Sigma FP as a stills camera, is it good?

[Daedalus2000]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is it possible to hear any opinions about the Sigma FP from current users? I am trying to rethink my camera system and given that I have some L mount cameras I was thinking that I can also consider the Sigma FP, if I find it at a good price used. I do not shoot much video, but I like the smaller form factor and the colors look good.

So my personal questions would be:

1) Is it good or even ok with M lenses?

2) Is it easy to use as every day pocket camera with small lenses (M or small sigma lenses)?

3) Does the form factor (rectangle, maybe slippery) make it difficult to use without extras accessories?

4) Is the lack of viewfinder and/or stabilization an issue?

5) Does the electronic shutter cause issues? (e.g. rolling shutter, no flash etc)

6) How is the AF after the firmware upgrades?

Thank you and Happy New Year

 

Edited December 31, 2020 by Daedalus2000

[Yuhau]

number 4 ) is the deal breaker for me .

Cannot see anything on the LCD panel under sun light, while IBIS is not an issue  

I would have picked one  up  in a heartbeat If Sigma  were to provide a SMALL LCD hood ( foldable ) or SMALL LCD finder for viewing .  

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[LocalHero1953]

1. I have only used it a bit with M lenses, and nothing wider than 35mm. IQ is fine. The problem is focusing them accurately on the LCD.

2. The lack of a viewfinder is a major limitation. It's too fat for the pocket IMO, though otherwise it is small.

3. It's not great: you would be better off with one of the attractive wooden grips you can find.

4. The lack of an EVF is the biggest problem, which affects everything else. Lack of IS is unimportant - especially if, like me, you've been without it for most of your life!

5. No better, no worse than most other cameras. It depends on what sort of photography you do, and what sort of lighting you shoot in.

6. Fine, but I didn't have a problem with it at launch. The main improvement I saw with f/w updating was eliminating a major bug in the UWC connection (direct streaming as a webcam via the USB-C port).

Frankly the notion of buying a Sigma fp for stills with M lenses is daft - using a LCD for framing is bad enough without having to manually focus as well. It only makes sense if you use AF lenses, and even then I wouldn't use it. I'd rather compromise the sensor size and get a TL2, where the design in the hand and UI is better, and you can use the add-on EVF.

I bought the fp mainly for video, initially with M lenses for static shooting on a tripod, but now always with L-mount lenses. On a tripod the absence of an EVF is not a limitation. I have not yet used it handheld, though, when I get a chance, I intend to use it with a separate monitor on a gimbal.

The pluses of the fp system that make it worthwhile for me are:
- Small size, combined with direct recording via USB to an external SSD.
- Superb IQ. Colours comparable with the SL2-S.
- L-mount lenses, which means I had no extra costs for lenses for video. The fp just becomes part of my L family with the SL2-S and CL.
- Dummy battery option, allowing you to run it from mains or battery pack. The battery (the same as in the CL etc) is too small for extended video.
- The bolt on additions: hot shoe mount (to which you can also bolt a clamp for a Samsung T5 SSD card); grip.
- Menu system. Better, more logical than Leica's IMO.

Edit. Bottom line. Would I buy it just as a stills camera? No. 

Edited December 31, 2020 by LocalHero1953

[Daedalus2000]

3 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

1. I have only used it a bit with M lenses, and nothing wider than 35mm. IQ is fine. The problem is focusing them accurately on the LCD.

2. The lack of a viewfinder is a major limitation. It's too fat for the pocket IMO, though otherwise it is small.

3. It's not great: you would be better off with one of the attractive wooden grips you can find.

4. The lack of an EVF is the biggest problem, which affects everything else. Lack of IS is unimportant - especially if, like me, you've been without it for most of your life!

5. No better, no worse than most other cameras. It depends on what sort of photography you do, and what sort of lighting you shoot in.

6. Fine, but I didn't have a problem with it at launch. The main improvement I saw with f/w updating was eliminating a major bug in the UWC connection (direct streaming as a webcam via the USB-C port).

Frankly the notion of buying a Sigma fp for stills with M lenses is daft - using a LCD for framing is bad enough without having to manually focus as well. It only makes sense if you use AF lenses, and even then I wouldn't use it. I'd rather compromise the sensor size and get a TL2, where the design in the hand and UI is better, and you can use the add-on EVF.

I bought the fp mainly for video, initially with M lenses for static shooting on a tripod, but now always with L-mount lenses. On a tripod the absence of an EVF is not a limitation. I have not yet used it handheld, though, when I get a chance, I intend to use it with a separate monitor on a gimbal.

