Sigma's DP2 compact with DSLR-sized sensor gets even better
By Thomas Ricker 
posted September 23rd 2008 4:49AM
posted September 23rd 2008 4:49AM
[Thanks, David Z.]
posted September 23rd 2008 4:49AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Hopefully they've sped it up. As long as this doesn't take forever to shoot a photo like the DP1, I think Sigma may have a winner on their hands.
Possibly, but since the DP1 launch we've had micro four-thirds come into being, and the DP2 still has a fixed lens...
Interesting.... What's the color accuracy, high ISO noise, dynamic range, etc. like on the DP1? Because this thing might be worth my money.
41mm lens? Not interchangable? Seriously? I'd get one of those microFT over this any day.
+1 for Micro Four Thirds
Similar sensor size, more compact body, changeable lens and usable "Auto" mode :)
Shinigami, you left LOWER IMAGE QUALITY off your list...
Wow..i think the features was better!
Weirdest usb drives ever seen
lol
Hopefully that F2.8 should improve things...although a quick look on Flickr shows you that the original is pretty impressive already. The compact camera market is getting interesting for the first time in years: it'll be interesting to see how the Sigma stacks up against the new Micro 4/3s.
Interesting!
I think the biggest news is the "True II image processor". This probably means faster image capture. What about video? Perhaps the True II image processor does a better job shooting video too.
It may have a fixed lens but I for one think this is a much more usable one. I love the idea of it being a fixed focal length for quality and the extra stop of aperture is also making this beast much more attractive to me. I really like the sound of this camera now but it will still hinge on it's ability to AF or at least be able to usably MF. It also needs to have 0 shutter lag (minus AF of course). Woow, a nice realistic and high quality 4.6mp full RGB RAW file with a decent lens in a compact shell.... awesome (and I don't say that often about new camera tech). Well done Sigma!!!
Yeah, but the fixed focal length does limit the camera. I like the idea of fixed focal lengths, but usually you can then change the lens if it doesn't work. 41mm is something I barely shoot at, I'd rather like a 28mm fixed lens.
I don't know, 41mm (35mm equivalent) seems fine by me. My 30mm Sigma spends more time on my Canon XSi than any other lens and that sticks it at 48mm (35mm equivalent). There have been times when I wished I had a little more FOV so this might be a great walk-around camera for me.
Uh, you're welcome, but thanks for what?
Personally, this sounds far better for most shooting situations. If you want to carry this in your bag or pocket to take photos of people, 41 mm is far better than 28 mm. For landscapes, it's arguable. Wider isn't always better for landscapes, as it captures too wide at times. I guess you could shoot wide and crop later, but nothing is better than getting it right the first time. Besides, this camera is 14 MP in name only. It's really 4.7 MP (14 MP divided by 3 since it's a 3 layer sensor), but since it doesn't have to interpolate colours using neighbouring pixels, the image quality is going to be similar to that of a 7-8 MP camera. Also, the quality of the photos themselves tend to look really nice and sharp (if you shoot RAW).
The problem with some of the u4/3 models like the Panasonic G1 is that the zoom lenses that everyone wants would make the camera far too big to put it in your pocket. Add the electronic viewfinder (EVF), and the camera is the same size as those "bridge" cameras which are between DSLRs, and regular point & shoots in size. Anything that's bigger than my pocket isn't pocketable, so even if the lenses are a tiny bit smaller than DSLR lenses, who cares? May as well get an Olympus E-420 and a pancake lens.
If what you're looking for is a u4/3 camera, and you ONLY intend to use pancake lenses in order to make the camera pocketable, this Sigma DOES compete with those. I'd rather see where u4/3 goes, and I think Sigma blew it by not introducing a DP-2 with 3 interchangeable prime lenses (with more to come). Keep the lens design the same, but make them detachable.
No, the SD14/DP1/2 sensor does not just match a 8MP camera.
In most cases it EXCEEDS *any* point and shoot compact that has whatever megamarketingpixels you want.
In low ISO modes (
Sorry, the comment got trunctuated. Here's another attempt. :D
-----
No, the SD14/DP1/2 sensor does not just match a 8MP camera.
In most cases it EXCEEDS *any* point and shoot compact that has whatever megamarketingpixels you want.
In ISO modes lower than 400 it gives you the quality of a high-end, full frame DSLR, such as the EOS 5D I. You don't even need to compare APS-C or 4/3. It beats them all.
