D800E vs Sigma SD1 Merrill: the saga begins!

[Vieri Bottazzini]

Hello everyone,

after working with it for a while and getting familiar with my new SD1, I decided time has come to do a comparison between it and my workhorse Nikon cameras, in particular with the D800E - today's king of high-resolution DSLRs. As always, I approached the problem from an user's point of view, so I didn't start shooting charts and the like but I used "real world" subjects and light. I couldn't find any such comparisons on the web, and I thought that publishing one might be of great help for those trying to figure out whether the SD1 is the camera for them or not, and whether they really need to fork out D800E money to get such high IQ out of their camera and camera system.

In the first instalment of what will be a long comparison, I choose to deal with the classic, "fast normal" 50mm f/1.4 lens (35mm f/1.4 on the SD1, of course). My conclusions are very positive for the SD1, which turned out to be a very impressive camera - though with many caveats - and for the 35mm f/1.4 as well: both by themselves and when compared with the King Of Resolution, the D800E equipped with Nikon 50mm f/1.4.
For those interested, you can read my article

HERE

Hope you'll find it interesting. Best,

Vieri

[Manoli]

Really bad form to use this forum as an advertising conduit to your blog and be asking for a monthly donation of $4.99 on top !
If you want to advertise clog up another forum.

[JohnBrew]

He may be a shameless promoter (there are many in the world of photography), but there is good work in this piece and the man is a very good photographer. He likes donations but the article is free.

[RFPhotography]

Difficult to compare when different lenses have to be used, but the Sigma does appear to perform well.  The colour shifting of the Sigma is off-putting and odd.  The Sigma also doesn't do video, which is important to some.  $2k for that camera is too much.  When you consider a D7100 is nearly half the price, the Sigma makes even less sense.  Sigma's lenses are, generally, good value.  Their cameras, not so much.  Also consider that it's not just $2k for the camera but then another few thousand for lenses.  $900 for the 35. f1.4 or $800 for the new 18-35 f1.8, $1300 for a 70-200 f2.8 and $900 for a 24-70 f2.8 means you're north of $5k just to get started with a decent kit.  Nice if you've got the coin to be able to do it but it does start to creep into the 'more money than brains' category.

And John is right, very nice photography.