Ouch! DPReview absolutely slams Sigma DP-1

[dg1]

For a pocket digital, I reckon my Fujifilm F810 renders closest to my wants and otherwise I'm with Godfrey about the L1.

 

But my solution to the larger sensor compact remains either my Rollei Prego 30 for AF, or my Olympus XA or one of the other 35mm compacts I have. Full frame, don't cost and arm and a leg and have the look I'm always trying to get from the smaller digitals.<div></div>

[kendall helmstetter gelner]

Fred - For $800, you get IQ far and away better than any other P&S - DSLR quality

images.

 

You get better dynamic range than any P&S, and better than many DSLR's.

 

You get a manual focus mode that is actually usable.

 

You get a really nice 28mm equiv. lens with almost no distortion and great corner to

corner sharpness.

 

And you get the ability to shoot RAW, something many compacts (even some

serious compacts) omit.

 

Are those things valueless? Why can not the incorporation of many unique aspects

to this camera be themselves worth a premium? You act as if those things were of

no consequence, and the camera price should be weighed on features alone when a

great deal of time and effort went into actually improving the fundamental image

itself and developing a good lens that would be compact and yet work with a large

sensor. Sigma has spent design effort in areas different than anyone else, and it's

important to recognize that when considering the price.

 

As an aside, an f/2.8 lens on the camera would be about the size of your fist due to

the physics of light and larger sensors - making it another R1, which only a handful

of people would ever buy because it's not really compact. Quite a few people are

buying the DP-1 exactly because it is the intersection of image quality and

portability than nothing else has.

 

I'd like to see higher ISO and IS myself, but you can as I noted push exposure to

get effective higher ISO, and with a wide angle lens IS is not as necessary as it

might be with other cameras.

[godfrey]

Heya Dean,

 

I still have my two old favorite compact 35s ... a Rollei 35S and a Minox 35GT-E. I

sold all the AF point and shoots ... drove me crazy ... and let go of the Leica M in

2002. The Rollei 35S has the best lens of the pocketables and the Minox is almost

on par while being a bit smaller and a little more automated (Aperture priority AE).

 

But I hate scanning 35mm film, it's nowhere near the quality of a good DSLR

capture, and haven't shot anything but a trivial amount of 645 in film since 2002. I

hold onto these two cameras out of sentimentality more than anything else, just like

I hold onto my favorite Minox and the Contax Tix that worked so well on the eve of

the digital camera revolution. And the Pentax 645 as well...

 

Ah, the good old days. But for me the L1 does a better job. :-)

 

Godfrey

[jtk]

I canceled my order for DP-1 in favor of a K20D with two pancake lenses.

 

What I got was very compact by comparison to the usual DSLR with any zoom, better than most prosumer DSLRs (at least equal to D300) in terms of resolution and noise at 3200, great autofocus and stabilization, and something roughly equivalent to a brick (or my Canon F1s) weightwise. The weight, being an issue, led me to a genuine bicycle messenger bag (brown, doesn't look like a camera bag), which also holds my Oly LS10, good Sony earphones, and whatever work paperwork or pleasure book is current at the moment...and the weight vanishes completely.

 

I'll be eager to check out Canon G10 when it's introduced.

[fred_c1]

Kendall, you can stop selling me the DP1. My XTi with Tamron 17-50/2.8 and Fuji F30 do everything the DP1 does and more, and they do it better. Mind you, both my cameras are also freqently accused of being "too small and fiddly" in the size department.

 

Nikon did the 28Ti with a 28mm f/2.8 lens covering 24x36mm more than 10 years ago. Look it up and see why your argument on lens-size does not stand at all.

 

There are far better ways to spend $800 than the DP1.

[godfrey]

Fred,

 

You are ignoring the fact that a 28mm f/2.8 lens for a 24x36 mm format FILM

camera can be made much more compact than a similar lens for a DIGITAL camera

due to the most fundamental difference between film recording media and a digital

sensor. To whit:

 

Film is completely insensitive to the direction of light striking it. Digital sensors are

extremely sensitive to the direction of light striking the photosites.

