Sigma Enters Mirrorless: The Sigma SD Quattro

[capital]

I've heard of (A)rt lenses but what's the SGV series ?

sd Quattro H

SGV lenses are Sigma Global Vision series, i.e. "Art" "Contemporary" & "Sport"

[AlterEgo]

It was also a dream of his father's to be a camera manufacturer.....

right, but the way company owned makes it possible for him to continue

[Dan Wells]

Why, oh, why put a failed SA mount on these? As an example of how little interest there is in SA mount lenses, B+H DOESN'T STOCK most of them... This is the same B+H that WILL stock such things as the Canon 800 MM f5.6L ($13,000) AND the $8000 Sigma 300-800mm zoom in Canon mount. The $1700 Arca Cube tripod head?  No problem - B+H stocks four versions! The Sigma SA lenses? 37 "available", but even B+H stocks less than ten. The ONLY other mount I can find where B+H doesn't try to stock everything is some of the more obscure Leica S medium format lenses (they DO try to keep all Pentax and Hasselblad MF lenses, plus the more common Leica S lenses, in stock).

These cameras will fail because of an obscure mount and Sigma Photo Pro! If they could put any standard mount (Canon, Nikon, Sony E, Fuji X, even Pentax - I don't mention Micro 43 only because the sensor is too big) on them, and convince somebody to work with the raw files (Adobe or Capture One), they'd be very interesting. Realistically, they'd want to do a Canon or Nikon mount, because the mirrorless mounts would actually discourage people from using Sigma lenses (none in X mount, limited selection in E mount so far). If their image quality turns out to be like other Sigmas (superb at low ISOs, limited ability to raise ISO), they could have some very nice landscape (and a few other disciplines) cameras, but not with an impossible lens mount and no software...

[BJL]

I am wondering why they pulled a Pentax and retained the SA mount though. They shortened the flange distance on their compact cameras, why not here?

I think you partly answer your own question:

Would open up other adapted lenses to their system.

And Sigma is primarily a lens maker, so it has good reason to favor customers buying and using its lenses rather than making yet another tool for using lenses from Canon or Nikon.  Also, Sigma might not be ready to commit to designing and producing an extensive system of mirrorless lenses in yet another mount, and it is probably best for marketing purposes for a camera to have a good array of "native" lenses, meaning ones that do not need an adaptor.

More on adaptors: I like the idea, but have read many people express concern that adaptors could degrade image quality, if only due to the risk of misalignment (plus the false belief of some people that adaptors involve extra optical elements).  This might be a misguided fear, but if it is widespread, it is one that design decisions need to take in to account.

Why not 35mm format, to make the most of the Art lenses???

In addition to other factors mentioned above, the usual cost and process complexity barrier due to the need for on-sensor stitching to make larger sensors still applies.  The new larger "H" sensor size of 26.6×17.9mm still fits a bit under the field size limit of 33x26mm imposed by all suitable fab equipment, while 36x24mm does not.  I do not know how much extra space is needed on the sensor chip around the actual "imaging" part, but maybe Sigma is already at this fab size limit with that 26.6mm image width.

[AlterEgo]

These cameras will fail

These cameras are first of all targeting their existing fan base - those people who still shooting SD-1 and the likes... the size of the market is too small to introduce specific Sigma mirrorless mount and at the moment Sigma does not see that as a justifiable expense (to make new Sigma lenses in a new mount)... as for the 3rd party open mounts like E-mount where Sigma participates they still can do this anytime if they see some sense  in it

[Dan Wells]

If B+H isn't stocking the vast majority of Sigma's SA-mount lenses (including many under $1000), I'd assume that "fan base" is something like hundreds of owners, maybe a few thousand at the most in North America. B+H stocks full medium format lens lines that cater to user bases in the low thousands, and they stock ultratelephotos and tilt/shift lenses that sell hundreds of copies worldwide annually, so the decision NOT to stock the SA line indicates that the demand is almost nonexistent. Almost the only other lenses they refuse to stock and sell as special order only (rather than running out of - they can't get enough of certain brand-new lenses, but they mark those as "more coming soon", rather than "special order") are large format lenses, and the vast majority of demand for those is filled by used lenses!

