Sigma's DP1 with DSLR-sized sensor reviewed, raises bar

It's always worth noting when a reviewer says that a device, "sets a new standard for image quality in a compact camera." That's PopPhoto's conclusion after testing the Sigma DP1 with a DSLR-sized, FOVEON X3 CMOS sensor packing 14 megapixels. The image quality and color accuracy remained "stellar" right up to ISO 800 where other compacts shackled with tiny sensors begin to lose control of the noise. The biggest nits are with the sluggish 9-zone AF system, an unsophisticated flash, lack of image stabilization, and delays between shots. Fix those while whittling-back the $800 street price a bit and PopPhoto believes the DP1 could go mainstream.

[Via Photography Blog]

[CB17 @ Mar 27th 2008 7:11AM]

Amazon says it has no optical zoom. Is that true? That'd be pretty lame if you ask me.

Still pretty encouraging if you ask me.

[jonouk @ Mar 27th 2008 8:11AM]

clearly this camera is not aimed at a market that you fit into. It's a "photographer's" compact, not a point and shoot

[Iain @ Mar 27th 2008 8:11AM]

It's a prime lens.
Prime lenses are generally far better than zoom ones, though this is just an f4 lens, which kind of defeats the point.

[mike @ Mar 27th 2008 7:24AM]

The "tiny sensor" comment in inaccurate. The sensor is actually APS-C (i.e. SLR) sized; the relatively poor low-light performance is symptomatic of the Foveon sensor.

The concept is awesome. I'd kill for something like this with better low-light performance (e.g. one of the lower-noise Canon or Sony sensors and a fast high-quality 1.4, or even 2.8, lens) and optical image stabilization. I'd even pay the $1K price.

[T-Bone @ Mar 27th 2008 7:53AM]

Read the post again. Engadget said the OTHER sensors were tiny.

Is it worth it having a DSLR sensor in a subpar compact body when you can buy an actual DSLR for the same price? Probably not.

[Temple @ Mar 27th 2008 9:34AM]

I'd love for the lenses to be interchangeable.

Like the old rangefinder cameras like the Leicas, Contax G-series, Canon 7s, and Nikon S1/S2/S3. I know Leica makes a digital M8 but that's $5,500(Epson/Cosina also made a Leica compatible digital called the R-D1, but thats also two grand as well).

[mike @ Mar 27th 2008 6:26PM]

T-Bone, there are plenty of us who have expensive bodies (e.g. my D3 and D200) and glass (e.g. 200-400mm f4) who would love to have a relatively small high quality "point & shoot." SLR bodies are also counter-productive for street shooters, etc.; We need something discreet.

[François @ Mar 27th 2008 8:08AM]

Mike: the poor low-light performance comment was referring to other (small-sensor) compact cameras, not to the Sigma. The Sigma has an APS-C size sensor, and has good low-light performance (as far as I know). It is limited to ISO800, but performs decently all the way up to this value. (unlike the useless ISO3200 modes on cameras with 1/2.5" sensors). Unfortunately the lens' maximum aperture is F/4, which negates some of sensor's low-light performance.

CB17: Unfortunately this camera has no optical zoom, but does have a good quality 28mm equivalent lens. It is a niche market, agreed.

And agreed, the AF, shot-to-shot shooting rate and flash are not on par with the market leaders.

The biggest breakthrough is not the fact that it has a big sensor, but rather the way in which the sensor works (no interpolation!). Now if only Canon and Nikon would start to put Foveon sensors in their DSLRs...

[z @ Mar 27th 2008 8:03AM]

I agree, a real

[z @ Mar 27th 2008 8:06AM]

sorry the lesser sign bugs in comments...
smaller than 2.8 lens would make it interesting. And shall we note it really is a 4Mpx sensor (three layers for colors)...

[Cassini @ Mar 27th 2008 8:34AM]

There would *definitely* be a market for higher priced P&S's. Why has this been overlooked by the industry? Manufacturers should really begin taking a look at this segment seriously.