 

To obtain the same FoV on the DP-1 sized sensor would require approximately a

16mm lens. The design of the lens, to achieve the required near-orthogonal incident

angle at corners and edges for best performance, would almost certainly require an

inverted telephoto design and collimating elements at the rear of the lens, as close

to the sensor plane as possible, in order to 'straighten' the ray trace adequately. This

would be a relatively large lens no matter what ... make it fast (f/2.8) and it will grow

in size and weight even more to the point where "a brick the size of your fist" is not

too far off the mark as a description.

 

I have a 14mm f/2.8 prime lens designed for the Pentax DSLR cameras. It is indeed

a 1 lb, large lens. A DP-1 type camera might cut down on that size by some as it

would not require the 45mm mount register consideration and there is no swinging

mirror in the way, but by how much is questionable.

 

Godfrey

[david_f._stein]

Good thread from some serious folks. I do wish digital photography would mature to where we get cameras instead of rocket ships-let the manufacturers produce some compact, quiet, fluid picture-taking machines where the emphasis is on image and lens quality. A limited zoom range or single focal length is fine. I think the market is there.

[craig_nieder]

I agree, David. A good conversation on the subject and I think further proof that a

market is there. Sigma sees that market, too; Serious camera people (pros and

enthusiasts) currently using DSLRs who would like a pocketable alternative--a

serious compact camera.

 

This is what the DP1 is trying to do. It's competing for a niche in the compact

camera arena. Say what you will about the bland state of current compact cameras,

but I for one find it amazing what these tiny little things can do in such a small form

factor. Anti-shake? Face recognition? 1.7 second start-up time? Minute shutter lag?

Hi-res LCD screens? 28mm-180mm zooms with decent quality and distortion control?

It's remarkable. Even more amazing, we've come to expect these little miracles in

each new camera.

 

So you can't just go blundering blindly into this arena. This will be considered a

compact camera first. A serious camera second. You have to acknowledge what

people--even enthusiasts and professionals--expect from a compact camera. And

what they will be willing to concede. Unfortunately, it looks like Sigma flipped the priorities.

 

Of course, the list will vary wildly for everyone. But in terms of expectations, I bet

the things on both the "layman" and professional lists for requirements in a compact camera

might be; quick start-up, quick

buffer, quick shutter lag, good image quality and quick auto-focus. I was actually in

a Best Buy last weekend looking at compact cameras. Apart from how cool the

camera looked, these were the things I heard most often from people asking clerks

for help (I won't even go into the uneducated responses they received). Sure, some

enthusiasts will boast about not caring about shutter lag or time between shots if it

means enhanced image quality. I think that's nuts. This is a compact camera! We

should have both!

 

The DP1, according to dpreview, is poor in 4 of 5 of these categories. Regardless of

how you might feel about their reviews, that's not good. Yes, as an enthusiast I

want a sharp, special lens. I want as fast a lens as I can get, but I understand the

limits that would place on the form, so I'll concede that if I have to. I want exceptional image

quality, full manual

control, wide dynamic range, and a sharp, hi-res LCD screen so I can tell if I got the

shot. I want the camera ready when I take it out, and I want negligible shutter lag. I want

acceptable, not stellar low-light capability. Frankly, though I don't use it

a lot, I want a decent flash when I need it. If this camera will be with me all the time,

it has to take snap shots as well as contemplative scenics and fussy macros. And it

has to be small enough to fit in my pocket. Sure that's a tall order. But I've been

spoiled to expect it. And I've a sneaking suspicion it can and will be done.

