S2 and Sigma DP1m, DP2m, DP3m

[onceuponatime]

Ad

Does anyone here have S2 and Sigma DP1m, DP2m.
If so how do they complement each other.

The DP3m has been announced with equivalent 75mm F2.8 and 1:3 macro. If anyone here has DP1m, DP2m and S2, would you purchase DP3m as well.

I handled the S2. For an amateur as myself I was lets say scared of it, if that is the right term.

For studio, stills, landscape would the apsc 3 layer non cfa Foveon be a leveller in terms of tonal gradation, subtlety, richness, micro contrast, clarity, per pixel sharpness compared to the MF Bayer cfa S2.


Thanks.

[jip]

I only have used or I should say handles the S2 once, but I think the S2 would be better then the sigma's since the S2 is medium format and the sigma's aren't even full frame I believe.

[vieri]

I don't have the S2, but last November, I went to Venice to do some shooting for my Fine Art website, and this time I decided to bring just small cameras along. Being this an easily repeatable trip for me, I was confident in bringing with me, together with my Sony Nex7, the newly arrived DP1 & DP2 Merrill. I enjoyed working with these cameras, albeit they aren't perfect: you can read the complete review on my blog.

Hope this helps!

[onceuponatime]

Thanks Jip, Vieri.

Originally Posted by vieri

I don't have the S2, but last November, I went to Venice to do some shooting for my Fine Art website, and this time I decided to bring just small cameras along. Being this an easily repeatable trip for me, I was confident in bringing with me, together with my Sony Nex7, the newly arrived DP1 & DP2 Merrill. I enjoyed working with these cameras, albeit they aren't perfect: you can read the complete review on my blog.

Hope this helps!

From your review


So what about image quality? In a word, wonderful. The clarity of the Foveon files and their per-pixel sharpness needs to be seen to be believed; detail is impressive - really impressive! - with no smearing, no aliasing, no moire, no interpolation artefacts whatsoever. Comparisons between the Merrill and other cameras started to appear on the web, and you might want to check out diglloyd and Reid Reviews (both paid websites, but both worth the money) for more "technical" reviews; in particular, Lloyd's findings on the rendering of smooth surfaces with the DP2 Merrill are amazing, and confirm my impressions with the camera.
Colour rendition is very appealing but particular to Sigma; meaning, the files aren't necessarily 100% faithful to reality, but when they depart from it they do it mostly in a subtle way and always very aesthetically, for a lack of a better word. That said, I wouldn't use the Merrills for critical reproduction work.



Interesting enough for cameras that make their "full colour" sensor their main strength, the black and white images produced by these two little machines are simply amazing. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that the Merrill outputs the best BW images I have ever seen from any digital camera, short of the Leica Monochrome and very likely of the Phase One Monochrome back (which I never used). The files have an amazing clarity and detail, the BW tones are so rich and the transitions so smooth, the images so deep and tridimensional looking that one would want to shoot BW all the time. Speaking of the Leica Monochrome, by the way, it is worth considering that one can get the DP1, DP2 and newly announced DP3 (75mm equivalent, f2.8) for less than the Leica's body alone, which is something worth thinking about.



To me outside of shallow dof I believe DP1M, DM2M, DP3M due to three layer would give equivalent S2 micro contrast, tonal gradation, subtlety, richness, clarity, per pixel sharpness, detail (DPMs are 30MP Bayer equivalent) with added dimensionality due to its 3 layer.

I just wanted to know if anyone had real world experience of both systems. S2 (& lenses) is currently well beyond my financial means nevertheless I dont want to compromise on image quality compared to S2 hence the DPM question.

[biglouis]

Hi there, some may remember me as a pretty active member of the forum until the middle of last year when I sold my entire Leica DRF kit.

In October I aquired a DP2M mainly after seeing so many excellent samples from it over at the GetDPI forum ("Other camera" section).

My flickr stream has a number of examples of how good the DP2M can be. The clarity and detail from its files is astonishing but you have to treat it as though it is a lens with a specialised sensor which can only be used best at iso200. Tripod mounted or in strong sunlight at high speeds the resulting files out resolve anything I shot with my M8 and all my lenses including my 34/1.4 Summilux ASPH (which I rated the best I owned).



DP2M, iso200, tripod mounted.

The DP2M seems to love textures and complex patterns. Like the tree bark, stone and foliage in the picture above. Some complain it is too good especially for portrait work where the severe detail leads to unflattering results (although the portraits I have seen of 'character' faces are excellent, imho).

I left the Leica system because I started to shoot more and more MF film and I felt the results were as good and better than working with digital. After a few weeks of working with the DP2M and marvelling at its astonishingly detailed files I then started to look back over my work with film. I also started to take my wonderful Hasselblad SWC film camera out with me. Pretty soon I was back to shooting just film.

