Sigma DP Quattro

[eronald]

Bart,

 I think we may have missed something: the top layer may be diffusing what gets passed down, so they don't get visible  color  Moiré because effectively chroma is low-pass filtered. They will still get some slow moving color casts though, probably.  Essentially they have a hirez blue chan image with painted over color. Which actually corresponds a bit to human perception. When I took Hunt's course, he showed  a monochrome hirez image and a low rez color overlay. Wonderful old man btw.

Edmund

It's unknown, as is the lens used. These web comparisons are usually flawed in one way or another. A bit of post-processing, even on these JPEG crops, makes a world of difference, and can make either crop look better than the other.

The DP Quattro images do seem to look good at the ISOs I've seen results from. Of course, it requires more from a camera to make it suitable for a given task. Getting the shot to begin with, is likely to be more important than how the image looks under ideal circumstances.

Cheers,
Bart

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Bart,

 I think we may have missed something: the top layer may be diffusing what gets passed down, so they don't get visible  color  Moiré because effectively chroma is low-pass filtered. They will still get some slow moving color casts though, probably.  Essentially they have a hirez blue chan image with painted over color. Which actually corresponds a bit to human perception.

Hi Edmund,

The 'top layer' of the Foveon Quattro sensor captures mostly a monochrome image, good for luminance resolution. The lower layers (indeed with lower sampling density of a more blurred signal) are somewhat biased towards Green and Red dominant signals respectively. It takes a huge amount of color separation to achieve some saturation. Binning of the top layer's color component will allow it to be closer in resolution to the two deeper sampling layers. So a lot a math is used to achieve an image, making it so different from more traditional Bayer CFA designs, that it remain unlikely that non-Sigma converters will natively support the Foveon Raw format. The dedicated Sigma converter should be able to do a better job.

When I took Hunt's course, he showed  a monochrome hirez image and a low rez color overlay. Wonderful old man btw.

Indeed, the lower Chrominance resolution is of lower importance than the Luminance resolution, something that has always been denied by Foveon worshippers, but is now considered a very clever thing that also allows to reduce file size.

Cheers,
Bart

[hjulenissen]

When I took Hunt's course, he showed  a monochrome hirez image and a low rez color overlay. Wonderful old man btw.

And this is exploited in pretty much every "natural input" still-image and video codec out there.

Your average JPEG image will (hopefully) have some sensible scaling of the CbCr channels before/after subsampling by a factor of (up to) 2x2. The Foveon is perhaps more like a critical box-car filter. Which is still (in a Nyquistian way) more elegant than the plain sample dropping of the Bayer scheme.

If Foveon was available at the same sensel density, with the same color accuracy and high-ISO performance, and at the same price point as Bayer, it would probably have been great.

-h

[BernardLanguillier]

Do we know it isn't a mirrorless camera?

Indeed, it could be the a7r.

Cheers,
Bernard

[MrSmith27]

I don't know, there is something wrong with these samples. Detail is there, but look at the greenish noise all over the feathers. Could do better, let's wait for more samples.

The samples look a lot like JPGs. Now you need to know two things:

1) The JPGs from the DP Merrill look the same and show the same kinds of "errors". In fact they look a whole magnitude worse than raw images taken with the Merrill which have been converted into JPGs later. All that smudgy noise is virtually non-existent if you shoot raw.

2) Sigma is certifiable stupid when it comes to marketing. It is absolutely possible that they decided "Hey we have this awesome new sensor so why not not take raws but instead post some in-camera jpgs."

In any case I would be wondering if anybody can give a qualified statement on how the quattro performs better than the merrill. i would suppose it does, but then again it's also 2.5 times the price. So if the quattro is -slightly- better it would be a hard sell, cause for the same money that a dp2 quattro costs you can pretty much get the dp1,2 and 3 merrills....

[palpman]

I guess the main advantage of Quattros will be increased dynamic range, 14 bit vs 12 if I'm not wrong.

[Foveonic]

I am a DP2 Merrill owner with the following observations in regard to Quattro advantages among others :

Autofocus speed
Processing write times
More crop capability
Battery Life
Dynamic range & tonality
Increased social activity (People asking you what the hell that ugly thing mounted on your tripod is..?)

Should I sell my DP2M....?  No, the shortcomings of the Sigma's have never affected what I do.....so the improvements of the Quattro really don't offer enough for me.  But... new buyers that have been on the bench due to these shortcomings might be persuaded to join the Sigma high resolution crowd.  This camera should help perpetuate the Sigma line.  I hope....

F

DP2Merrill
SPP
LR4
T-Bird

[Alan Smallbone]

Sigma is doing a try before you buy. http://www.sigmaphoto.com/sigma-dp2-test-shoot I signed up and got an email from them that mine will ship on Monday, need to have it back to them by the middle of the following week. It will be interesting to try it.

Alan

[francois]

Sigma is doing a try before you buy. http://www.sigmaphoto.com/sigma-dp2-test-shoot I signed up and got an email from them that mine will ship on Monday, need to have it back to them by the middle of the following week. It will be interesting to try it.