Minimum specs (and keep in mind, this is high-end) would need to be:

- Low-Light DSLR Sensors (8-10mp is plenty, even for a big sensor - at least on a P&S, anyway)
- OIS
- Multi-zone and Face/Motion Detection AF System
- Auto Red-Eye Correction
- f/2.8 5x Zoom Lens
- VGA 30/60 fps Video/Audio Capability and Stereo Mics
- A strong, adjustable, intelligent flash
- High-res 3" LCD Screen (like on the Nikon D300) with 100% coverage
- Attractive and intuitive menu system, ergonomics, and button layout
- High overall speed (with power on, AF, shutter, and write)
- microSDHC or just SDHC
- Titanium chassis (or something similar - no cheap plastic!)
- Great battery life

- And lotsa pretty blue lights! (Joking...)


This would be very expensive, no doubt. But I would love to have a pocketable (or fairly pocketable - no bricks, though!) P&S with these features. People want more DSLR features (speed, photo quality, AF, etc.) without having to lug around a camera the size of a shoe box, and they'd be willing to pay for it. I know I would.

[Bluppy2 @ Mar 27th 2008 8:46AM]

A 5x zoom range (which could be 10-50mm or 30-150mm, so "5 times zoom" says nothing over actual zoom performance) in a compact with a APS-C sized sensor AND with a 2.8 aperture would be physically impossible... Such lenses don't even exist for SLR camera's, and if they would, they would be huge and heavy.

Second, if you want all these features: buy an SLR. It may not be pocket-friendly, but it is the only way to keep good ergonomics and such a huge feature pack possible. What you describe is the holy grail and will possibly never be made because it is simply impossible. :)

[Iain @ Mar 27th 2008 9:29AM]

Bluppy's right - have you ever seen a telephoto f2.8 lenses with Image Stabilisation? They're definitely not 'pocketable'.

The only way to get a 'pocketable' f2.8 5x zoom lens (say ~28-140mm) would be to make the sensor tiny, which would just defeat the point of having such a good lens.

[Cassini @ Mar 27th 2008 9:41AM]

5x zoom in my mind would be 35mm-175mm

And you're right. I should've provided a range for the aperture. Naturally, we couldn't expect f/2.8 throughout the whole range, and especially not in a P&S - that would be impossible.

And I'm not talking about a full frame sensor, naturally.

Of course, the whole point of my post is to illustrate the desire for a much, MUCH higher quality P&S with zoom. Of course you're going to get the best quality out of a DSLR, but the whole point was that I don't want to have to lug one around everywhere just to get much greater photo quality. Manufacturers can certainly push the envelope much further with compact cameras and IMO, I'm certain people would be willing to pay the additional cost to have access to it.

[Iain @ Mar 27th 2008 10:49AM]

The closest actual, real camera to what you want is a Sony R1: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Sony/sony_dscr1.asp
They never took off really because they were quite expensive and since D-SLRs have dropped so much since then, you're unlikely to ever see anything else like it.


As for the specs you've listed, you'll never see them on a 'compact'/P'n'S camera.

[F3 @ Mar 27th 2008 12:58PM]

That all seems to fly except the 2.8 5x lens... There's nothing small about a 2.8 zoom, ever.

[Cassini @ Mar 27th 2008 1:41PM]

Never say never, Iain. People want quality, technology marches on, and you can't stuff a DSLR into your pocket.

[Iain @ Mar 27th 2008 5:10PM]

And if the camera were to have everything you've listed, you wouldn't be able to stuff it in your pocket either.
Did you look at the R1? It's D-SLR sized, definitely not 'pocketable'.

On top of which, a camera like the one you want would cost a huge amount - more than a low-end D-SLR.
Ok, with a D-SLR you have to buy the lens separately but you can then keep the lens when you replace the body, so in the long run it would be a better investment.