My point is that there are wonderful camera systems out there like the DP2M which will super-accurately capture the moment. Then there is film which is more like painting with light.



Hasselblad SWC, Kodak Portra 160 - hand held.

At this point in my life I know which one I prefer to create photographs with.

That said it is hard to find a digital camera which can match the DP2M at the price point for the quality it produces but you must work with its idiosyncracies. I think it favours Leica shooters - especially film shooters - who will not baulk at having to be constrained to a maximum film speed of iso400 (640 tops) or use a weird post processing path the turn the DP2M raw files into usable TIFF and JPEG format.
And compared to any other camera system out there, it is lightweight!

I am quite interested in the new DP3M but mainly as a landscape and macro camera. I think the 75mm equivalent focal length could be very good for specialised work. But again I would view it as a lens with a specialised sensor attached to it.

Hope my points are useful input.

LouisB

PS Vieri - wonderful review and superb results. I assume you were using graduated filters to lengthen the shutter speeds?

[vieri]

Originally Posted by biglouis

...

PS Vieri - wonderful review and superb results. I assume you were using graduated filters to lengthen the shutter speeds?

Hey Louis, good to see you, long time no see - I also am not around here much these days, since selling my M9 (I kept only the Nocti for the future... who knows!)

Yes, I treated the DPs not as compact or point-&-shoot, but as specialised cameras as you said; therefore, most of what you saw has been shot on a tripod, with filters (polarizer, NDs and grad NDs) and with the same care I'd use for my Fine Art work with any camera. While size and form factor can be deceiving, I agree with you that these cameras are best used in a very controlled way, as MF or the like.

[onceuponatime]

Originally Posted by biglouis

Hi there, some may remember me as a pretty active member of the forum until the middle of last year when I sold my entire Leica DRF kit.

My flickr stream has a number of examples of how good the DP2M can be. The clarity and detail from its files is astonishing but you have to treat it as though it is a lens with a specialised sensor which can only be used best at iso200. Tripod mounted or in strong sunlight at high speeds the resulting files out resolve anything I shot with my M8 and all my lenses including my 34/1.4 Summilux ASPH (which I rated the best I owned).

DP2M, iso200, tripod mounted.

The DP2M seems to love textures and complex patterns. Like the tree bark, stone and foliage in the picture above. Some complain it is too good especially for portrait work where the severe detail leads to unflattering results (although the portraits I have seen of 'character' faces are excellent, imho).

My point is that there are wonderful camera systems out there like the DP2M which will super-accurately capture the moment. Then there is film which is more like painting with light.

I think it favours Leica shooters - especially film shooters - who will not baulk at having to be constrained to a maximum film speed of iso400 (640 tops) or use a weird post processing path the turn the DP2M raw files into usable TIFF and JPEG format.
And compared to any other camera system out there, it is lightweight!

I am quite interested in the new DP3M but mainly as a landscape and macro camera. I think the 75mm equivalent focal length could be very good for specialised work.

Hope my points are useful input.

LouisB

Thank you Loius. Your post is very useful and just what I was hoping for when I made the thread.
As you I feel DP1M, DP2M, DP3M and S2 are specialised and photographing with film is as painting with light.

Originally Posted by vieri

since selling my M9 (I kept only the Nocti for the future... who knows!)

Yes, I treated the DPs not as compact or point-&-shoot, but as specialised cameras as you said; therefore, most of what you saw has been shot on a tripod, with filters (polarizer, NDs and grad NDs) and with the same care I'd use for my Fine Art work with any camera. While size and form factor can be deceiving, I agree with you that these cameras are best used in a very controlled way, as MF or the like.

Vieri I should have said your review and photos are really nice.
It was the Luminous Landscape review which said DP2M is as a MF that made me start this thread.

DP1M, DP2M, DP3M using as specialised as I would S2 and knowing I am getting S2 image quality (except shallow dof) makes it a really nice 3x system for me.

[vieri]

Originally Posted by onceuponatime

Vieri I should have said your review and photos are really nice.
It was the Luminous Landscape review which said DP2M is as a MF that made me start this thread.

DP1M, DP2M, DP3M using as specialised as I would S2 and knowing I am getting S2 image quality (except shallow dof) makes it a really nice 3x system for me.

Thank you very much, I am glad you enjoyed the pics I haven't used the S2, but I have a few years experience with Phase P45+, P65+ and Leaf Aptus 12R and while the Merrill don't go even close to 65/80 Mp of Medium Format quality, they sure hold their own as far as detail up to about 30 Mp Bayer. As far as look, they do have a richness and a different look to them, whether this is appealing or not, of course, is another matter. To me it is, but of course YMMV.

[LucisPictor]

Not exactly what you are looking for, but still...

