Even higher megapixel Bayer sensors will suffer a lot under similar circumstances. 

ButI wouldn't dare rate it faster than 100 ISO.

[Mattias Burling]

Im a broken record here but.. dp1/dp2 classic. Super fast mf for street shooting. All the others are more for a medium format type of shooting.

[HockeyFan12]

13 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Im a broken record here but.. dp1/dp2 classic. Super fast mf for street shooting. All the others are more for a medium format type of shooting.

My bad. Yeah, the DP2 Merrill is slower than a medium format rangefinder but faster than an RZ67 or something. WAY faster than large format. But also way less control. Best texture of anything for its size, though. IMO better than 6x7 film. The magenta/green low frequency noise can be fixed by doing noise reduction in lab color space but it's still a pain. Not a perfect camera.

If the DP2 Classic is a lot faster than that, then it might be a decent street photography camera.

[Mattias Burling]

51 minutes ago, HockeyFan12 said:

If the DP2 Classic is a lot faster than that, then it might be a decent street photography camera.

The wakeup is as fast as any modern camera. I set it to 30sec before sleep.
And the manual focus wheel makes it as far as I know, the fastest manual focus compact camera in the world.
Much faster than my x100f or Ricoh GR. Perfect for zone focus on the streets.

But be sure to catch the moment, there is no spray and pray. I never shoot more than one picture at the time on the streets so Im fine with it.

And on the DP1 its easier. 28mm is my preferred focal length for street. No need for a good evf I just need a general view with shapes.
Exposure is already set.
Focus wheel at 2.5 means all is in focus no matter what. I think 1.8m to infinity or something like that.

Now I can just snap away

All of the following shots are shoot on the move while walking and within a second or two of waking the camera up from sleep mode.

 

 

 

And if one wants more resolution I have done some street shooting with the SDQ as well. A bit big for that imo though.

BTW, I have a DP Quattro on the way and I definitely will shoot the streets with that as well  

 

 

[Ed_David]

Nice photos for sure and Matthias you could make any camera look great - but I am not seeing anything that screams that it couldn't be captured with Nikon, Canon, Fuji, or even Sony color science.  

Not attacking anyone's photos, which are all beautiful but

The highlight roll off to me feels more videoish.  It's not a smooth curve roll off like on my a7s ii

And the handling of yellow I'm not a fan of.

But thanks again guys for taking me on this journey.  I have shot 5 rolls of film since this thread, so thank you.  Excited to get them developed!

I guess I would be curious to see a side-by-side against sony a7s ii.

I will try to take a few shots today.  Until then, my points are just opinions, no facts behind it.

[Mattias Burling]

Its all good, we cant like the same things. Personally Im not good enough to make my Fujis or Leicas look like my Sigmas. Or the other way around.

And lets not forget, my dp1 cost me $28.. my X-Pro2 was alot more than that..

[Ed_David]

26 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Its all good, we cant like the same things. Personally Im not good enough to make my Fujis or Leicas look like my Sigmas. Or the other way around.

And lets not forget, my dp1 cost me $28.. my X-Pro2 was alot more than that..

No I think before I poo-poo the Sigma anymore, I need to do an A/B comparison with my a7s ii.

Also I'm shooting on the dp2x, an inferior sensor to what you have.  So even that is unfair.

 

Some comparisons: 

https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/3570044

[Mattias Burling]

14 minutes ago, Ed_David said:

No I think before I poo-poo the Sigma anymore, I need to do an A/B comparison with my a7s ii.

Also I'm shooting on the dp2x, an inferior sensor to what you have.  So even that is unfair.

 

Some comparisons: 

https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/3570044

I think your Dp2x sensor is either the same as my dp1 or a tweaked version.

[mercer]

@Mattias Burling I just saw your Gunpowder "Stalker" photo on Flickr... very nice. 

This damn thread has gotten me very confused. I've been wanting to get into stills for a long while now and since getting the 5D3, I was hoping still photography would help me get better at the craft for shooting and processing my ML Raw files but I don't want to carry around the 5D3 for stills, so...

I was planning on getting some type of hybrid... perhaps a Fuji, or an Olympus, or the D7500, but after reading this thread I have fallen in love with this Sigma image.

Since video is my main concern, specifically ML Raw video, do you think shooting and processing Raw files with a photo only camera like the DP Quattro would help me with ML Raw video... or would shooting Raw with a Canon camera... perhaps the EOS-M5 with the 22mm make more sense? There's also the rumor that the upcoming G1X update will have aps-c sensor. 

So, I guess my question is... in your opinion, would shooting DNG Raw with the Sigma and processing those DNGs, with Resolve be more beneficial than shooting and processing Raw stills from a Canon mirrorless via Lightroom since the color science will be similar between the M5 and the 5D3?

[Ed_David]

46 minutes ago, mercer said:

@Mattias Burling I just saw your Gunpowder "Stalker" photo on Flickr... very nice. 

This damn thread has gotten me very confused. I've been wanting to get into stills for a long while now and since getting the 5D3, I was hoping still photography would help me get better at the craft for shooting and processing my ML Raw files but I don't want to carry around the 5D3 for stills, so...