Fixed-lens, prosumer have been in decline for years.
They're prohibitively expensive, they don't perform to the same degree as D-SLRs and they aren't as flexible.

[rcappo @ Mar 27th 2008 5:14PM]

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMC-LZ5S-Digital-Camera-Stabilized/dp/B000E168E2

This is the camera I use. I wish it had a better, bigger low-light sensor in it. But I am happy with a smaller LCD if it means the camera is smaller. I also don't need the ability to take tons of pictures in one second like a DSLR. But I would like quality lenses and other features that DSLRs have.

But there are times like mountain biking, hiking, and going to the beach where a P&S is much easier to carry around than a DSLR. You can't get good pictures if you don't have your camera with you. But there is a market for people who want high quality pictures.

[Iain @ Mar 27th 2008 7:03PM]

With all due respect, as good as I'm sure that camera is, it's nowhere near the sort of level of specification that we're talking about.

[tallgrave @ Mar 27th 2008 8:56AM]

I also do to this article by seeing agreement.

[Stew @ Mar 27th 2008 10:00AM]

Please fix the spelling of "stellar"... it's spelled correctly in the article.

[nathan.wong @ Mar 27th 2008 10:16AM]

If it has a non-zoom prime lens, then why is it so slow? I mean, come on, an aperture of F/4? It should be at least F/2 if not F/1.4. Geez! And the price for a non-zoom, slow lens, no viewfinder camera at $800? Uh, no thanks.

[DirtHerder @ Mar 27th 2008 11:37AM]

Looking at the sample pictures, I'm not all too impressed.

Especially when looking at the 100% crops, the images don't look that much better than some of the present and past compacts out there.

[dave @ Mar 27th 2008 11:51AM]

That's very interesting. What other compacts are you comparing it to at full res?

[isjoni @ Mar 27th 2008 10:47AM]

It's a boutique camera. Like Leica, only cheaper and only one slow lens (a Slow prime lens, thats stupid).
and even though it has 'DSLR's size ccd' , ISO 800 from this camera is very noisy compared to real DSLR. And slow auto focus is just not right for a $800 camera.

[dave @ Mar 27th 2008 10:53AM]

Actually, ya'll should flickr this camera, as many of the low light hand held shots are pretty damn amazing. Although it's no Ricoh GRD, it definitely has a following already. ALL of the cameras have sold out for North America...it was released last week. Amazon is back ordered up until May-June...I know because I was on that list of ppl whose preorder was bumped back several months.

Also, if any of you are seriously considering this camera, every review I've come across have been positive and some praising it as revolutionary...check out dpreview and go to the sigma forums. You'll see a lot of sample pics from owners and their opinions...all of which have exceeded my expectations of this camera. Funny thing was that I hated this camera based on it's paper specs...I've commented on it since it was deemed vaporware - slow lens, will have too much grain, blah blah. I was wrong and now I want one. I don't really care to wait until June though to snag one...so I'll probably get me the GRD II since I've had my eye on it for a while.

For those of you who don't use manual controls, and only rely on automatic P&S settings to get good pictures...this camera isn't for you. This camera is made for a niche market aimed towards users who know how to get the most out of different lighting situations, f stops, shutter speeds and enjoy having complete control of their hardware.

[nathan.wong @ Mar 27th 2008 12:57PM]

I don't doubt the low light capabilities, but if they made the lens faster than F/4 can you imagine the shutter speeds you'd be getting in really low light? As it stands they probably used F4 so the depth of field isn't too shallow so their autofocus system didn't need to be as accurate as say a SLR.

[dave @ Mar 27th 2008 10:59AM]

Also, there are rumors that Sigma is also working on two other versions of this camera...one of them will be a fixed lens at f 2....that should be nice and snappy for you low light shooters.

