mike_maas

Last night some goofball inserted between 200-250 votes for the new camera using neither dpx nor micro 4/3 skewing the results. The votes don't show up on the map so they apparently used some kind of a back door.

In additional news in an interview posted here:http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/other/2008/09/30/9341.html

Mr. Yamasaki said Sigma has no plans for the 4/3ds efforts other than lenses for the SLR segment but that lenses for the micro segment have not been ruled out. Bodies apparently have been ruled out.

From examining the map and counting balloons I came up with the following results:

Micro 4/3 version: 78 votes 47%

Dpx with interchangeable lenses: 51 votes 31%

No change to dpx models with a single lens per model: 22 votes 13%

New camera neither dpx nor micro 4/3: 14 votes 8%

I have a total of 165 votes. The poll was posted at dpreview, photo.net, fm.forums, getdpi.com, and luminous landscape.

The poll will remain open a bit longer though I doubt the percentages will change much.

I will send the poll results to Sigma for their edification.

thanks,

Mike

http://www.vizu.com/poll-vote.html?n=120440

Vote Now but only vote once.

Mike

Robert,

Well all my sigma cameras do just fine without it. So does my 5D which has only the horizontal filter removed.

I occasionally see some moire in the raw on the 5D but not after processing and there is a noticeable improvement

in the accutance of the images produced.

The AA filter is necessary for some shots but not for all shots, for some subjects but not for all. The Leica,

Sigma, and Kodaks all get along fine without it most of the time. Sure there are exceptions but they are few and

far between. If you want a camera that smears details in all shots at the expense of only a few where it would

matter get one with an aa filter. If not be like the pros and get one where you can choose or be like those of

us who shoot without them and suffer the occasional situation where the lack has a negative impact on the image.

In 20,000 + shots it hasn't happened enough to me to worry about it.

If I were shooting fashion with lots of fine weave I would want an AA filter and those who do shoot fashion are

primarily those who use the AA filters on MF backs. Roots and rocks folks leave the AA off for the most part.

There is no simple answer. If someone shoots more people and events where there are lots of people the AA filter

is probably useful. If one shoots closeups of birds the AA filter might be useful. If one shoots primarily

landscapes, near or distant an AA filter is more of a hindrance. All IMHO of course.

Mike

Robert Lee [Frequent poster] , Aug 06, 2008; 01:39 p.m.

>"... DP1 and SD14 don't have to have an anti alias filter ..."

"And this is a design fault. Any digitally sampled system has to be fronted with a low pass filter."

If that were true the aa filters would not be optional on the digital backs used by professionals.

Mike

I'm not an expert on printing so I can't really address the pixels issue there.

I tested a Sigma SD14 against a Canon 5D using a bellows and some Xenotar lenses and found the Sigma to be the equal of the Canon at iso400 and below. Above iso400 the canon was superior. I also did resolution tests using Koren's charts and methodology (http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF5.html) and found the system mtf for the 5D to be slightly better than the sd14 using the same lens and Koren's target.

Uprezzing the Sigma to Canon native size also showed that the Sigma image was the equal of the 5D at its native resolution. One of those posting on the dpreview forum when I did this did print the two images and could see no difference between them.

If you compare the raw file size between a Sigma shot and a 5D shot of the same subject they will be very close to the same size. In other words even though the 2D spatial measurement is 4.7 MP it still contains as much information as does the larger 12MP 2D spatially measured 5D.

Finally you may want to read Sean Reid's review of the Sigma. It does cost money but from what I hear it is well worth the cost. I haven't purchased or read it because I already have the dp-1 and am in the process of paring down my other equipment since the DP1 does almost everything I need and I expect the succeeding models to fill those gaps.

Mike

Well since it hasn't been mentioned thus far the "A" stands for aluminum as opposed to the "C" for carbon.

Mike

http://www.pbase.com/hughden/dp1comp

Sigma: http://www.pbase.com/hughden/image/95371773/original

Leica D-Lux 3: http://www.pbase.com/hughden/image/95372456/original

Mike

Like I said if you are looking for image quality, and in your original post that appeared to be something that is

important to you, and if you want that quality to be good enough to look at up close at anything larger than a

snapshot the DP1 is the only game in town.

I don't think they are any less reliable than any other compact out there. There have been some growing pains but

we are now on the 3rd release of firmware the latest of which added iso 50 and the ability to program the +- button

used for the zoom in jpg/movie mode to provide switchable iso and other options.

Most of Illka's objections appear to be second hand from reading reviews and most of them come under user

preference as well rather than actual deficits in the camera itself.