[powerslave12r]

Why do we assume that because B&H stocks a few of those lenses today, they can't stock more of those in the future?

If this camera is compelling enough, they might start moving SA mount lenses in higher volumes.

Looking at the SD1/M and the SD9/10/14/15, I'm not surprised at the lack of the SA mount lenses.

Keeping the SA mount for their own cameras is the logical choice, which itself is, admittedly, not something Sigma is known for

They are the same company that does lens mount conversions, so there is a glimmer of hope for those expecting other mounts to show up on this body.

[Dan Wells]

I agree and disagree... I agree wholeheartedly that the reason the SA mount hasn't sold at all is that the bodies haven't been compelling, and that if these bodies were really compelling, the lenses would start to move.

The caveat to this is that the SA line is already thought of by dealers as a failure, and that is a large and complex line to stock, with many overlapping lenses (Sigma bolts an SA mount on anything they make in Canon and Nikon mounts - at least in theory -I suspect there are a few that have NEVER SOLD A COPY (300-800 f5.6 zoom anyone? It's theoretically available in SA mount, but at $8000 and limited production even in Canon and Nikon mounts, is the only SA version in existence one that Sigma takes to trade shows?)). Nobody's going to stock that 300-800 (or worse yet, the $26,000 200-500mm f2.8, also supposedly made in SA-mount), but how's a dealer to choose between an 18-200,18-250 and 18-300? Equally confusingly, there's a 17-50 and a 17-70, plus an 8-16,10-20 and 12-24 and two separate 150-600 lenses (plus a 50-500). Only a few primes are available (although some of those are the desirable ART lenses)...
The SA mount itself turns out to be an odd hybrid - it's pretty much a Pentax K bayonet, but with the flange focal distance and electronic contacts of a Canon EF mount. My guess is that an SA mount lens is actually an EF lens, with the SA mount plate bolted on at the last second (if you swap the mount plate from a SA lens onto a Canon lens, it'll mount to a Sigma body, and everything except image stabilization will work). Sigma probably doesn't really stock many of the lenses supposedly available in SA - they just put a plate on an EF version that's made in quantity when someone orders one...

When Fuji introduced a new lens line incompatible with anyone else, they presented dealers with only three (four rather quickly, when the zoom hit) lenses to stock, and the lenses were well chosen to complement the bodies. There are now 20+ lenses, but there are also a million bodies out there to put them on, with a couple hundred thousand added every year.  If you're a dealer wanting to stock the new SA bodies, you have to choose from an array of lenses to carry, and you may not make the same selections your customers do... I suspect many will just carry the 17-70 Contemporary as a "kit lens", and say "anything else is special order, although there's quite a bit to choose from". Any other strategy involves stocking lenses that may well not sell.

[NancyP]

Quattro owners who have used Merrills, how does the Quattro generation Sigma Photo Pro perform in stability? The Merrill generation SPP (5.5) gives me fits because it crashes after about ten minutes of use on an admittedly 5 year old top-spec MacBookPro with 8G RAM. I have been pruning back the hard disc to more reasonable amounts of space, and I haven't seen an improvement in stability. No, I am NOT nostalgic for old MS Windows operating systems. I don't like having the computer crash or develop the eternal spinning beach ball.

I think that this new development would be of some interest if there were EF and F mount options, or a generic option to which one could add the electronic pass-through adapter of one's choice. Sigma is offering mount changes on lenses - why not offer options on the CAMERAS?

[BJL]

From what I have read, Sigma would have loved to just use the Canon EOS mount, but Canon and it patents prevent that, so Sigma SA mount is as close as it could legally get.

[capital]

Hi NancyP, you might try having less x3f files in the same sub folder (like under 100) to see if that reduces the crashes.

As for the Quattro SPP developing, I've had one crash that caused the x3f file to become corrupted but thankfully I was able to recover since the SPP left a backup version in the folder but appended it with an additional extension that had to removed in order for the file to be read by SPP.

Overall, from my initial tests with DP2Q, and up through the versions, they are still not extracting the maximum amount of luminance resolution data from the top layer, this difference is small enough that most people will not miss it, but why they have not addressed it, in light of the fact the linearized DNGs from the third party developers were able to get this data is beyond me. Also, the linearized DNGs did not fail in the blown highlight rendering that SPP chooses to adopt, again, why there is no progress on this, I do not know.