And then there's the magnificent film "response" that no normal cameras actually achieve. The Foveon sensors are one of the rare ones to not have their data processed/smudged to remove "artifacts" that are a result of interpolation.
u4/3 is not viable, IMHO for a real photo enthusiast. The crop factor's a staggering 2x, and the lenses are going to be expensive for what they offer- none of them will be as sharp as Sigma's built-in prime lenses. It will sell to the masses, but I know what I'm going to buy. :)
Well said. I'm in line for this camera because of the lens, sensor and size. I don't enjoy using zoom lenses myself, prime glass is the way to go. I do hope that the raw write speed is much better. Can't wait to hear them announce the launch date.
Mikeo, that is simply not true (though it is exactly how Sigma markets the Foveon),
While Sigma would like you to believe that Foveon captures up to 3 x as much detail, that would only be true if every single picture in the image was in color, and that is for all intents and purposes never the case. There is much more black and white pixels even in a "color" photo, and that reduces you number of "effective" pixels, making the true resolution closer to Ian's claim of 8 MP.
You are right that the larger sensor size does provide it a certain benefit over MOST point and shoot camera, but you are just blowing smoke trying to lay claim that it has anywhere near the capabilities of the 5D (even with the 5D being three years old).
As to the magnificent "response" time, if that was the case, then why is it that the camera shoots 3 fps?
Foveon, came out to much fanefare, but has yet to live up to what it promised. Sigma, while making superior lenses has been thus far abysmal as making a camera. They have been slow, underpowered, overpriced and ergonomic disasters.
the problem of dp1 was the ultra slow auto focus even in sunny so-cal day time & even worse raw processing. dp1 practically shut itself down while writing raw to sd card.
if sigma improved the auto focus's reliability & speed to near the other dslr & raw writing speed, i might consider it again.
even with a big lens, it's noise was there...a lot more than it should have
41mm is darn close to 43mm, the perspective of the human eye. Sounds ideal for truth-seeking photojournalists of the Henri Cartier Bresson school.
In the 1960s through 1980s, advanced amateurs were perfectly fine buying and using a camera with a non-interchangeable fixed lens. Nowadays, we're hooked on zoom...and let's face it, the DP2 will cost a lot of dough, making the proposition of a single-focal-length camera a more daunting choice. It seems that people will accept a camera whose lens can't zoom, or a camera whose lens can't be swapped out, but not both.
Most DP2 users will shoot in RAW. A "new processor" nearly always means "better in-camera JPEGs," making it irrrelevant.
For those interested in this unique camera, here is a 22 page review of the DP1:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/
A compact camera with a full-frame Foveon sensor is a truly great concept, but the DP1 wasn't perfect, largely due to the processor and the software. Here's the conclusion:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigmadp1/page21.asp
Hopefully, the "True II image processor" will address some of those problems.
I can't wait until dpreview get their hands on the DP2!
:-D
It is not a 14 MP camera, no matter how much Sigma spins it.
I'd rather have a micro 4/3 system camera.
It's true that this is not a 14mp camera... It's, at last, a true resolution of 4.7mp but at the same time. A 5D, D3, D700 are not true 12mp cameras and the 5D mkII, 1Ds mkIII are not true 21mp cameras etc. etc. You have to give it to Sigma for claiming it's better than it is because most people do not know that every other camera manufacturer interpolates their colours when Sigma do not.
So given the current state of marketing dependant, undereducated consumers in regards to image tech I do not blame Sigma at all for saying this is a 14mp camera.
Engadget has this wrong. It's a 35mm equiv. lens.
you got it wrong. It is equivalent to a 41mm lens on a 35mm film camera
You're right. I misread an earlier press release. The X3 sensor has about a 1.69X crop, so yes, 24.2 sounds right for the actual focal length.
Will Engadget or somebody else just shoot me an email when a camera comes out that:
a. Can shoot non-blurry, non-grainy pictures in low light conditions like concerts where a flash won't work anyway.
b. Fits in my pocket.
Get a D3 and bigger pocket
I think the changes to the SD15 is more than just a tweak were it counts. They made it more difficult to do many things that were simple to do.
It's good not to change the body's model.
Solution of moire that happens because of Naoiri light of source of light.
And, an expectation for the improvement of QVGA.