Sigma has been among the best of the mfgrs in responding to the userbase and in standing behind their cameras

and lenses. A number of people have had their dp1 replaced due to their having dropped or otherwise damaged the

camera.

If IQ is not primary and you are looking for a snapshot camera then get one of the ricohs or another brand. They all

work for snapshots and a good SLR or a dp1 has no advantage over a regular compact if all you want is snapshots.

If you want a poster size print though you'll see a big difference between what the dp1 puts out and what any other

compact puts out.

I think you're really trying to decide between a volkswagen and a Lotus or McLaren. Yes the Lotus or Mclaren might

be a little more demanding both in terms of getting out of them what they can deliver and in the potential problems

that might occur but they'll do a heck of a lot better job on a track or the open road than will a beetle.

Mike

By all means read the review. But don't ignore the forum. It is filled with enthusiastic pleased users and a

few complainers. But maybe you'll get caught up in the enthusiasm and enjoy yourself.

It is slow but I'm not sure what is meant by quirky. You can take 3 quick shots in continuous mode but other

than that you are going to end up waiting a few seconds between shots while the camera starts writing the image

to memory. By the way the written images are on average about the same size as an image from a Canon 5D and

imagesize correlates with information. There really are 14 megasomethings of information but they are three deep

over a 4.7 MP sensor. If it were a 4.7MP bayer 1 dimensional sensor you would get 1/3 the info written per shot

rather than the amount you do get.

ISOs 50-200 are excellent. 400 shows color shift but not too much noise and 800 is better than any prior Sigma

model including the SD14 by a significant margin but neither 400 nor 800 are as good as that of a 5D or many

other cameras. At 100 and 200 though it is the equal of any and probably better than most.

The 16mm (effective 28mm) lens is also superb in fact I think it is close to as good as my 21mm contax zeiss

distagon.

Like I said if IQ is what you seek nothing else can compare in that size package.

With the success it appears to be having I wouldn't be surprised to see other mfgrs follow suit and Sigma will

almost certainly introduce new models at photokina this year.

Mike

I'm on an ibm laptop with windows xp and have installed service packs 2 & 3. I'm running firefox 2.0.0.16. I

don't usually use this computer but my macbook pro is being repaired. I'm not seeing problems anywhere else in

my browsing which includes some blogs, ebay, dpreview, fred miranda and some other forums. Whatever it is it

seems to be something specific to this setup and this site. I just checked on internet explorer and it shows up

fine there.

If anyone has an idea great. If not since IE works and I'll have my macbook pro back later this week using IE is

an acceptable workaround.

thanks,

Mike

You should take a visit to www.dpreview.com and read the sigma slr forum then visit www.pbase.com and check out the sigma dp1 gallery.

No bells and whistles compared to other p&s but the IQ is soooooo much better there really is no comparison.

If IQ is not primary then there are lots of choices none of which I know anything about.

Mike

I thought it might be because I was not logged in but I logged in the only thing I see is the title of the ad

and the name of the user. No text in any ad at all.

Mike

I don't know what happened to the link -- looks like it got shortened somehow.

The dpreview discussion is at:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1032&thread=26233965

Mike

I've just posted the results of relative MTF tests on dpreview. Here is the link:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=26273971

MTF is @8% better in landscape mode where the horizontal aa flter has been removed than it is in portait mode where the vertical aa filter is still present.

A fuller explanation is in that thread.

Best,

Mike

Thanks Robin. A nice summary and good assessment of what is going on vis-a-vis sigma which is my other camera.

Apologies to all for not doing a better introduction.

Best,

Mike

On Monday 12/24/2007 I met with Jack Fletcher and I took a short series

of test shots using his unmodified 5D and my Maxmax Hotrod modded 5D.

The pictures can be found on my pbase pages:

http://www.pbase.com/masimo/5d_hotrod

I have also uploaded the raws to Mediafire so that anyone who wishes to

can download them and see if they can see any differences with and without

the aa filter.

I won't poison the well with my findings but I will say that Raw developer

seems to be a better tool for converting the hotrod files.

I have also posted this on photo.net in the canon eos forum, dpreview.com

under Canon EOS-1D/1Ds/5D, forum.getdpi.com under canon and Luminous landscape

under Digital Cameras, Backs and Shooting Techniques

It would be nice to have one discussion place for this but I have no idea where

it should be so I think we will have to live with multiple threads on multiple

sites.

Here is the download information for the files.