Quick Comparison – Leica Monochrom, Sigma DP2 Merrill and Hasselblad 39CF by Michael Ma | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

[onceuponatime]

Originally Posted by vieri

Thank you very much, I am glad you enjoyed the pics I haven't used the S2, but I have a few years experience with Phase P45+, P65+ and Leaf Aptus 12R and while the Merrill don't go even close to 65/80 Mp of Medium Format quality, they sure hold their own as far as detail up to about 30 Mp Bayer.


As far as look, they do have a richness and a different look to them, whether this is appealing or not, of course, is another matter. To me it is, but of course YMMV.

To me the richness and dimensionality of Foveon is preferable to detail of MF.
30MP (Bayer Equivlent) DPMerril are approaching S2 37.5MP, that is plenty detail for me.

[vieri]

Ad

Originally Posted by onceuponatime

To me the richness and dimensionality of Foveon is preferable to detail of MF.
30MP (Bayer Equivlent) DPMerril are approaching S2 37.5MP, that is plenty detail for me.

I just made today for one customer some A3 prints of my Venice images taken with the DP1 & DP2 Merrill, and they look simply wonderful. Colours, depth, detail, they are just amazing - and not just "considering" the camera they have been shot with, they are amazing period These little compact cameras never cease to impress me, so much so that I wrote an ARTICLE on printing big from small cameras - maybe it isn't very far the day when we'll be able to have amazing print quality (like, A1 and larger prints) from a 3/4 compact-camera kit. I wish Sigma would make:

- a fourth Merrill, lens around 18/21 mm;

and / or:

- A DSLR with a FF Foveon sensor with Nikon F and Canon EOS mounts (a la Kodak of old), same pixel size of the current sensor, just enlarge it as it is (it will end up around 22 Mp, or 65-70 Foveon Mp as Sigma calls them, which is perfectly fine); aimed at Studio & landscape / Fine Art photographers;

If they'll price it right, I am sure that they'll have an hard time keeping them on the shelves!

[AB007]

I have not used the S2 much. There are rave reviews of the DP3. The details are amazing. Quite an interesting little camera. I am fighting my GAS

I wonder if they would come out with a full frame. I am not sure why Engadget stated as 46-megapixel (15.3-megapixel equivalent)

Review on Luminous-landscape:
Sigma DP3 Review

On Engadget:
Sigma DP3 Merrill to ship in March, deliver distance macros for $999

[Peter D Lux 2]

Originally Posted by vieri

I wish Sigma would make:

- a fourth Merrill, lens around 18/21 mm;

and / or:

- A DSLR with a FF Foveon sensor with Nikon F and Canon EOS mounts (a la Kodak of old), same pixel size of the current sensor, just enlarge it as it is (it will end up around 22 Mp, or 65-70 Foveon Mp as Sigma calls them, which is perfectly fine); aimed at Studio & landscape / Fine Art photographers;

Hi Vieri,

I don't think it would be very useful to make a DSLR with a FF Foveon sensor with Nikon F and Canon EOS mounts. Look at the trouble people have with the dissapointing resolution of their lenses on the D800 with 'only' 36 MP Bayer-pixels.

[vieri]

Originally Posted by Peter D Lux 2

Hi Vieri,

I don't think it would be very useful to make a DSLR with a FF Foveon sensor with Nikon F and Canon EOS mounts. Look at the trouble people have with the dissapointing resolution of their lenses on the D800 with 'only' 36 MP Bayer-pixels.

Hi Peter,

well, you got a point there Well, since 15 Foveon-MP are about 30 Bayer-MP, 22 Foveon-MP would probably be in the same range as 45 Bayer-MP, which shouldn't be impossible to attain, at least for the new generation primes. Plus, more sampling at sensor level is always better, even with lesser lenses.

Otherwise, they could make it APS-C: less strain on the lenses, less development cost for Sigma (it will be sort of like the SD1 but with different lens mounts).

Either way, I'd love to put my Nikon glass on a FF or APS-C Foveon camera, it would be just wonderful for Landscape / Fine Art and Studio work... hopefully one day

[wildlightphoto]

Originally Posted by Peter D Lux 2

Hi Vieri,

I don't think it would be very useful to make a DSLR with a FF Foveon sensor with Nikon F and Canon EOS mounts. Look at the trouble people have with the dissapointing resolution of their lenses on the D800 with 'only' 36 MP Bayer-pixels.

The obvious solution is to use a Leica-R mount instead

[Peter D Lux 2]

That'll be the day, Doug

[colonel]

the pictures posted above look over sharpened to me.
many of the examples of the merrill I see look over sharpened.

