The Photography thread!

[rj144]

Damn, after watching that video I’m not sure if pressed, which one would I buy myself.

He says he likes the dp1 better, and I might also for the following reasons.

Cleaner low iso(but gives up higher iso capabilities to the newer)
Wider focal length (28mm is what I do “most” of my “street” shooting with that I would use this camera for)

Head scratcher draw backs.

F4 looses to the newer 2.8
Stops at iso 800 vs higher on the newer.

Damn, those are some hard choices.

I do like the “film “ look of the sensor.

The “raw” file type is a drawback however and would need to be converted before use in some softwares.

He didn’t mention does the video shoot in a “raw” video mode or is all video compressed.

Also how is the video, he mentions it’s bad, but how bad in your experience.

How does it compare to say a Canon powershot 120 for example in a cheap camera vs cheap camera head to head??

All of those Sigmas are basically useless at any ISO over 200.

I don't even bother with video. It's not designed at all to shoot video.

Picture wise, it would smoke ANY point and shoot camera.

I also have the Merrill version which is a higher resolution than the non-Merrill versions.

Sigma also makes a plugin for the conversion in Photoshop and there's a standalone program you can download for free which also processes the image.

 

[rj144]

A couple of simple pics with my Sigma:

 

[90 50]

I picked up a DP1 Merill when they were selling them off cheaply a few years ago.

You'd definitely be advised to shoot RAW as the in camera processing is pretty poor but it does certainly punch above its weight for an APSC camera. Most obvious advantage I would say is in graduation of colour which might if anything be slightly smoother than my D850, so a good choice if your looking for quite subtle images there rather than jacking up the contrast massively. Ironically given the colour sensor I'd say its actually a better B&W camera for that reason.

Handling wise you can't get around it being pretty poor though and for that reason I only tend to use it when I really can't have a larger camera with me which isn't that often anymore.

It would only be for convenience at times instead of dragging around my other stuff.

For stills it would be in jpeg, because If I was taking serious pics in raw I wanted to edit, well I have better cameras for that.

Video in raw however is what I would be interested in since I edit all my video in software anyway, and would want it in raw form for color grading purposes because it would no doubt be mixed with other devices.

Most of my “videos” I’ve well let’s face it “attempt “ to make, habe video feed from at LEAST two devices, so raw video for color grading is important.

 

[90 50]

A couple of simple pics with my Sigma:

Hmm, for my uses and your description I think possibly a cheap as used powershot might fit my “wants” better.

Seems like I would enjoy this as a stills camera at times however, but video is a necessity for me with what I want to do right now.

Taking stills with a go-pro is annoying but very pocket friendly. And the video on it is great, for what it is.

Maybe paired with the go-pro they could both more or less fit in a pocket and would be quite nice, but then I’m getting close to the same amount of baggage with two devices as I would be with just my little d3300 for instance, but it does stand out a lot more than this plus a go pro would.

 

[90 50]

All of those Sigmas are basically useless at any ISO over 200.

I don't even bother with video. It's not designed at all to shoot video.

Picture wise, it would smoke ANY point and shoot camera.

I also have the Merrill version which is a higher resolution than the non-Merrill versions.

Sigma also makes a plugin for the conversion in Photoshop and there's a standalone program you can download for free which also processes the image.

Fuck me looked at the specs myself. Take 48mp raw stills but only 640x480 vga video.

No thanks on both accounts, I want stills no more than 24mp especially on apsc

And video is terrible.

This sounds like a great little pocket cam for its intended purposes, but does not fit my wants and personal preferences whatsoever

I’m sure I would enjoy the heck out of it as it’s intended, but it’s not “multipurpose “ enough for me.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Fuck me looked at the specs myself. Take 48mp raw stills but only 640x480 vga video.

No thanks on both accounts, I want stills no more than 24mp especially on apsc

And video is terrible.

This sounds like a great little pocket cam for its intended purposes, but does not fit my wants and personal preferences whatsoever

I’m sure I would enjoy the heck out of it as it’s intended, but it’s not “multipurpose “ enough for me.

They are REALLY not video cameras and again the difference is much more significant when it comes to RAW/Jpeg than most cameras, its not small pixel peeping differences but quite significant ones. The "48 MP" is a bit misleading as that includes all three layers, its only actually 16 MP in real resolution although that is a very good 16 MP indeed at base ISO with the lack of interpolation that can take a good deal of up scaling.

Its definitely not what I'd call a versatile compact camera, rather its something that can crate high quality images with a somewhat unique look to them and doesn't cost the earth. If you wanted something with a bit more versatility maybe consider a used Sony RX1?

If the Merill pictures look "film like" I'd say its moreso like large format film with the fine graduations.

 

[90 50]

They are REALLY not video cameras and again the difference is much more significant when it comes to RAW/Jpeg than most cameras, its not small pixel peeping differences but quite significant ones. The "48 MP" is a bit misleading as that includes all three layers, its only actually 16 MP in real resolution although that is a very good 16 MP indeed at base ISO with the lack of interpolation that can take a good deal of up scaling.

Its definitely not what I'd call a versatile compact camera, rather its something that can crate high quality images with a somewhat unique look to them and doesn't cost the earth. If you wanted something with a bit more versatility maybe consider a used Sony RX1?

If the Merill pictures look "film like" I'd say its moreso like large format film with the fine graduations.

The file size is still huge, higher than I want to deal with.

Like i mentioned , I’m sure if I used it as intended, I would enjoy the hell out of it, it’s just not in my needs area right now.

I’ll look up the Sony rx1


Edit: Jesus no the rx1 isn’t even remotely what I’m looking for.