Mike

File name: Normal iso400 f8 28mm L IMG_2052.CR2:

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?alzzeoonxhx

File name: normal iso400 f8 28mm L IMG_2050.CR2:

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?ar2jocyyyiw

File name: normal iso800 f5.6 200mmIMG_2048.CR2:

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?dkrkilzdmbc

File name: normal iso400 f5.6 200mmIMG_2047.CR2:

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?e4yiuz4lzvv

File name: normal iso200 f5.6 200mmIMG_2046.CR2:

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?834tml8t0nx

File name: Maxmax iso400 f8 28mm 24-105 L at 28mm IMG_9225.CR2

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?celxlbzt39

File name: Maxmax iso400 f8 28mm 24-105 L at 28mm IMG_9220.CR2

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?cjrunbttmoa

File name: Maxmax iso400 f5.6 200mm IMG_9214.CR2:

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?5gcnklxtxno

File name: Maxmax iso200 f5.6 200mm IMG_9213.CR2:

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?0m1do2ll3wv

File name: Maxmax iso800 f5.6 200mm IMG_9215.CR2:

Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/?7ni2kwcv5jx

Thanks to all for your responses. I just agreed to purchase the ULD that showed up on the ad forum today. I should have it when I get to Seattle in a week or so where I will try it out up in the Cascades hopefully.

Best,

Mike

At the same level on the lens as the aperture setting is a little sliding switch. I don't have the lens now but as I recall it opened the aperture blades fully. When the aperture was then set the blades would close down to the appropriate opening. It may have been a dof preview lever instead of a focus preview lever where the aperture is closed by the lever rather than opened. In any case it made the aperture manually adjustable and tape kept it from moving from the adjusted aperture. I used f8 and f11.

As to how an aperture works I think you're wondering if I know how one works rather than asking for information purposes. I do.

Do you have any information about the lenses I asked about? I'm also considering an angulon 65mm f6.8 lens but it is a non retrofocal and will leave minimum room between the back of the lens and the body flange on the camera. The Mamiya has a lot more room.

thanks,

Mike

A couple of questions if I may. I have read through the history of the Mamiya

lens issues on this site. I purchased and returned an RB 50mm no letter lens

that was very distorted and lacked resolution on the edges.

I've been looking for a 50mm ULD at the right price but so far haven't found one.

Now I'm thinking about the 65mm lenses. At least one post mentioned the RB 65mm

as being marginal. The RZ 65mm comments seem to be universally good.

I'm using the lens on a stitching rig where I mount my Sigma SLR on a Toya rear

standard over a horizontal rail givimg me about 6x6cm of movement. When I used

the Mamiya 50mm I taped the preview lever fully open and then adjusted the

aperture using the regular lever. I don't need the shutter as the Sigma is used

for shooting. Will I be able to do the same thing on the RZ lens? I know the

shutter is electric but I see an aperture dial on the lenses. What I can't see

is if there is a preview lever that will allow me to set the shutter to the

correct aperture for shooting. My front standard is from a Linhof Technika and

I've mounted a body flange on the lensboard to hold Mamiya lenses. I need

something wide but I also need it to be retrofocal. All the 645 platforms are

too short and Mamiya RB/RZ have the most room of any MF cameras between the film

plane and the flange.

How good or bad is the RB compared to the RZ in 65mm and can I manually set the

aperture on the RZ with no RZ body involved?

If anyone has a good 50mm or 65mm they want to sell I would also like to hear

from them.

thanks,

Mike

Regarding the coverage. The whole reason I am doing this is to attain LF like dof using tilt on the front standard. So while my nominal image size is 6x6 coverage will need to be slightly larger to account for tilt I think.

I'm leaning toward an older angulon 65mm f6.5 (not a super) at this point. There doesn't seem to be much information on their quality but options are few. I could settle for a smaller negative size than 6x6 and enlarge the possibilities somewhat. Super angulons and equivalent lenses from other mfrs all have long rear elements which preclude the ability to get infinity focus because of the mirror tunnel length of 44mm between the body flange and the sensor.

Thanks,

Mike

thanks Edward,

I actually need to keep the lens open since I use the shutter on the Sigma. Do those lenses have a way to keep the lens open other than setting the shutter to "T".

I am sort of hoping one of the 35mm Pentax 645 FA lenses will appear on my doorstep.

Best,

Mike

I have a digital stitching set up based on LF components. I am seeking a wide

lens that has at least 60mm from the film plane to the back of the lens. This

is because my sensor is 44mm inside the mirror tunnel and to allow for bellows,

flanges etc.

It seems that there are a number of lenses in MF that are short and wide and

many of them appear to be pretty flat at the back of the flange but I'm

concerned that the rear elements may need to extend into the body at infinity focus.

My requirements are at least 6x6 coverage and 60mm or less focal length.