[Paulo Bizarro]

I admire Sigma for keep trying, they have proud on what they do, and that is great. But the typical photographer/consumer is very conservative, we don't change just "because".

The product may be awesome, but if the rest of the ecosystem does not follow with robust support (image processing, reduced quirkiness), the adoption rates will be small. And that may be fine, if they are not targeting "mass market"; and no doubt it will serve the purposes of some photographers.

Personally, I would love to try one of these and see what it is all about, but I can't remember the last time I have actually saw a Sigma camera here in Lisbon, at shops that cater for pros... lenses, yeah, one can find them abundantly, but cameras, no way.

Similar to the Ricoh GXR concept? Great in theory, but in the end, didn't really caught on.

[Ancient Tiger]

Don't forget, if you have a invested in a few Art series lenses, you can get the mount changed to SA by Sigma USA for a small fee. I guess they can change it back too!

[NancyP]

Thanks. I find that I do best with fewer than 10 to 15 images per folder. I should just segment my downloads into folders with 10 each, then cull, then group the keepers into new folders of 10.

Everything about this camera (Merrill) is like a film camera - set up carefully, plan to shoot as few frames as absolutely needed, not to save money but to save aggravation. And maybe I ought to try one of the other RAW editors that can do faster preview of RAW files to do the first cull.

[capital]

For speed viewing purposes, you could also try exporting the jpeg using "Convert to JPEG" under the file menu . It extracts the camera rendered jpeg for that x3f, so it is much much faster.

[wallpaperviking]

I am a bit confused by these two cameras...   

I like the concept of the larger sensor APS-H camera and am wondering if the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 zoom would cover it, as well as the newly announced 50-100mm 1.8 zoom..

Although technically only meant to cover the smaller APS-C format, often zooms seem to have a wider image circle...

Any idea if these two will cover the larger APS-H sized sensor?

[capital]

If their existing DC lens compatibility chart is anything to go by, then we could reference the Canon EOS 1D Mark IV (APS-H) and we see only the Sigma 4.5 mm circle fish-eye is fully compatible:

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lens-resources/dc-lens-compatability-chart

DC lenses: Theses are special lenses that are designated for interchangeable lens type SLR digital cameras because the lens image circle is designated to correspond to the size of the image sensors of most interchangeable lens type digital SLR cameras.
The specialized design gives these lenses the ideal properties for digital cameras.
• An image sensor element larger than than those corresponding to APS-C cannot be used in digital cameras or 35mm film cameras. If such an element is used vignetting will occur for digital cameras.

[wallpaperviking]

Thanks for that information, much appreciated! 

Yep, I guess it does look that way, although sometimes listed specs are different to the reality of a product when used in real world testing...

Guess we will have to wait and see...

Would also love to know how much of a dynamic range improvement this might possibly have? 

[Alan Smallbone]

Thanks. I find that I do best with fewer than 10 to 15 images per folder. I should just segment my downloads into folders with 10 each, then cull, then group the keepers into new folders of 10.

Everything about this camera (Merrill) is like a film camera - set up carefully, plan to shoot as few frames as absolutely needed, not to save money but to save aggravation. And maybe I ought to try one of the other RAW editors that can do faster preview of RAW files to do the first cull.

Nancy have you tried the latest SPP with your Merrill files? The latest version is quite stable and faster than previous versions. It is still not great but it works. I use it with both the Quattro and Merrill files. However once you convert or save to the X3f the settings you cannot edit on the V5, the headers change. So what I would do is make copies of the original and try it with latest version of SPP and see how you like it. I large numbers of files in a directory and not crashed. In fact I have not had it crash for a long long time, I think since the original version with Quattro support. I think the only thing lacking is better highlight recovery. I can live with it, but I am hoping that they continue to fix it, they are making improvements. The latest firmware for the Quattros with the new SPP is better and better color.

Alan

[RMW]

Hi All,

It's certainly an interesting company. Admirable and profoundly puzzling. I've found the DP2 Quattro to be both an extraordinary tool and an unforgiving process for making good fotos. If it were a person I'd say it's a stern task master !

Thanks Alan for all the Foveon knowledge. Your first foto is especially enjoyable.

Richard