Alan

Alan,
Let us know how it goes!

[janus]

I signed up too, camera will arrive next Tuesday or Wednesday; will post some thoughts here later on.

I am especially interested in how large I can print a panoramic crop: 13x39 inches will be no problem, but 16x48'' might be stretching it a little? An initial test from a RAW file posted on the net seems to indicate that such a print may very well look fantastic, if you keep the proper viewing distance in mind.

Will test and compare to regular DP2M, which I have.

[pmmtch]

In Germany it seems that more and more stores have them now.
My local dealer in Hamburg has the Camera...
So I have it now
It is very cool the design works very good in terms of handling at least for me!
Build quality is superb in my opinion, like Fuji x-t1.

Even though it is not the smallest camera people do not seem to notice it much.

To prove it some pictures below.
One is of course from my phone. The others are straight out after turning it on.
Nothing special straight JPGs output of the cam with autofocus.
Out of the box the full resolution for JPGs is not set. Sorry for that.

[Hulyss]

In Germany it seems that more and more stores have them now.
My local dealer in Hamburg has the Camera...
So I have it now
It is very cool the design works very good in terms of handling at least for me!
Build quality is superb in my opinion, like Fuji x-t1.

Even though it is not the smallest camera people do not seem to notice it much.

To prove it some pictures below.
One is of course from my phone. The others are straight out after turning it on.
Nothing special straight JPGs output of the cam with autofocus.
Out of the box the full resolution for JPGs is not set. Sorry for that.

Well, I have both and comparing Quattro to XT-1 is comparing apple and oranges (without offence).

The Quattro, at 900 Euros, do not represent enough advance compared to a 400 € Merrill, to justifies his price. It is totally different sensor design, more bayerish than ever, flat. The XT-1 do not joke when it come to photography; for his price you have a very advanced, very light and efficient weather sealed body, who can take photos in almost any situations. Lenses are extremely good too.

Keeping the Merrill is a very good and clever choice. Merrills are the last real foveons and Quattro is not what a foveon used to be, sorry.

So you might encounter some fan boys who will try to turn your mind, I was a foveon fan boy, but my eyes and my computer tell me this era is over. So the thing is returning Monday. Fixed lens, no OVF or EVF, even the Merrills have video to play with ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCepB3snYBE

[pmmtch]

I'm not trying to turn anyones mind.
It's just that I think some people would like to see something.
Like myself when I'm curious about a new product.

It is true that the x-t1 has a better build quality but it is complicated to
compare the the dp2q with other models. Maybe you have a better suited example.
Still in my opinion the build quality is super. It heavy for its size and solid.
I never said nor compared something about other aspects of both cams.

I had the dp2m and I don't see that the dp2q is flat compared. But I would appreciate some comparison pictures of you (Hulyss).
From a technical point of view, I don't think you are right. The definition of what exactly a foveon sensor should be or not is
clearly not for us to decide. This is acctually an interessting behavior.
Poeple often appreciate a new technogology and at a certain point they tend to declare what its "real" form has to be.
A sensor evolves an it has not necessarilly to be that having every pixel in the color layers processed brings you to a different
result in the way they are doing it now.

Video: I think it is a good decission not having video in there. So far I have reseachered on some tech sites in that matter and a friend
of mine works for Olympus in that area. I red and he told me that it is very difficult to build a sensor beeing able to handle both areas good.
A lot of compromises have to be made on both sides.
Sigma tried it and it didn't work. So why investing time and resources for a not really working feature.
The video you posted is really awefull, no offence. Of course not the model

Yeah an external evf would be nice. But they don't seem to have the resources for that yet. Still
Sigma is a relatively small company compared to the others and that is something we have to
live with. Their products except the lenses are placed in a niche-market so we have to live
with some areas they can't focus on. If the camera had everything it would be a mainstream product.

I don't try to convince anyone to spend 999 Euros for this camera nor to upgrade from Merrill.
I don't try to compare it to Fuji nor Olympus and all the others.
I try to see the camera for what it is and what its output is in its expertise.

It has a crazy lens, very impressive output and its fun to shoot with it, even without an evf.
The price is cheap for this kind of output. What I see in my pictures is that it outperformes the Merrill but maybe
I'm not pro enough...

Sorry if I have written a little too much

Finally some JPGs out of the cam (nothing special, just some quickshots like mentioned in my post before):

http://i.imgur.com/Een4Q06.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/GKoiNUh.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/vZ6nOE2.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Gn41FOa.jpg

The next 2 are resaved with 80% in Photoshop. Original Filesize is over 20 MB. Imgur does not like that

http://i.imgur.com/fn01IDA.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Zh8GQ1s.jpg

[Hulyss]

Whatever, Quattro is not my cup of tea after 8 years of foveon usage. If consumers find joy in using it there is absolutely no problem at all. The thing is I can express my opinion and my disappointment (as well as I can express my joy). When you use multiple brands you can compare, as I do (Nikon, Fuji, Sigma, Leica, without counting what I rent).

