I'll be interested in seeing others' responses to Bernard's suggestion that the image quality of the DP2M may be "a tad overhyped." My response is, "Compared to what?"
No intend to start a heated discussion with this comment.
I need to spend more time with the DP2m and I like it!
This comment is coming from the review of some first files shot on tripod and with the best possible AF/manual focus (100% live view) I could achieve in pretty easy conditions. I like the files, but I don't really see clearly superior pixel quality compared to what my D800 delivers when converted with the best converters, like C1 Pro 7 and optimally sharpened.
Now, this may be the result of me not using optimally the Sigma raw converter. I am also using only the very best primes from Nikon (24mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, 300 f2.
, Zeiss ZF (50 and 100mm makro) and Leica (180 f2.8 APO) on my D800 at they optimal aperture, so the comparison may not be fair, but reading comments in this thread and elsewhere I was expecting to be blown away when looking at files at 100% on screen. So far I see nice files, but I am not blown away.... yet.
What I need to do is:
- identify the sharpest aperture of the Sigma lens, I guess it is going to be around f4.5-5.6,
- improve the way I fine tune focus in live view,
- identify the best sharpening routine (involving probably both the Sigma raw converter + other sharpening in PS)
- receive my bracket and test again with the camera firmly attached to the tripod instead of just resting on top of it.
Now, all that may help extract more, but it may not be how I end up using the DP2m.