I was planning on getting some type of hybrid... perhaps a Fuji, or an Olympus, or the D7500, but after reading this thread I have fallen in love with this Sigma image.

Since video is my main concern, specifically ML Raw video, do you think shooting and processing Raw files with a photo only camera like the DP Quattro would help me with ML Raw video... or would shooting Raw with a Canon camera... perhaps the EOS-M5 with the 22mm make more sense? There's also the rumor that the upcoming G1X update will have aps-c sensor. 

So, I guess my question is... in your opinion, would shooting DNG Raw with the Sigma and processing those DNGs, with Resolve be more beneficial than shooting and processing Raw stills from a Canon mirrorless via Lightroom since the color science will be similar between the M5 and the 5D3?

If your goal is to use a camera to improve. I would get one that you can shoot a lot of stills at once and compare images in camera.

Plus one that can shoot past 100 iso

The sigma cameras are for those who know exactly what they want from their image. Def not for the faint of heart.

Can u rent via lensrental and test it out?

[Mattias Burling]

Yeah I would get something easier and most of all smaller since otherwise you might as well use your 5Dmkiii.
Checkout the Fuji X70 or Ricoh GRii. They are the current kings of the streets imo and both pocketable.

I have several review videos of each

[mercer]

45 minutes ago, Ed_David said:

If your goal is to use a camera to improve. I would get one that you can shoot a lot of stills at once and compare images in camera.

Plus one that can shoot past 100 iso

The sigma cameras are for those who know exactly what they want from their image. Def not for the faint of heart.

Can u rent via lensrental and test it out?

Thanks for the reply, Ed. I appreciate the input and I don't mean to sound too argumentative, but the slow nature of the Sigma is part of the equation that actually appeals to me. Part of this process is, for me, is to become a more considerate, instinctual filmmaker.

By shooting ML Raw with the 5D3, and being a no budget/hobbyist filmmaker, I quickly learned how important it is to take my time and find the shot. Often my shooting days fall together and since I shoot guerilla style, I find I am at the mercy of location conditions more often than not. Since shooting endless footage is not an option, I am forced to slow down and make gut decisions that serve both the story and the photography. Obviously, I am ignorant about still photography... and motion photography as well... lol... but I thought the slower Sigma would force me to find the image and consider composition and light, so I fear the ability to shoot bursts or quickly would be counterproductive for my goal?

I do agree ISO 100 is a little of a bummer, but I would most likely get the Sigma 30mm 1.4 kit, so the fast lens would help a little.

But maybe your right and there would be too much of a learning curve... 

Hmm... food for thought, thanks.

Btw, I watched that time travel, short film you DP'd... really nice work. Great choice going with the DVX for the "flashback" scenes.

 

32 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Yeah I would get something easier and most of all smaller since otherwise you might as well use your 5Dmkiii.
Checkout the Fuji X70 or Ricoh GRii. They are the current kings of the streets imo and both pocketable.

I have several review videos of each

Thanks, Mattias... from the photos, the Quattro looks considerably smaller than the 5D3, but definitely something to think about.

Obviously, my concern with a Fuji or a Canon is that I'll get out in the world and end up shooting video instead of photos which is why the Quattro sounded so appealing to me.

But you guy's are probably right.

In that case, I wonder if the M5 would be a smart move since I can easily use the same lenses I use with the 5D3, so lens characteristics and color science will be more similar to what I'm shooting with the 5D3?

[BTM_Pix]

Am I right in thinking that this ML Digic 6 development could make the M5 a bit of a DPAF+RAW pocket rocket?

[HockeyFan12]

10 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

The wakeup is as fast as any modern camera. I set it to 30sec before sleep.
And the manual focus wheel makes it as far as I know, the fastest manual focus compact camera in the world.
Much faster than my x100f or Ricoh GR. Perfect for zone focus on the streets.

But be sure to catch the moment, there is no spray and pray. I never shoot more than one picture at the time on the streets so Im fine with it.

And on the DP1 its easier. 28mm is my preferred focal length for street. No need for a good evf I just need a general view with shapes.
Exposure is already set.
Focus wheel at 2.5 means all is in focus no matter what. I think 1.8m to infinity or something like that.

Now I can just snap away

All of the following shots are shoot on the move while walking and within a second or two of waking the camera up from sleep mode.

 

 

 

And if one wants more resolution I have done some street shooting with the SDQ as well. A bit big for that imo though.

BTW, I have a DP Quattro on the way and I definitely will shoot the streets with that as well  

 

 

Very nice shots. I still don't see the Sigma as a great street photography camera (your focusing/composition method is the same as you'd use with large format, requiring a lot of light and knowledge of hyperlocal distances, and again I wouldn't rate it past 100 ISO). But those look great. Great eye. And I do think the highlight roll off is a lot closer to slide film than you'd get on other digital cameras. Both in your photos, and just in my experience. 