Its a fine camera and the sensor is wonderful but am not convinced there is much relationship to a the S2 MF. Not having the S2 but surely there are DOF, bokeh and detail advantages that a small sensor camera can not compete with. In addition, larger sensors need less good lenses as they capture more light. As the Leica S2 system lenses are technically perfect, I would be surprised if any smaller sensor camera could compete and colour depth

I would be interested with the view of someone with a S2

[onceuponatime]

Originally Posted by colonel

the pictures posted above look over sharpened to me.
many of the examples of the merrill I see look over sharpened.

Its a fine camera and the sensor is wonderful but am not convinced there is much relationship to a the S2 MF. Not having the S2 but surely there are DOF, bokeh and detail advantages that a small sensor camera can not compete with. In addition, larger sensors need less good lenses as they capture more light. As the Leica S2 system lenses are technically perfect, I would be surprised if any smaller sensor camera could compete and colour depth

I would be interested with the view of someone with a S2

Originally Posted by onceuponatime

To me outside of shallow dof I believe DP1M, DM2M, DP3M due to three layer would give equivalent S2 micro contrast, tonal gradation, subtlety, richness, clarity, per pixel sharpness, detail (DPMs are 30MP Bayer equivalent) with added dimensionality due to its 3 layer.

Luminious Landscape have noted DPMs are as Medium Format.

DP3M is the one i have settled on as it is the focal length i use most.
If i need more than 30MP i will stitch.

Re ; sharpening, in SPP needs to be set at -2 (-two) to be neutral. Anything less will look over sharpened.

[tom0511]

Originally Posted by colonel

the pictures posted above look over sharpened to me.
many of the examples of the merrill I see look over sharpened.

Its a fine camera and the sensor is wonderful but am not convinced there is much relationship to a the S2 MF. Not having the S2 but surely there are DOF, bokeh and detail advantages that a small sensor camera can not compete with. In addition, larger sensors need less good lenses as they capture more light. As the Leica S2 system lenses are technically perfect, I would be surprised if any smaller sensor camera could compete and colour depth

I would be interested with the view of someone with a S2

Originally Posted by onceuponatime

Does anyone here have S2 and Sigma DP1m, DP2m.
If so how do they complement each other.

The DP3m has been announced with equivalent 75mm F2.8 and 1:3 macro. If anyone here has DP1m, DP2m and S2, would you purchase DP3m as well.

I handled the S2. For an amateur as myself I was lets say scared of it, if that is the right term.

For studio, stills, landscape would the apsc 3 layer non cfa Foveon be a leveller in terms of tonal gradation, subtlety, richness, micro contrast, clarity, per pixel sharpness compared to the MF Bayer cfa S2.


Thanks.

H,
I cant comment on the meryl, but I have used a dp1 and dp2 for some time. Allready those had a certain 3-dimensional look and clarity.
However I found color to be somewhat difficult. Strong but not allways pleasing. Also the yellow and red channel blew out much faster than blue for example. One had to underexpose when there were strong yellows in the image to not blew the channel. As soon as you went up in ISO the colors got "dead".
The images I see from the Meryl have the same look IMO (even though I know many things are improved).
I have used a S2 and now S and while the Meryl images are very sharp and show nice detail - to me they look often some what overprocessed.
I don't find they show the fine tonal transitions like the files from digital MF including the Leica S. But I have never compared side by side.
Personally I prefer a Coolpix A at the moment as my small camera.
The detail is very good as well (it seems as detailed or even more detailed than my M9 with 28/2.0asph), and I have much more room to use it in low light at higher ISO.
But the look is different from Foveon.
My guess is you would initially see which images are from the Meryl, and which from the S.
Not so much resolution, but more color and tonality.
Just my guess.

[onceuponatime]

Originally Posted by tom0511

H,
I cant comment on the meryl, but I have used a dp1 and dp2 for some time. Allready those had a certain 3-dimensional look and clarity.
However I found color to be somewhat difficult. Strong but not allways pleasing. Also the yellow and red channel blew out much faster than blue for example. One had to underexpose when there were strong yellows in the image to not blew the channel. As soon as you went up in ISO the colors got "dead".
The images I see from the Meryl have the same look IMO (even though I know many things are improved).
I have used a S2 and now S and while the Meryl images are very sharp and show nice detail - to me they look often some what overprocessed.
I don't find they show the fine tonal transitions like the files from digital MF including the Leica S. But I have never compared side by side..

I settled on the DP3Merrill as it has resolved those colour and white balance issues and 75mm is a lerngth i use for than 28, 50.
Yes, Sigma's always had a 3D feel and clarity : Monochrom has it.

In processing sharpness needs to be at -2 (minus two) to be neutral else looks over processed.

Those who have compared the Merrils to MF digitals say the Merrrils have the fine tonal trnasitions just not quite the detail, thus on static subjects i will stitch.