The pluses of the fp system that make it worthwhile for me are:
- Small size, combined with direct recording via USB to an external SSD.
- Superb IQ. Colours comparable with the SL2-S.
- L-mount lenses, which means I had no extra costs for lenses for video. The fp just becomes part of my L family with the SL2-S and CL.
- Dummy battery option, allowing you to run it from mains or battery pack. The battery (the same as in the CL etc) is too small for extended video.
- The bolt on additions: hot shoe mount (to which you can also bolt a clamp for a Samsung T5 SSD card); grip.
- Menu system. Better, more logical than Leica's IMO.

Edit. Bottom line. Would I buy it just as a stills camera? No. 

Thank you very much for your detailed post. I am passing on it as a stills camera... Pity, because I always look for smaller size,  but, as you said, the TL2 is a better option...

[cboy]

I would say in some respects better than the sl2-s which is also 24 mp video centric camera. The main advantage are its dual gain and ridiculous low light capability. The only issue is its global shutter isnt great for panning action shots as there is rolling shutter distortion. The IQ is on par with leica. Focus peaking is spot on when i tried with my leica m lenses through an adapter. Its hefty and solidly built like a tank and water resistant.  However the shutter button lacks the tactile feel of the M

Had it an external accessory to allow for a lagless evf ( and not the silly ovf - photography pov not videography) then i would of sold my leica and just used primarily the fp.

The next iteration of the fp im quite sure will be a hit, or at least more accessories to make it more photography friendly.

Personal opinion...others i guess would say otherwise

 

[LocalHero1953]

4 minutes ago, cboy said:

I would say in some respects better than the sl2-s which is also 24 mp video centric camera. The main advantage are its dual gain and ridiculous low light capability. The only issue is its global shutter isnt great for panning action shots as there is rolling shutter distortion. The IQ is on par with leica. Focus peaking is spot on when i tried with my leica m lenses through an adapter. Its hefty and solidly built like a tank and water resistant.  However the shutter button lacks the tactile feel of the M

Had it an external accessory to allow for a lagless evf ( and not the silly ovf - photography pov not videography) then i would of sold my leica and just used primarily the fp.

The next iteration of the fp im quite sure will be a hit, or at least more accessories to make it more photography friendly.

Personal opinion...others i guess would say otherwise

 

The only matter where I am surprised at your comments is in low light capability. In low light, I find the SL2-S superior in noise management and colours. I suspect they are the same Sony sensor family, but Leica seems to get more from it. 

[frame-it]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/sigmafp/

 

 

[BernardC]

1. It's soft in the corners with some M lenses, compared to my SL. In other words, it's like a number of similar "almost M-compatible" cameras: it will work with one lens, but not another, and it will never be as good as an M or SL.

2. It's small but chunky and dense, so it feels heavier than it is. It's not a point-and-shoot like a TL or CL.

3. I use the small Sigma grip, and it's OK.

4. That's a personal call. Some people need a viewfinder, and some prefer to look at a bigger screen. Don't get the fp if you absolutely need a viewfinder. I find that it can be quite hard to focus manually in bright light, so it's probably not the best pairing for M lenses (unless you are adept at scale focusing).

5. Not in natural light. You will probably get issues with lights that fluctuate at a high frequency

6. The Sigma 45 is my only AF lens. It works fine

I wouldn't use the fp as a walkaround camera for M lenses, unless you are good at estimating your focus and framing (something I do all the time with a 24 or 21). The more I use the fp, the more it becomes obvious that it's a formidable video camera that also shoot stills.

[Daedalus2000]

7 hours ago, cboy said:

I would say in some respects better than the sl2-s which is also 24 mp video centric camera. The main advantage are its dual gain and ridiculous low light capability. The only issue is its global shutter isnt great for panning action shots as there is rolling shutter distortion. The IQ is on par with leica. Focus peaking is spot on when i tried with my leica m lenses through an adapter. Its hefty and solidly built like a tank and water resistant.  However the shutter button lacks the tactile feel of the M

Had it an external accessory to allow for a lagless evf ( and not the silly ovf - photography pov not videography) then i would of sold my leica and just used primarily the fp.

The next iteration of the fp im quite sure will be a hit, or at least more accessories to make it more photography friendly.

Personal opinion...others i guess would say otherwise

 

 

3 hours ago, BernardC said:

1. It's soft in the corners with some M lenses, compared to my SL. In other words, it's like a number of similar "almost M-compatible" cameras: it will work with one lens, but not another, and it will never be as good as an M or SL.

2. It's small but chunky and dense, so it feels heavier than it is. It's not a point-and-shoot like a TL or CL.

3. I use the small Sigma grip, and it's OK.

4. That's a personal call. Some people need a viewfinder, and some prefer to look at a bigger screen. Don't get the fp if you absolutely need a viewfinder. I find that it can be quite hard to focus manually in bright light, so it's probably not the best pairing for M lenses (unless you are adept at scale focusing).