[Bad Beaver @ Mar 27th 2008 11:20AM]

Stella! Stellaaaaa!
SCNR

Too bad this thing is more than $1200 over here, 800 would be a steal. I agree with the other posters arguing for higher quality compacts. There is no use in a compact camera if the pictures are painful to look at. Also, I'd love to see a return of the viewfinder on these things.

[yao @ Mar 27th 2008 11:22AM]

"DSLR" isn't a sensor size. DSLR sensor sizes range from APS-C to 35mm. if you're talking about a specific camera, why not note it's actual sensor size?

[Bad Beaver @ Mar 27th 2008 11:26AM]

...btw. I realize there is the Sigma VF-11 viewfinder, but it's another $200 on top.

[dave @ Mar 27th 2008 11:34AM]

I've heard that the inexpensive Voigtlander view finders (28mm frame lines) are easy to find and pretty high in quality. Chek it ;)

[DirtHerder @ Mar 27th 2008 12:13PM]

For example, you might want to take a look at pics taken by the various prosumer cams that have come down the pipe over the years (Sony V3, Canon Gs, etc).

PBase is a good choice for this (flickr's camera search is OK... just wish it wasn't so limited... though maybe I just haven't figured it out entirely).

I guess I expected that the images from the Sigma would be sharper.

Perhaps in order to achieve it's low-noise, it is applying some noise reduction? Arono, I'm no expert. Just giving my IMHOs.

[dave @ Mar 27th 2008 12:22PM]

Yeah, flickr has tons of images, search dp1 and you're good to go. The big difference on this camera is the sensor size and raw writing capabilities (when converted to TIFF from raw, it interpolates to 15-16 megapixels). Most compacts don't have this ability...the key here though is shooting in raw to get the mostout of post processing.

[DirtHerder @ Mar 27th 2008 12:33PM]

The sensor size is certainly impressive... But again, I guess I just expected more from the use of a larger sensor.

Hrm, some of those prosumers have RAW capabilities (I miss that segment of cameras can you tell? ^_^)... though they tend to be kind of slow (shot to shot) when shooting in that mode.

How's the Sigma's RAW performance?

As for flickr: Do you mean just enter DP1 into the search field, instead of using the camera finder? The "camera finder" is what I find limiting... but good point. I should just use the base search functions.

[dave @ Mar 27th 2008 12:43PM]

The glass on the camera, from the reviews I've read is pretty damn amazing. Sharpness can always be controlled in PP, so it's all good.

The writing speed on raw images is pretty good, but the card needs to be at least a class 6 sdhc card (2-2.5 sec write speed). Anything slower, class 4 or 2, will double/triple your write times.

Yup, just enter dp1 or sigma dp1 in search and you'll see thousands of images that have already been posted (Japan had this camera before NA did). Lots of good stuff. Most of the shots look 'SLR' in quality...i'm still amazed by this thing.

[DirtHerder @ Mar 27th 2008 1:56PM]

But couldn't that be said for noise as well?

I mean if one camera has more noise but sharper pics... and another one has less noise but softer pics, don't they pretty much amount to the same thing?

No doubt that DP1 seems competent enough... I just wonder about it being a real benchmark in image quality. It seems more like a benchmark in fitting an SLR sized sensor into a compact camera body.

So when someone says SLR quality images, what does that really mean? Is it the characteristic shallow depths of field (that's what most laymen seem to respond to most when they make that comment). Low noise relative to ISO settings? Dynamic range? And then how does that relate to the DP1 (noise wise it doesn't really seem to stack up, dynamic range seems comparable to other high end compacts).

I've gotten such compliments (well not really compliments.. .more questions "were those taken with an DSLR"), for pictures taken with much older cameras with much smaller sensors.

Sorry, I hope I'm not coming off as a judgemental jerk or something. I'm just really curious about what makes the DP1 such a watershed.

[phez @ Mar 27th 2008 1:04PM]

Bait for elitists. Seriously, try and defend this thing all you want; you're an idiot if you're going to spend $800+ if indeed, all you're going to do is go around town and "point and shoot" (I mean, that is really why you'd buy this, no?).