 

[90 50]

This is more like it, under 50.00

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-Powe...599227?hash=item36553261fb:g:8WEAAOSwJwVdhwDN

 

[Deleted member 110072]

I suspect it will need a larger sensor manufacturer to pickup the tech to really take it into an area where its useful to a large number of people.

I do wonder though whether part of the reason this hasn't happened is that the tech only works with certain lens designs. With light having to go though three sensors I'm guessing it needs to be hitting the sensor pretty straight on, just look at the lens design for their 20mm equivlent Dp0 camera....

My guess is it needs to be that big to get the light hitting the sensor at the right angle and indeed their ASPH sized system camera the Quattro H actually uses uses their old SLR mount with a longer register distance which again I'd guess gives you light hitting the sensor at less of an angle than mirrorless lens designs.

It could well be that layered sensor tech is a no no with mirrorless systems with small register/flange distances.

 

[rj144]

I suspect it will need a larger sensor manufacturer to pickup the tech to really take it into an area where its useful to a large number of people.

I do wonder though whether part of the reason this hasn't happened is that the tech only works with certain lens designs. With light having to go though three sensors I'm guessing it needs to be hitting the sensor pretty straight on, just look at the lens design for their 20mm equivlent Dp0 camera....

My guess is it needs to be that big to get the light hitting the sensor at the right angle and indeed their ASPH sized system camera the Quattro H actually uses uses their old SLR mount with a longer register distance which again I'd guess gives you light hitting the sensor at less of an angle than mirrorless lens designs.

It could well be that layered sensor tech is a no no with mirrorless systems with small register/flange distances.

I doubt that is a problem. There's a lens system in the lens of course and the focal point is well inside the lens. The light hitting the sensor is not collimated.

 

[rj144]

This is more like it, under 50.00

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Canon-Powe...599227?hash=item36553261fb:g:8WEAAOSwJwVdhwDN

Why don't just use your phone? I'm being serious. Trust me, that won't be any better at pics and video than any phone made in the last 2 to 3 years.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

I doubt that is a problem. There's a lens system in the lens of course and the focal point is well inside the lens. The light hitting the sensor is not collimated.

The microlens system can correct it somewhat but still you can't have light hitting the sensor at too extreme an angle even with conventional sensors and film era lenses have needed to be redesigned due to this. Having a 21mm equivalent(14mm actually) lens that size seems a bit strange otherwise as it obviously limits the cameras saleability considerably. You look at say the 14mm F/2.8 on the Fuji system and that's a smaller lens despite being a stop faster.

 

[rj144]

The microlens system can correct it somewhat but still you can't have light hitting the sensor at too extreme an angle even with conventional sensors and film era lenses have needed to be redesigned due to this. Having a 21mm equivalent(14mm actually) lens that size seems a bit strange otherwise as it obviously limits the cameras saleability considerably. You look at say the 14mm F/2.8 on the Fuji system and that's a smaller lens despite being a stop faster.

???

Film era lenses can be used on full frame cameras no problem. They needed to be redesigned so the image circle is optimized smaller than full frame sensors.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

???

Film era lenses can be used on full frame cameras no problem. They needed to be redesigned so the image circle is optimized smaller than full frame sensors.

Full Frame sensors are by their nature the same size as 35mm film but a few Leica and Voightlander rangefinder wide-angle lenses needed to be redesigned to avoid light dropoff and colour shifts when used on digital sensors.

That Sigma are having to produce such a large 21mm equivalent lens even on an ASPC system suggests to me the problem is worse with their layered sensor design which makes sense doesn't it?

 

[rj144]

Full Frame sensors are by their nature the same size as 35mm film but a few Leica and Voightlander rangefinder wide-angle lenses needed to be redesigned to avoid light dropoff and colour shifts when used on digital sensors.

That Sigma are having to produce such a large 21mm equivalent lens even on an ASPC system suggests to me the problem is worse with their layered sensor design which makes sense doesn't it?

I don't know really. The lenses on the Merrill are small.

 

[TheLinguist]

Up at 4 in the AM here in Shanghai for this shot today.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

I don't know really. The lenses on the Merrill are small.

There 28mm and 45mm equivalents though which are much less challenging designs in that respect and even then I wouldn't say the 28mm(actually 19mm) is THAT small. You look at say the 20mm F/2.8 on the Sony APSC E-mount and that's quite a lot smaller.

 

[rj144]

There 28mm and 45mm equivalents though which are much less challenging designs in that respect and even then I wouldn't say the 28mm(actually 19mm) is THAT small. You look at say the 20mm F/2.8 on the Sony APSC E-mount and that's quite a lot smaller.

Regardless, I don't think it has much to do with the layered sensor. Different wavelengths naturally penetrate different depths.

 

[TheLinguist]

I’ve almost Bought some of McKinnons coffee, but I’m a coffee lover so I buy lots of “off the Wall” coffees anyway.

Can’t blame you on the coffee front, I’d kick a baby for a field goal if that meant I get my morning coffee faster

 

[Deleted member 110072]

I would say as well that unless your looking to work as a very service based pro then the obsession with "workflow" how to videos is rather questionable for me. I spose it ties into a dislike of the mindset of just trying to replicate someone else's work, everyone has influences but just direct aping of someone else's work to me has little appeal.

When it comes to post processing I tend to think that as with the taking of the pictures the mechanics of editing are a very small part of the skill involved, 95% of what I do is just adjustments to brightness, contrast, saturation, etc layers that could be learned in probably an hour using photoshop, what took time to learn was using these things in(hopefully) a tasteful fashion to suit the images in question.