Sigma SD10 or Sony F828??

[dan_biddle]

I have done a lot of research about the SD10 and the upcoming Sony

828. Can someone please help?? It seems that there has been a lot of

concern about the noise (potential) of the Sony, but with the Sony

having 8mp vs. the 3.4 actual of the SD10, I am torn between the

two. My primary interest is landscape photography, so I am hoping

for something that produces 11X14+ quality prints on my Epson 2200.

Thanks!

[carl smith]

Without having a chance to test them, the Canon 300D would probably be a better choice even with the kit lens. For landscape photography you'll be stopping the lens down anyway so the less than stellar kit lens with the 300D won't be so bad then.

 

From what I've seen of the Sony so far it doesn't offer much improvement in detail over the 717, and in fact has some more noise. Some have complained about heavy chromatic abberations as well.

 

The sigma SD9 was a good camera and the SD10 is just an update. However even though color may be read more effectively you've only got 3.4 million sites reading different areas of the scene whereas with the 300D it's 6 million different samplings of the scene, even if they aren't in full color. It's because of this that I've seen many photographers prefer a 6mp DSLR from Canon or Nikon over the Sigma.

 

I haven't had a chance to test them that intensively but my use of these cameras seems to fit that reasoning.

 

If you're considering the Sigma however you may also want to consider the Canon 10D and Nikon D100, both offer some more capability over the Canon 300D and excellent image quality as well.

[gsbhasin]

Carl gives good advice. However on dpreview.com the SD10 does seem to have same resolution as the 10D or the D100, so 3.4 MP is not less than the Baeyer algorithm 6MP of 10D or D100.

<p>However Canon 300D would let you use fine Canon optics later on, if you so choose. With Sigma your choices are limited to the Sigma.

<p>As for the Sony 828, the camera has not been reviewed as of this writing though many sites have been publishing pictures at ISO 64 as of now. No full reviews. I don't believe Sony could have circcumvented the laws of Physics to yield the same Signal to Noise ratio from a small sized 8MP chip as a larger sized 6MP chip. So high ISO performance is a suspect.

<p>For most landscape photography usage, this usually would not be a problem since you would use a tripod and the lowest possible ISO. Howver beware that ISO 50 of prosumer camera is worse than at least ISO 200 of DSLRS.

<p>But then again the Sony and the SD10 should produce 11X14 prints with ease. But that should be the upper limit in size even for 35mm film...

[paq]

yeah, for the cost of an 828, you can get a 300d and even another lens ($1200 estimated for 828 right now)

 

however, for a bit more, you could get a 10d and get a lot of extra functionality and a LOT less noise. 11x14 prints are easy from a 6.3 mp DSLR. 11x14 prints are not easy from an 8.x MP small sensor camera...the noise is astronomical in comparison. It's kinda like shooting 100 vs 800 spd film in comparison without the extra speed...Admittedly, you wouldn't see the noise as easily in a print, so more onscreen noise isn't that bad, but in an 11x14, the effects would be quite noticeable.

 

the D100 is also a very good option for the money.

 

Seriously, after seeing the smoothness of a large sensor'd camera, i will never go back to the noisier counterparts for anything other than snapshot pictures...

[carl smith]

Thank's Guphreet, that's true. The Sigma produces rather good resolution, however I would suspect that for landscapes the standard bayer array, which is sampling the scene at more locations would win out. The Sigma (I used the SD9 a few times) isn't exactly like a 3.4 mp camera, but it isn't exactly like 9 mp either. It is somewhere in the middle and enlarges quite well.

 

Also choosing a Canon or Nikon DSLR will give you more versatility, there's more equipment available and you're guaranteed to have some superb bodies and lenses to look forward to in the future.

[victor_yushenko]

Christopher, 10D does not have less noise then 300D. They use same sensor.

 

I also think that 300D with a kit lens is a great option. For lanscapes at f/8 you gogin to have a great quality. I have not used kit lens myself, but from comparisons that I've seen it is very sharp at f/8.

 

I though that sigma is a great idea, but not anymore. Current algoritms do not need all 3 colors for each pixel. Extra information does not hurt of course, but it makes sensor/camera more expensive and does not seem to improve images.

 

I think that there is no comparison between 300D and Sigma. 300D wins. Sigma resolution is just under 4Megapixels needed for Noritsu print for 5*7 (needs 320dpi). You can increase size with to 4megapixels in photoshop and it still would look great, but for something bigger then 5*7 I would get more then 4 megapixels.

 

To me 300D is also better then Sony. I do not like LCD for viewfinder. I think that manual focusing will be hard with Sony. I heard that it zooms in on LCD for focusing, but then you loose full image for framing. Sony sensor is also smaller and thus noice will be worse then on Canon.

 

You might want to wait until there is a full review at http://www.dpreview.com/ for Sony 828 and then decide.

 

I own 300D and very happy with it (great, great camera). Last week I put 50 f/1.4 lens, set iso to 1600 and was able to get 1/100 shutter speed at night. Something that would not be possible with Sony (lens is zoom so it will be slower no matter what and with smaller sensor iso1600 will be too much).