You want to talk specs like a gearhead? Sure. $800 bucks for f4, fixed lens. Sigma quality? Sure, those ISO100 shots look superb. Like shit, the sensor is three layered, 4.7MP, and they're marketing it as 14MP?

Not my market? Yea, truly.

[dave @ Mar 27th 2008 1:28PM]

Thats about 5MP per color layer>> the same way as film records colors. RAWS, when converted to TIFFS, sit at 15-16MP. If your shooting jpegs, then your screwed...but this camera was never meant to shoot jpegs exclusively ... it's designed as a photographic tool, thus RAWs.

Elitist? Perhaps not. The new trend for an extremely high quality point and shoot camera is not a new idea. The best film P&S camera's are now cult classics that resale for almost the same amount they were retail...I'm talking about the Minolta TC-1's, Ricoh GR1V, Contax T3. Why? Because these camera's produce some of the best images bar none and are camera 101 for journalist shooting, street photography.

The DP1 is not perfect by any means. IT IS another excellent step up to a high quality camera that rivals slr's...this is a professionals dream. To have a backup camera, that fits in your pocket, that will produce excellent results. A good trusty camera.

Is the IQ (image quality) better than any other compact out there...the reviews say so..I've seen them. I don't think this is a boutique item or an overpriced P&S, but a high quality photographic tool that will start a positive trend with other camera makers. I hope to see a revision of this camera soon with a faster lens.

[DirtHerder @ Mar 27th 2008 4:09PM]

"photographic tool that will start a positive trend with other camera makers"

I very much hope so.

I was seriously bummed when camera companies started moving away from fully featured, highly manual, awesome quality compacts (though I guess I use that term a little loosely). Like when Sony killed its V line, or when Canon started neutering its G line.

I have no interest (at the moment) of going DSLR (yes I know they are regarded as the ultimate in digital photography tools... but I kind of disagree a little), so here's to hoping to a reversal of that trend.

[Fergus Kane @ Mar 27th 2008 3:42PM]

Seem to be a lot of misconceptions here.

APERTURE. You just can't get a small 1.2 / 1.4 prime that has good quality. I shoot club photos with a DSLR and a 1.4 35mm and can get great images, but frankly it still takes ability as well. Shooting at 1.4 requires considerable skill as the depth of focus is so small. Sigma obviously would have liked to include a tiny lens that was sharp from f1, but reality stepped in.

PURPOSE: This camera is an everyday camera for those who are on the move, but want the same quality they could get with a film compact - completely impossible until now. Those who don't notice the poor quality on their phones / digicompact don't need it.

MEGAPIXELS. A 12MP canon has 4M pixels of each colour that are combined to essentially provide 4M full colour pixels. the different sensors use different tech to essentially get the same endproduct. However, the foveon is reputed to have a better (or at least unique) quality of image (in a similar way to how Velvia differed from different film).

NO ZOOM: Having no zoom can be a pain, but it can also make you a better photographer. It makes you think more carefully about framing and connects you with your environment.

This camera is obviously a compromise, If you can't justify it fine, but, if you don't want one, you may just be lacking the soul of a phototographer!

(thank you Sigma for having the guts to at least try this)

[Iain @ Mar 27th 2008 5:51PM]

It requires a level of skill to take good pictures no matter what speed the lens, so what's your point?

It's a fixed lens so a fastest aperture of f4 is really very poor. f2.8 should be considered the slowest sensible aperture for a camera like this and given the price-tag attached, even faster would be better.
Also, given the obvious target customer base for a camera like this, then even if it added a bit of bulk to the camera, then they should've produced something faster as most potential customers would likely appreciate the superior lens much more than the slightly smaller size.

