We got a few reminders about the Sigma DP-1 in the comments section of yesterday's lunchtime dilemma, so we took to the streets to do a little research. And by "streets", we mean "IM". Even the hype on this camera has a PR machine, so we've been a little wary of checking it out. Luckily, Clayton Cubitt has given us a full review, complete with images. And they're not of flowers or macro shots of bumblebees, or other inane things, thank god.
The Bad:
Autofocus is too slow, and useless in low light. Should have used IR-focus instead of optical.
Lag-time between shots is too slow, even with instant review off.
Auto flash control is horrid.
Manual exposure system is clunky, no live preview of exposure changes.
Lens is slightly too wide, and f4.0 is too slow for low-light work, especially if ISO 800 is the top film speed. With a sensor this size they should have at least brought film speed up to 3200. And with no zoom, this lens should be f2.8.
Lens cap is gay, and no thread for a UV filter is dumb.
RAW software is atrocious. Almost unusable.
The Good:
It's almost as small as my Yashica T4, and looks clunky and cheap enough to not draw attention to itself.
AEL separate from AFL is great to have on a snappy cam.
Files look great.
Being able to shoot movies and audio is nice.
Digital, so much more convenient than film. Duh. With the file size finally approaching film on a snappy cam, this one fact alone outweighs the otherwise sub-par design and performance issues, compared to my previous film snapper.
Verdict:
Seriously flawed, but important milestone. Probably too niche and expensive for what it does for most users, but for those of us who need its combination of file size and bokeh, the only game in town.
Hopefully a real camera manufacturer will pick up on this and make a better version soon. In the meantime, I can make snaps again without the excruciating pain of scanning. And that alone justifies its existence.
Stumble Upon
another review:
http://tinyurl.com/4zt2n4
yes, scanning is a drag, but in the long term, I think more satisfying. avoids that snappy snappy mentality of digital.
was just about to find that link 'by camera', quite revealing about the Foveon factor in that linked review.
no one mentions it either - but it's one handsome camera
An aside:
"Gay" is not an appropriate word to use to describe something one disapproves of or finds lacking.
It either means "happy," or it means "homosexual." It makes no sense to use it as a derogatory term in either of these meanings.
It's not that it's "offensive," it's just silly.
M
Gay is a perfectly fine way of describing something that you find rediculous, dumb, frustrating, or retarded. Yes, I said retarded. Get over it.
There are alternate meanings outside of the standard understanding of the word....geeesh!
Seriously though...if the camera has so many issues then getting these shots (shown above) must have been a bitch (go figure...not talking about a female dog)?
"Snappy Snappy" digital huh?
How many rolls of film did you go through to get that one good shot? I hate this being used as a manner of putting digital down. Sorry but it is not only not true but just plain rediculous. If you don't like or are not comfortable with digital then just say you don't like it. Don't come up with retarded reasons to justify your disdain.
Those photographs are nice, too. Much better way to advertise the camera than the shit on Luminous Landscape. Too bad about the problems, hopefully the next one will be the winner. I'll stick with my T4 for now.
Yeah, I was going to crosspost this on my own sites, but not after that kind of poor choice of words... and your defense, even worsely worded.
@Shoot the blog - This is a great blog. Preserve that with some copy editing!
All those complaints and we still get the nice pictures. What can it mean? I'll tell you what it means: the reviewer has more talent at taking pictures than at writing or evaluating cameras, apparently. But in terms of talents, better to be able to take the nice pictures. Apparently the DP1 works very well, despite the massive display of foolishness by the "reviewer."
Raw software atrociouis? Now that's an atrocious remark. It could be better (I want color sliders, not a wheel), but your comment and entire review has an arrogant tone to it. You are trying to be cool in your word choices, but for that reason the review doesn't have any professional feel to it. It is merely an opinion based on personal preferences. And yet, you conclude it's the only game in town. Well, enjoy it!
This review was done by a sub-par pro and laughable.