5. Not in natural light. You will probably get issues with lights that fluctuate at a high frequency

6. The Sigma 45 is my only AF lens. It works fine

I wouldn't use the fp as a walkaround camera for M lenses, unless you are good at estimating your focus and framing (something I do all the time with a 24 or 21). The more I use the fp, the more it becomes obvious that it's a formidable video camera that also shoot stills.

Thank you for your replies. I was thinking of it as a smaller camera that I can use with an m lens or one of the smaller sigma lenses (45mm, maybe 35 f2 when it is available), and also the 20-60 panasonic lens that I have (got it with the S5). I realize now of course that it is not that small and maybe carrying an TL2 or even the S5  (if the extra weight is not an issue) may be preferable. 

When I do street photography I actually use M lenses and estimate the distance fine, but then the electronic shutter may create some distortion if I shoot a moving subject (especially if I move as well). 

I value great color etc, I wonder if I can find a way to rent it for a week or so to see how it is. I admit that I have a soft spot for Sigma, as I used to use the Merrill DP cameras that I loved...

Thanks again for all your posts.

 

[padam]

I think the Sony A7S is not a bad cheap camera to use with M lenses.
It does not have as many image issues as other sensors do, the ISO and dynamic range are unsurprisingly excellent, the colours are fine outside.
Very small, very light, it does feel like those old film cameras with the shutter button placement and the grip (which I find quite fine to be honest)
Decent tilt screen, decent battery life with manual focus.
When using the electronic shutter I always make sure that I am in burst mode and I hold the camera stills for a fraction of a second, it does a good job of reducing the rolling shutter to a minimum, but unfortunately the old A7S sensor was one of the first to have this feature and it shows.
I am still searching (dreaming) for a proper successor for this camera, but the Sigma fp, Canon EOS RP, Panasonic S5, Sony A7C, A9/A9II A7SIII etc. just don't seem to cut it and a lot of them cost so much more as well.

Most frustratingly, I think many other people beside me would consider buying a compact FF mirrorless Leica (no matter M-mount or L-mount), but they are just unwilling to produce one...

[Daedalus2000]

1 hour ago, padam said:

I think the Sony A7S is not a bad cheap camera to use with M lenses.
It does not have as many image issues as other sensors do, the ISO and dynamic range are unsurprisingly excellent, the colours are fine outside.
Very small, very light, it does feel like those old film cameras with the shutter button placement and the grip (which I find quite fine to be honest)
Decent tilt screen, decent battery life with manual focus.
When using the electronic shutter I always make sure that I am in burst mode and I hold the camera stills for a fraction of a second, it does a good job of reducing the rolling shutter to a minimum, but unfortunately the old A7S sensor was one of the first to have this feature and it shows.
I am still searching (dreaming) for a proper successor for this camera, but the Sigma fp, Canon EOS RP, Panasonic S5, Sony A7C, A9/A9II A7SIII etc. just don't seem to cut it and a lot of them cost so much more as well.

Most frustratingly, I think many other people beside me would consider buying a compact FF mirrorless Leica (no matter M-mount or L-mount), but they are just unwilling to produce one...

You are right, actually I used to have an A7S and I liked it, but I never "connected" with the Sony cameras and never liked the color especially in mixed light and the skin colors. At the moment I have the S5 and tbh I start to like it a lot, the color looks good the AF is descent, but it is still heavier than I like. I liked my SL when I had it but again the SLs are heavier cameras. 

I also have the TL2 and it is smaller but not full frame, so I guess I just have to accept that. I used it with the panasonic 20-60 and I was a bit disappointed with its performance but I need to explore it more with M lenses. I just hoped the Sigma FP was better for stills.

[padam]

3 hours ago, Daedalus2000 said:

You are right, actually I used to have an A7S and I liked it, but I never "connected" with the Sony cameras and never liked the color especially in mixed light and the skin colors. At the moment I have the S5 and tbh I start to like it a lot, the color looks good the AF is descent, but it is still heavier than I like. I liked my SL when I had it but again the SLs are heavier cameras. 

I also have the TL2 and it is smaller but not full frame, so I guess I just have to accept that. I used it with the panasonic 20-60 and I was a bit disappointed with its performance but I need to explore it more with M lenses. I just hoped the Sigma FP was better for stills.

Yes I briefly tried the fp and didn't like it at all as a camera.

I've just got a slightly used S1 with a beautiful EVF, tilt screen and a fairly quiet mechanical shutter, but it is just too big.
So I will probably sell it, with the S5 I would loose all three of these things so I don't see enough in it to switch until it becomes cheaper.

Maybe the next EOS RP level camera with a silent mode, or an A7CII, etc. will work well enough as street cameras, apart from Sigma, they seem to care most regarding the weight and size (although they don't care that much about tilt screens anymore).