The thing is the Quattro lack of the original magic, those little twisted colors that made the legend of the foveon. It is now standard and sharpness, resolution or whatever are not the only key of the foveon magic.

 

[Jim Kasson]

The 'top layer' of the Foveon Quattro sensor captures mostly a monochrome image, good for luminance resolution. The lower layers (indeed with lower sampling density of a more blurred signal) are somewhat biased towards Green and Red dominant signals respectively.

Bart, the top layer is blue-weighted. The second layer is much closer to luminance. Thus, without assumptions about the way spatial frequencies of the luminance and chromaticity of the original scene vary, is is not possible to "develop" a colorimetric RGB image with implicit luminance at the resolution of the top layer.

The top layer has its peak at a wavelength that plays almost no part in calculating luminance from spectra.

In all of the above, I am defining luminance as the Y component of 1931 CIE XYZ.

http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6117

Jim

[BernardLanguillier]

Whatever, Quattro is not my cup of tea after 8 years of foveon usage. If consumers find joy in using it there is absolutely no problem at all. The thing is I can express my opinion and my disappointment (as well as I can express my joy). When you use multiple brands you can compare, as I do (Nikon, Fuji, Sigma, Leica, without counting what I rent).

The thing is the Quattro lack of the original magic, those little twisted colors that made the legend of the foveon. It is now standard and sharpness, resolution or whatever are not the only key of the foveon magic.

I think that this is a bit harsh. I would agree that something may be missing in the quattro file compared to the Merrill when looked at 100%, but the pixels remain in my view clearly superior to those of my D800. So overall I feel that a lot of the Merrill magic is still there, but yes, not all of it.

On all other fronts, the Quattro is a much better camera with a usage enveloppe significantly expanded.

I could personnally never quite get over the battery life issues of the DP2m and it was seeing very little usage in the end.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Hulyss]

I think that this is a bit harsh. I would agree that something may be missing in the quattro file compared to the Merrill when looked at 100%, but the pixels remain in my view clearly superior to those of my D800. So overall I feel that a lot of the Merrill magic is still there, but yes, not all of it.

On all other fronts, the Quattro is a much better camera with a usage enveloppe significantly expanded.

I could personnally never quite get over the battery life issues of the DP2m and it was seeing very little usage in the end.

Cheers,
Bernard

Hello Bernard (and sorry for your Otus :/),

I do not seek the perfect pixel. I seek colors and even, not real colors. For accuracy I have what I want. The thing with the foveon, let's take the original DP2, is that the color are almost unreal. The original DP2 outputted his own rendering, like a film. The DP3m output his own rendering, like a film. The quattro is purely digital.
The previous foveon iterations was "organic" like.

The magic is not at pixel level. The magic is in the "overall" image.

Edit : I hope the next SD will be a surprise, like a 24x36 with same resolution ... The bigger sensor might bring back some goody's.

[BernardLanguillier]

Hello Bernard (and sorry for your Otus :/),

I do not seek the perfect pixel. I seek colors and even, not real colors. For accuracy I have what I want. The thing with the foveon, let's take the original DP2, is that the color are almost unreal. The original DP2 outputted his own rendering, like a film. The DP3m output his own rendering, like a film. The quattro is purely digital.
The previous foveon iterations was "organic" like.

The magic is not at pixel level. The magic is in the "overall" image.

OK, I understand what you mean. As far as I am concerned, I kind of like what I see with the Quattro still, but it is indeed a bit different compared to the Merrill.



The second image would have been better with D800 + Otus (had both of them not been under repair, thanks btw  ), but the Merrill would simply have stayed in the bag. This image is pretty usable and I sort of like the rendering at ISO800.



Cheers,
Bernard

[eronald]

Bart, the top layer is blue-weighted. The second layer is much closer to luminance. Thus, without assumptions about the way spatial frequencies of the luminance and chromaticity of the original scene vary, is is not possible to "develop" a colorimetric RGB image with implicit luminance at the resolution of the top layer.

The top layer has its peak at a wavelength that plays almost no part in calculating luminance from spectra.

In all of the above, I am defining luminance as the Y component of 1931 CIE XYZ.

http://blog.kasson.com/?p=6117

Jim

Jim,

 Everyone here is smarter than me; I have stopped trying to correct their facts with my errors

Edmund

[eronald]

Bernard,

 some pix in the sun or magic hour would be nice to judge colors - overcast is always hateful. your second picture I find artistically excellent and technically impressive.

Edmund

OK, I understand what you mean. As far as I am concerned, I kind of like what I see with the Quattro still, but it is indeed a bit different compared to the Merrill.



The second image would have been better with D800 + Otus (had both of them not been under repair, thanks btw  ), but the Merrill would simply have stayed in the bag. This image is pretty usable and I sort of like the rendering at ISO800.



Cheers,
Bernard