6x7-6x9 coverage would be better.

Any suggestions?

The candidates so far are angulon 65mm f6.8 LF lens, Mamiya press 65mm, Mamiya

220 or 330 65mm taking lens and wa-companon 60mm and rodagon-wa 60mm enlarger

lenses.

Any comments on these as regards suitability and quality would be highly

appreciated.

thanks,

Mike

p.s. If you're interested the camera is a toyo rear standard with a Sigma SD14

mounted landscape mode on top of a short horizontal geared rail to give both x

and y stitching movement. That hangs on the back of an olympus bellows rail on

the front of which is a Linhof color kardan front standard with the addition of

a micrometer stage for fine focus. The bellows are homemade from neoprene rubber.

My lenses thus far ar 100mm f2.8 and 135mm f3.5 xenotars.

Hi Bert,

I don't seem to be able to run this from either of my pc's. Has it gone belly up?

thanks,

Mike

<p>

To All,

<p>

Thanks for some very useful answers and information. I am primarily interested in landscapes and seek to use the Scheimpflug as Ellis suggested for landscapes that are planar to a sufficient degree to make it useful. My sample photo could probably have benefited from it somewhat but even using the hyperfocal more carefully would probably have helped. I'm really focused on landscape and nature photography so using a light bulb filament is probably not practical. A tiltshift lens is pretty limiting and more expensive than my current solution and probably limited to about 1 additional image on either side of the center and maybe three rows. The bellows is much more versatile and provides the ability to create images between 2"x3" and 4"x5" consisting of a mosaic of shots stitched flat as Jim Collum is doing here:

<p>

<a href="http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_48/essay.html">http://www.outbackphoto.com/workflow/wf_48/essay.html</a>

<p>

and as Jack Flesher discussed here:

<p>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Dh8W">http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Dh8W</a>

<p>

I had thought about the ground glass and sensor alignment and realized it could be a pretty tough task but the lens flange to sensor distance is known and their already exist sliding backs intended to move a sensor where the groundglass is like those made by Kapturegroup. However, with the Scheimpflug calculator I may not need this at all. I believe from my initial testing that I can find the focus I need through the viewfinder and adjust using Scheimflug and/or hyperfocal adjustments.

<p>

One thing I do find a bit ironic is that with the 127mm ektar I seem to be able to shoot at f22 without any diffraction issues whereas diffraction can sometime be seen at f11 with some of the Sigma 35mm lenses. The irony is that it seems like lenses are always evaluated strictly on sharpness whereas a less sharp lens might be useful because it can be used at smaller stops to gain dof without encountering diffraction. I hadn't thought about this before and don't recall having seen it discussed in what I have read either.

<p>

Mike

<p>

Hi,

<p>

I've read the recent thread on the forum about digital slr on LF

using the Studiotools device. I have built my own similar device

using a Bronica bellows with my Sigma SD10 and two focusing rails to

accomplish the movements of the camera at the back end. Here is a

thread with my first real attempt to create a picture using this

method.

<p>

<a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?

forum=1027&thread=15545279">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readfla

t.asp?forum=1027&thread=15545279</a>

<p>

Note the first two posts are the entire initial posting because it

was too long for the forum and had to be posted in two parts.

The same post is also posted here:

<p>

<a href="http://www.tawbaware.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?

p=16622#16622">http://www.tawbaware.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?

p=16622#16622</a>

<p>

My question concerns focus. The initial reason I am pursuing this

is to get better dof by using front tilt. I demonstrated for myself

that the tilt worked in earlier experiments but didn't use it here.

I am not LF experienced and sort of felt that I would ultimately

want to focus using ground glass then move the Sigma into the same

plane and shoot. However it seems that this is not what folks are

doing. Is it possible to simply estimate the amount of tilt needed

based on experience or are you not using tilt at all? I can focus

easily around the center of the image but as the camera is shifted

away from the center the viewfinder gets to a point where the

subject is almost invisible. I know that as long as the x-y stage

is aligned focus will remain unchanged so that isn't a problem and I

can set up tests to determine how far to shift between shots so I

never have to look through the viewfinder once focus has been set

but the viewfinder on the Sigma will never give me a big enough

patch to see a vertical slice long enough to insure I have good dof

and as I shift down to look at the foreground the image gets dark

and it is difficult to tell if it is in focus or not. A sliding

back with the camera on one end and GG on the other would probably

solve this problem but I'm not sure its necessary and thus this

question.

<p>

To state it more concisely: how do you determine focus and

particularly how much tilt to use to get good dof in the image.

<p>

thanks,

<p>

Mike