Edited January 4, 2021 by padam

[Chris W]

It is a slow camera (like slow food). I actually really enjoy using it. It has become my main stills camera - I also have a Leica Q. I find the raw image quality comparable between the two cameras. 

It IS light.

It IS not great ergonomically. I bought a very cheap 'niceyrig' grip and now it is a joy to hold.

I bought the Sigma viewfinder as I mostly use manual lenses, especially for video. Yes. the viewfinder is the biggest downside. It is big.

I have added a Sigma 45mm lens for auto-focus. It's fine, bit not as fun to use as my M and Takumar lenses.

I have had Blackmagic pocket, Panasonic GH, Epson RD1, Sony A6000, Fuji X100T and XT3, plus Leica Q. The Sigma FP is by far the most successful hybrid - great for stills and great for video. It isn't always convenient, it arguably isn't the best camera at any single duty. It's a great all rounder.

My gripe with the Leica Q is the 28mm lens.

As a comprehensive combo, I find the Q and Sigma FP are formidable.

[Alan Friedman]

I've enjoyed the FP immensely. Its tiny form factor is a pleasure. I've made my own grip for it (pictures posted in other threads on the camera). It has become a regular carry for airline journeys - at least it was when I used to travel by plane. Yes, the rear LCD is difficult and sometimes impossible to use in daylight/sunlight. I've carried the dedicated viewfinder for some outdoor shooting - despite the silly size I find it enjoyable to use when a specific project requires it. I also find find the overall image quality to be on par with the original SL but the noise handling at high ISOs I find better on the FP. The new Sigma L mount lenses are fine performers with the FP. I can use all my old Leica and Nikon glass with the FP, but I've shifted mainly to the Sigma AF lenses. 

For me it is a nice niche body to own and carry out in the world and very nice to use especially for indoor candid shooting. The tiny size was reason enough for me to get it and it gets more use than my SL. Just another .02!

[agfa100]

Ok, I am another M lens user that is working with a Sony A7s and getting very close to picking up a fp. I only use manual focus lenses, I have M lenses, SL lenses plus some L-39 Russian stuff going back to 1936 plus three Alpa lenses with M adp. 24mm, 50mm f1.9 Macro-Switar, and a 40mm Makro-Kilar. Also everything gets converted into b&w, yes I am a luddite but I have fun and my eye's still work.

[Chris W]

I have an Alpa Macro Switar. At the moment there is no Alpa to L mount adapter, which is a bummer.

[BernardC]

1 hour ago, Chris W said:

I have an Alpa Macro Switar. At the moment there is no Alpa to L mount adapter, which is a bummer.

I guess you need to go Alpa-to-M and M-to-L.

On 1/15/2021 at 3:11 PM, agfa100 said:

a 40mm Makro-Kilar

It's a fun lens, but incredibly flare-prone. I would use it more often if it wasn't for that. I remember shooting in a room with large sunny windows. There were only a couple of places I could stand without triggering a thick fog-like flare (this was around sunset, so the Sunlight was particularly direct).

Is your Makro-Kilar flare-prone too?

[agfa100]

Since I use a lot of older lenses it's not worse then the others I use, I have a the hood for it and use it all the time. That is a must with some of these lenses I use, one of the worst is a Fed 100mm f 6.3 pre WWII even with a hood it is really prone to flare. But then it is also uncoated, but I have to be very careful with it. Here is a link to a shot with it on my Ricoh GXR with the M module. http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/wbill/R0011462.jpg.html

[verwackelt]

I had the FP as a loaner for a week together with the 1.2 35mm, the 14-24mm and the 45/2.8.
I liked the colors and overall imagequality.
But i would like to have at least 40MP.

For being my only and not a second camera it should have better ergonomics (modular grip attachable), EVF, tilt display, IBIS and mechanical shutter and BIGGER battery.
For being my second pocketcamera i would not need the things except the EFV and Tiltdisplay.

1) I just had the 50 summicron M and it works great

2) Not as easy as a very small compact camera. Fits in bigger pockets of a coat but not in tight pocketa of a jacket. depends on lens of course.

3) I have quite big hands and missed a grip.

4) Yes i missed an evf and that the display can be tilted. In bright light focusing and composing is an issue. Shots from lower positions are almost impossible without lying on the ground.
The same with the boxy viewfinder. It makes a telescope out of the camera. Can not be used for high shots above head over a crowd or at knee hight without lying in the mud.

5) only with flickering flourescend lights

6) do not know, because i had the camera before that update and i used most time the manual focus. But AF was good as i can remember.

Edited February 25, 2021 by verwackelt

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Chris W]

The FP is plenty detailed and sharp enough IMO.

The lack of evf is the biggest issue for me. When using L mount lenses you should just go with auto-focussing, then the screen is not such an issue. With 3rd party manual lenses, yes, it's a PITA, and the Sigma Loupe doubles the size of the camera.