I'm a working professional photographer, not a camera reviewer. Thank God. I simply stated my brief opinion of the camera for my readers, who kept emailing me about it, since I picked up one of the first units to hit NYC.
And I stand by it all. The software is laughable, and as soon as Adobe Camera Raw updates to include the DP-1 it will be dropped by everyone in the universe. The camera has serious usability and design flaws, many of them needless and silly, especially in light of how long it took to bring to market, how much it costs, and the users it's meant for.
Can a good photographer work around these flaws and get great photographs? Obviously. But a camera is an important tool, and important tools should not have to be worked around. And it's the only game in town because other manufacturers have yet to get a clue and increase the sensor sizes of their own cameras. Hopefully they will soon.
Again, it's a great, but seriously flawed, first effort. Not for everyone. For those of us who have been hoping to drop our Yashica and Contax film snappy cams in favor of digital, and not sacrifice too much quality? This is the only option.
Photonerds agree:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sigma-dp1.shtml
Unable to abandon film I always have a contax TVS on my belt, next to my cell phone. I convinced myself that I needed this camera for instant , quality shots. I also needed it when photographing performers under red spot lights...digital and red lights..yikes.
Now I have the DP1. It fits (almost) into the TVS case on my belt. The quality of the images is stunning to me. Oh, for some reason this camera also seems to do better with red.
Now when I think back to the work and the frustration involved with scanning film I wonder why I did this.
Ergonomically the camera does indeed need improvement. However where I had done 10% or so of my work with the TVS I am up to about 75% with the DP1, and increasing. Quite a remarkable camera. I hope it's so astoundingly successful that it demands competition.
You have confirmed again my reasons for not wishing to purchase the DP1.
For those stubborn english illiterates out there, gay is term for expressing something unfavourable or awkward.
If you continue to arrogantly argue that your dialect is the world's dialect then you have a serious mental problem indeed.
Very nice pics, precise assessment of the camera, but then this utterly nonsensical verdict... "flawed"?? Why that?
Stop clicking and start remembering -- now what do we have here:
o a stellar lens
o a very good sensor -- I mean, 13x19 w/o any post processing hassle from less than 5 MPs!!
In my book that's as good as my 1DS II!
All that for $800, and you even get an embarassingly implemented, but workable camera body thrown in for free! And the whole package isn't much larger than the cellphone you were so proud to lug around just 6 or 7 years ago...
Now, stated this way, doesn't this ring some bell? Probably not, but it should... cause that's exactly the way the big Fuji rangefinders GL, GW etc. were described to those misinterpreting them as a "Leica on steroids", and then dismissing them immediately in frustration.
Cause that's the DP1 essence: a GW690 translated to the 21st century -- for deliberate, thoughtful, slow shooting, that when used competently rewards with super IQ in an easily portable package... not that I'd dare to equate the DP1's IQ to 6x9 Velvia trannies (have about 2k from the latter), but at least the tiny digisig can do those 13x19s for me
in a way that justifies printing them, something e.g. a 30D with prime lenses could not. Nothing
below an 1DS II could up to now, for me... and I'm
too tired of schlepping this brick meanwhile.
So, if you were satisfied with 35mm in past days,
and are looking for something replacing an M3 w/o having to pay for and lug around an M8, stay with your GRDigiTGLux9II3 or whatever, forget it, the DP1 was never designed with your style of picture making in mind, as the GW690 never was made for
chasing the kids around.
But if you're willing to step back from the hunt for all those fleeting moment HBC shots, slow down and start composing, evaluating, *recording* the stills hidden in the world around you... hurry on to get a DP1, so you can stop grieving all the shots missed because you can't be bothered to schlepp the equipment needed to get photos that are worth to print big.
Now wait -- "an important milestone", think he's got it at least some way.
Kudos to the product steering committee at Sigma, and to the engineers over there (an I say this as an engineer)... they must have seen all those mistaken "reviews" coming, and decided to make the DP1 nonetheless.