 

The DP1 is an exciting step in the right direction. But for the same price as a low to

mid-level DSLR, I expect a camera with faster performance and low light capability

than this. For $300-400, I would be more accepting of the DP1's flaws. But for $800,

you've got to be kidding. I don't think sluggish sales of this camera is an indication

of a lack of a market, I think it's an indication of a missed mark. The crying shame?

I haven't even shot this camera! I'd love to, but no brick and mortar carries the

thing! Same goes for the Ricohs! Of course you have disappointing sales! I can't

find your cameras!

 

So I'm waiting for a camera that does what a compact camera is supposed to do

first, then strips away all the silly features and takes great images. In a perfect world, I'd like to

see the ones who are pioneering this niche benefit from it (Ricoh and Sigma), but it looks as if

they've left the door open for the big boys.

[silverfox]

Had the DP1 for a little over a week and i have to say that the image quality is amazing. Sure its a little slow but that doesnt bother me. Ive attatched an image taken in relatively low light in a jpeg and this is straight from the camera.<div></div>

[bob_pauls]

<p>I can understand why some nock the DP1. I thought I made a mistake buying it after using it off and on for a few months, until I fully understood how to use it. Now it's the only camera I want to use. I can hardly stand to use my D300 or any of my other cameras. The pictures are so film like and the camera lets you totally keep your mind on the subject. For me it's the fastest, quietest, sharpest, lightest package you can get. I bought the D300 and a D60 after the DP1 for when I need big glass and because of all the lenses I have. Been using the Sigma for about a year. The others camera just sit. I use it low light conditions all the time without a flash at 3000iso equvilant. I agree the auto focus is not the fastest (but it have a fantastic manual focus) and between shots are a bit slow, but it's the best camera I have, and I have alot of of cameras. It does not do alot of tricks but it is a shooters camera. This is a camera you can and want to live with. If they where to discontinue this camera, I would likley run out and buy 3 or 4 more.</p>

[adrian_mctiernan1]

<p>I would like to ask Kendall Gellner's opinion about the Sigma Foveon sensor, as I am very impressed by it's sharpness and so forth, but I REALLY need a sensor with MORE PIXELS. Regardless of how well the lens/sensor definition combination is, surely a bigger sensor with more pixels will produce a more detailed image? <br>

I see this with all the reviews I have watched over the years - the more pixels, the more image can be used to produce a finer detailed photo. Similarly, with a film camera, the finer the grain of a film, (I guess more image-forming smaller grains), then the larger the enlargement you can produce from it.<br>

I don't mind saving up for a more expensive camera, but as I would like to produce pictures about 5 feet wide, it is no use me using a sensor with a small number of pixels on it, but I need to have lots of detail from many pixels. Now, correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that Sigma are fixated with using the same number of pixels, but just improving processing and results from that same number. This is fine, and I love the subtle colours and nice sharpness, but I need to get more of those pixels, so I can print it out bigger.<br>

Would you know if Sigma are working on making bigger sensors at all? - you seem to know a lot about the camera and sensors, so I thought I would ask. I am fascinated to find out that the camera can do well with low light levels, as that was one of the criticisms levelled at the Foveon sensor. And yet, bigger sensors are around - I understand from a report I read yesterday about the Hubble Telescope that it has now got a gigapixel sensor - and ok, it's government - financed (read 'you and me' there), but if they can make something that big, and panasonic can now put 12 megapix on a tiny phone sensor, why the heck can't Sigma move away to something like 15 megapixels, with three layers at each sensor - I know it equates to 45 megapixels of actual sensitive pixel, but as each site really only seems to produce one (very accurate) pixel, well, we are limited to the size of a finely detailed print. <br>

So, what Kendall, could you let me know about Sigma's plans. I tried to contact them about the matter, but they seem to not want to talk to me - so I am sticking to 645 film for any big shots, which is expensive and a shame, as the camera is big to lug round with me, so I don't take so many photos as I would like, and the cost is not good either.<br>

Hope you may be able to enlighten me, and thanks for your detailed responses above to other's comments</p>