As for your comment about it not being possible to produce a small fast lens of decent quality, this isn't a standard compact camera sensor, it's an APS-C sized sensor, so the lens is quite large anyway, so that isn't a factor.
If, however, you mean that fast prime lenses can't be produced that are any smaller than, for example, the Canon 35mm f1.4 L lens, then you're wrong. Ok, lenses faster than f2 won't be incredibly compact but if you look at Nikon's old manual-focus lenses, there are 28 and 35mm f2 lenses that are really no size at all and they were designed to work with full 35mm film frames, not an APS-C sized sensor. True, adding AF to the lens will bulk it out a little but it's certainly possible to have produced a faster lens for the DP1 without adding any size to the unit.



The rest of your points are valid though, save for the comment at the end about lacking the soul of a photographer - I would never buy one of these but not because of any problem with my soul, just that in my eyes it's too much of a compromise and I'd rather put up with the extra bulk of my 20D with my 17-35mm f2.8 L lens in return for the better flexibility.

[whatsdamattau @ Mar 27th 2008 11:42PM]

Exactly. A Leica M F/1.4 or F/2 is really, really tiny. No reason why they couldn't use one of those lenses.

[Charles @ Apr 24th 2008 12:07AM]

It is true that the Foveon sensor only has 4.7M pixel locations, but it has 4.7M red locations, 4.7M green locations and 4.7M blue locations. A 10MP Bayer filter sensor has 2.5M red locations, 5.0M green locations and 2.5M blue locations. There is no spacial interpolation for the Foveon sensor. You must interpolate 2/3 of the data when using a Bayer filter sensor.

As others have stated the 14MP Foveon has a resolution about the same as a 10MP Bayer filter camera. This is true for green, but the Foveon is much better in red and blue. When it comes to image quality the Foveon has some major advantages, but light sensitivity is not one of them.

A note about the SD-14, it is the best NIR digital camera you can buy.

[Jesse S @ Mar 27th 2008 2:13PM]

I'd rather have a d40 or XTi at that price.

[imageburn13 @ Mar 27th 2008 2:44PM]

This is very similar to my Lumix DCM LX2, the first PAS with a widescreen 10 meg sensor. Even looks the same. The LX2 had horrible noise above 100 iso unfortunately, but this makes me think they used the lumix as a template.

[neurosceptic @ Apr 8th 2008 7:41AM]

Iain

Fair enough, a bit overdramitic with the 'soul' aspect of things. I certainly want one though. I'm hopefully off to do a bit af travelling soon, so am thinking of getting one for that. I remember really regretting hiking with my old 10D and two lenses - partly because of the weight and partly because in the cold, extremely wet weather, it had to be protected inside my bag and was difficult to pull out quickly for shots.

If it really is currently possible to produce a much faster lens in a similar form factor (I'm probably ignorant due to the use of Canan's perhaps unnecessarily large DSLRs and lenses - and lack of use of older, classic lenses), I hope someone does it soon.

[TC @ Mar 28th 2008 4:05AM]

If it were a 35mm 2.8 lens I would be tempted. I'm still not sure about the quality of the images; from the samples, they don't seem particularly outstanding. I do kind of wish that Panasonic would do a cheap version of the Leica M8. But for now, I'll hang on to my Canon powershot.

[blork @ Mar 31st 2008 1:54PM]

Don't think for a minute that Sigma didn't put a lot of time and thought into that lens. If they could have fit it with a 1.4 or 2.0 they would have, but that would have made the lens bigger than the form factor they were shooting for.

It is completely pointless to say things like "if I were going to spend $800 I'd just get a [insert DSLR model]." That's missing the point. The DP1 is a whole different kind of camera; it is not intended to be a catch-all that appeals to everyone. It is a specialty camera for people who want exceptionally high image quality in a very portable package.

Also, it is a camera for people who want a CAMERA and not just a gadget that takes pictures, which is the best way to describe most point & shoot cameras. All those buttons and silly gizmos and layers of menus just get in the way of taking pictures.