[larry_tudor1]

Sorry that it's not in English but the pictures talk by themselves(specially the close-up of the building) http://www.e-fotografija.com/artman/publish/article_163.shtml

[dan_biddle]

Wow...That building close-up is all telling! The 300D is very, very clear in comparison. So, is there a noticable difference then between the 300D and the 10D (for landscape photography)? For that matter, should I also be considering the Nikon D100? Thanks again...

[victor_yushenko]

300D and 10D are alsmost the same. Canon just disabled some futures in 300D. 300D can be had with or without a "kit lens"(100$) and 10D cames without a lens (you need to buy lens separately). Here is the link that just got posted on Canon EOS forum:

<a href="http://www.cps.canon-europe.com/articles/article.jsp?articleId=60003&pageId=1">10D vs 300D</a>

 

 

For lanscapes 10D has a mirror lock-up, 300D does not. I have 300D and I do not think that mirror flap degrades image in any way on that camera at all.

I think that 300D is far better deal for a beginner. In other word if you not sure whether you should get 10D or 300D(Digital Rebel) then 300D is your camera. Money that you can save on 300D vs 10D can be better spend on some good lenses. If you never shot digital there will be a learning curve, but it's true for any digital camera.

[anthony_d.]

Go to pbase.com and do a search for the SD10. Look at the images in full size. You will never see such clear and sharp images with the 300d/10d as you will with the Sigma SD10 ...even if you resize to 3.4MP. For landscape work, the Sigma SD10 is the way to go. The main disadvantage to the camera is that it gets noisier at higher iso speeds. For landscape this is no problem . Also, it shoots RAW only so there is an extra processing step. But the variations in colors, textures of leaves, etc...will be far more precisely recorded with the Sigma than with any other camera. Other sensors will just 'color in' the high frequency color data. Only the Sigma cameras do not.

[rick_wilkinson]

Hi,

I looked real close between a 10D and SD10 and ended up ordering a Sigma. I'm not pixel counter and just liked the way the pictures looked. I've read a lot about the apples to oranges thing and truthfully came the conclusion it is a matter of preference. I don't feel lenses will a problem as Sigma makes some very nice glass and think they will improve as the industry evolves. I liked the Fovoen sensor and it's approach, this latest chip resolved most issues people had with the SD9.

[rick_wilkinson]

Hi again,

Got to thinking and just wanted to express thanks to this site. A lot of places flame Sigma and I'm sure they like what they have but not everyone makes the same selections. I guess I can be defencive at times but usually I'm proactive (job and all). Anyway this HAS to be the most helpful and friendly site I know. Thanks again.

[charlie_vigue]

The image quality seems about a push, with my experience (SD9, not SD10) being the Canon is a bit better, for my tastes. But - and this is huge - getting the most out of the Canon involves shooting to RAW and using Photoshop, in 16 bit mode is prefered. So the fact that the Sigma only shoots to RAW is more an issue for those times I want to just shoot snapshots. If I'm after absolute best results, I'll go to RAW anyway.

 

The other factor is build, and the 10D seems much more responsive, quiet and generally much better put together than the Sigma.

 

YMMV.

[adri_de_groot]

The Sigma is a real photographer's camera, because you will work on each image individually; the way it should be. If you do landscape and fine art work, this is the way to go. The 30 seconds or more you spend with an image is far less than any darkroom work you may have done before. I don't find it a bother at all. Good photography is not about mass production. The Sigma draws the photographer out of you, rather than vice versa.

 

The images from the Sigma SD10 have a 3D effect about them, a natural rendering that makes the photos very film like. The software is great and the RAW images are awesome. I had both totally over and udner exposed shots and they were brought back to normal. I haven't seen this possible with other RAW images (I could be wrong). So, no more blown out highlights!

 

It takes about a week to get used to this camera; you first wonder if you made a mistake buying it, and then you fall in love with it and with photography all over again.

 

This has been my reaction to the Siga SD10.<div></div>

[adri_de_groot]

One more photo<div></div>

[joshua_mcdermott]

My decision to go with the Sd10 over comparable models of nikon/canon/sony came down to the level of technology and thought that went into the sd10 sensor. The Foveon is recording the photons incident on the sensor in RGB, and encoding that directly into numbers on your memory stick. No other sensor can do this, they record (roughly) one third of the real incident photons with the rest filled in by a complicated algorithm. Maybe the algorithm does a better job than the foveon in pleasing the eye, but its also one more step removed from what is actually there.

 

I am a physicist, so I value tools that give me the most direct measurement, The sd10 is the more scientific tool, and the sensor much closer in conception and execution to true film exposure. I am a big fan! But that being said, I mainly use it for close-ups under studio conditions. cheers

[max_chau]

I researched and compared sigma sd10 with canon 10d, nikon d70, d2h and other high

end cameras. I ordered the sigma for its life-like image with superb depth (3d). All others,

regardless of pixel counts, looked the "same", or "digital" to me. Those camera may give

"wow" factor for a short moment, only the images of sd10 truely impress even days after

viewing them.