Taking the plunge? From eos 1d Mark II to Sigma DP3 Merrill?

<p>I am a prosumer photographer and shoot families / portraits about 2-4 times a month. My fee is that of an average pro-photographer due to the fact that 1) my photo's are in the same quality league and 2) people are willing this to pay<br>

I usually work with a Canon EOS 1D mark II with some fast 50mm glass or the 'goldfinger' (24-85mm) and a small lightning studio / or strobes on location.</p>

<p>The 8 mp of the 1D mark II is fine: most people use the pics on the internet or A3 (at most) and I love the camera - but nowadays I'm in search of more Dynamic Range / IQ. I have a Sigma SD 14 as a back-up camera and know the quirck's and failures of the Foveon sensor - but god I love the colors of it!</p>

<p>I was thinking to dump the SD 14 and pick up a Sigma DP-3Merrill to use and keep the 1D mark II for a backup. I know the buffer is small, but I'm not that triggerhappy and know when to shoot. Anyone made this move and would like to share some expierence?<br>

Thank in advance!</p>

 

<p>I loved the SD14 colors....used it with Leica R lenses for about a year. Just a thought - you can change the camera body mount on your SD14 for other camera body mounts and then use the lenses of that mount in manual or aperture priority mode with your Foveon sensor. Check out Leitax for more info.</p>

If you want pretty good resolution and don't care about anything else then sure, the Sigma is for you

<p>Thanks for the replies.</p>

<p>I just checked and it seems that the 1Ds mk II (full frame) is around for the same price as the DP3 Merrill... what to do, what to do...</p>

<p>If the resolution of the SD14 is good enough then why not just get the SD15 instead? The color is far more reliable and 21 shot buffer should be more than enough for portrait work. Also the 3 sec processing/file is much better than the 7 sec of the SD14 and the 15 sec of the DP3M. Plus you can buy them used for around $350 now on eBay.</p>

<p>Thanks Mike,<br>

But the resolution of the SD14 isn;t good enough to be 'safe'. As a backup cam, it works and I use the 1D mk II for composition and all, and the SD14 for real close up portrait only. But cropping for a good composition with the sd14 just leaves too few pixels (and the 1D mk II with 8mp does too - that;s why I am looking for an upgrade).<br>

I've read about everything there is to read on the internet, and think that on my budget the DP3M is the best bang for my buck. 24+ megapixel camera body;s are too expensive for me now, let alone the lenses that come with it.<br>

If I ever hit the jackpot, I'll buy a SD1 Merrill and a Sony A7r</p>

<p>If you don't mind buying used the SD1M can be bought for under $1,000 and A7 for less than $1300. </p>

<p>Some thoughts:<br /><br />1) Chose Canon or choose Sigma but don't try to mix and match. If you have one body of one brand and one of another, you're not going to be able to swap lenses, dedicated flash units and other brand-specific accessories between the two. You end up either having to put together two complete systems or not really have backup. Does the Sigma really have a lens mount that can be changed? Never heard of that before but I don't follow Sigma. Also, when you pick up a camera you want it to be completely familiar -- if you've been shooting all day with the Sigma and have to stop and think where things are on the Canon or vice versa, it can slow you down and increases the potential for mistakes.<br /><br />2) A good photographer can take pictures with any brand of camera. But if you are going to shoot professionally (if you're a "prosumer" I take it you are taking people's money and that makes you a professional if only part-time), I would go with Canon. Not saying Canon is any better than Sigma. But the DSLR world is dominated by Canon and Nikon. Their range of lenses, flash, accessories etc. is generally wider than other brands. Third party lenses and accessories are pretty much always made for those two brands, are offered for them first and might or might not ever be offered for other brands. Rental lenses, bodies, flashes, accessories are almost exclusively Nikon and Canon. If you shoot more than just occasionally you are eventually going to need to rent when you need a special lens or when a piece of gear is in the shop, etc. And if you become a second shooter, assistant, etc. for another photographer and need to work within their system, it will almost certainly be Nikon or Canon.<br /><br />3) The DP-3 Merrill might be a very good mirrorless camera to photographers who know it. But to the non-photographer, it looks like any other point and shoot. I know this sounds trivial, and there are some professionals who are doing great work with smaller cameras these days. But if you're charging big bucks to shoot and you show up with a camera that the bride and groom think is the same as their own camera, you lose some of what little mystique is left in being a "professional" photographer. There's a certain amount of psychology in making people feel like they're getting their money's worth.</p>

<p>Thanks for your input Craig,</p>

<p>From point 1, I'll take it you've never heard or read about the Sigma DP3 Merrill ;-)<br>

2) You're absolutely right, never thought about being a second shooter<br>

3) I follow your point: people want to see impressive gear when they rent you. I mostly work with flashes or strobes, umbrella's & light boxes etc. and indeed: with the 1D mk II around my neck I might look kind of 'hung like a donkey'. I consider the flashes and all mystique enough - but maybe I'll be forced in the end so slap a Sigma DP3M on a painted brick to look more pro, lol! <br>

As things stand, I still tend to the Sigma and save up for a second hand 1Ds mk II in time.</p>

<p>I think the Merrills are great with medium format like quality, but will be noisy above ISO 400, which is usually their downfall. You also have to be happy with their unusual ergonomics and, from what I have heard, somewhat doubtful AF. None if these things may matter in a studio setting, however.</p>