But it doesn't look like color negative, which is softer in the highlights than slide film or digital. I REALLY don't think these are the right cameras for Ed, especially when I find film to be so good for photographing people. And frankly I find color negative better in both low light and mixed lighting... also in difficult lighting...  than anything digital. (I'd recommend he check out a Mamiya 7, but 6x7 is far slower than 135 for low light.)

I think where the Sigmas do shine is in rendering difficult textures. The photos I posted are not very good, sort of test shots, but if you download them and zoom in to 100% you can see that difficult textures are rendered better than you'd expect from an APS-C camera, let alone a tiny point and shoot. I think a D800 and excellent lens could get similar results, but that's expensive and big, and even then I'm not sure. 

[Mattias Burling]

13 minutes ago, HockeyFan12 said:

Very nice shots. I still don't see the Sigma as a great street photography camera (your focusing/composition method is the same as you'd use with large format, ...

The method is by far the most commonly used by street photographers no matter what camera. Ricoh. Leica, Sony, you name it. Its the street shooters mo.

With exceptions of course. Including me from time to time.

[HockeyFan12]

That's fair. Definitely not a kind of photography I do a lot of. When I dabbled in it I used a Leica rangefinder and would focus through the rangefinder rather than setting hyperfocal distance and compose through the rangefinder. But I decided it wasn't for me. In retrospect, maybe my slow ability to focus hurt. Hyperfocal technique is more instantaneous. 

@mercer I'm not that into photography but I found the 5D Mark III to be a solid stills camera when I had one. Yes, the Sigma has better image quality at 100 ISO and it's small. Bt that's IT. Everything else about it is much worse. Like crazy worse. And it also has this magenta/green noise that needs to be filtered out in lab color space and sometimes can't be so you really have to be careful. The battery life is awful and shot-to-shot time is the worst I've experienced. If I cared much about photography I'd buy an old MFDB and tech camera lenses.Bbut I don't, and this is the next best thing. If you want it for one thing (hyperfocal street photography, or I'm trying to get into some really abstract stuff–the shots I posted were test images to see how the detail is) it's great for the money. I wouldn't start with one. 

If you really want to challenge yourself, I'd get a spot meter and shoot slides on an old (like 1960s) SLR without a working on-camera meter. That's how I learned to expose. In the lab, they can change the exposure on C41 when they print it and it has tons more dynamic range. If you want to get really good at photography and exposure (not of people, necessarily, because they move too fast) pick up a manual focus Nikon camera and use an external light meter. Or challenge yourself a bit less and get an old Nikon SLR (the FM2 is great) and use TTL metering.

For small stills cameras, the Fujis are really nice.

[SMGJohn]

I recently acquired a Sigma SD Quattro from Japan just to have some fun alongside a 17-50mm Sigma F2.8 which for the price is okay lens.

I put it up against my Samsung NX500 and I just do not see it, what does this camera do better than my Samsung? It seems Samsung has exceptional colours out the camera as well albeit the profiles fall flat so I boosted them in bridge but other than that everything else is straight out the camera, DNG/RAW to JPEG with no edit except a crop, both cameras using standard colour profile which should not matter as neither seem to translate that to the RAW file. 

Both using F2.8 and 28mm range, I used the middle section. 

While some may say its unfair to compare 19 megapixel to 28 megapixel, remember that Foveon captures true RGB colour but yet does not have the colour resolution of a NX500 funny enough both cameras are best at ISO 100 - 200 and starts degrading the further you increase ISO.

 

NX500 - SD Quattro DNG - SD Quattro X3F

 

Maybe I am doing something wrong, I got the latest firmware on both cameras too or maybe I just do not see it. 
Someone shed some light on this? 

[Ed_David]

1 minute ago, SMGJohn said:

I recently acquired a Sigma SD Quattro from Japan just to have some fun alongside a 17-50mm Sigma F2.8 which for the price is okay lens.

I put it up against my Samsung NX500 and I just do not see it, what does this camera do better than my Samsung? It seems Samsung has exceptional colours out the camera as well albeit the profiles fall flat so I boosted them in bridge but other than that everything else is straight out the camera, DNG/RAW to JPEG with no edit except a crop, both cameras using standard colour profile which should not matter as neither seem to translate that to the RAW file. 

Both using F2.8 and 28mm range, I used the middle section. 

While some may say its unfair to compare 19 megapixel to 28 megapixel, remember that Foveon captures true RGB colour but yet does not have the colour resolution of a NX500 funny enough both cameras are best at ISO 100 - 200 and starts degrading the further you increase ISO.

 

NX500 - SD Quattro DNG - SD Quattro X3F

 

Maybe I am doing something wrong, I got the latest firmware on both cameras too or maybe I just do not see it. 
Someone shed some light on this? 

I think boost saturation level in the sd quattro to match it.  To really do a good test (not like I am good at that  - You should bring a color chart.  Shoot with the sigma at 100 ISO, the other camera at it's recommended ISO, same lens (as much as you can) and go from there.  I think of course, you would have to rent the removable lens quattro to make it work.

It's crazy, and maybe it's me, but I can't find a single A/B test on the internet besides one really quick one to compare foveon and cmos bayer pattern