frame-it Posted March 10 Share #81 Posted March 10 Advertisement (gone after registration) its what the TL3 should have been... 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 10 Posted March 10 Hi frame-it, Take a look here Sigma BF camera. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
nykv Posted March 10 Share #82 Posted March 10 13 hours ago, SrMi said: Cost? Better for shooting moving subjects (faster readout)? + Overheating during long videos? This being the main application. Without the cooling fins' the design is now Jobs&Ive, better said: pure Japanese. (One more reason to buy the light version with a matching lens, as shown in video.) There are thousands of camera models old and new, while beauty is so rare = it'll be a seller imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted March 10 Share #83 Posted March 10 3 hours ago, nykv said: + Overheating during long videos? This being the main application. Without the cooling fins' the design is now Jobs&Ive, better said: pure Japanese. (One more reason to buy the light version with a matching lens, as shown in video.) There are thousands of camera models old and new, while beauty is so rare = it'll be a seller imo. Apple design would be better called German, given the influence of Rams. Regarding the BF, I would suspect the 24mp resolution was chosen for cost and the target demographic isn’t after top image quality. No EVF and no IBIS, and the unlikelihood of this being a tripod camera means lower ultimate resolution so why waste an expensive, high res sensor? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted March 10 Share #84 Posted March 10 2 hours ago, LD_50 said: Regarding the BF, I would suspect the 24mp resolution was chosen for cost and the target demographic isn’t after top image quality. The target market has a different definition of image quality. It's not (primarily) a camera for tripod-bound landscapes and sofa sized prints. I guess you could describe them as the "post-pixel peeping" generation. There are many similar aesthetic rifts in the history of photography. Compare and contrast the "f64" generation with post-war street shooters, or with the earlier pictorialists. 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeping_a_balance Posted March 13 Share #85 Posted March 13 around minute 13 they play around with rolling shutter. Seems it's not as bad as one would expect... (shrug) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted March 15 Share #86 Posted March 15 Looking at a camera for a few minutes at a trade show is very, very different to using it in real life. I have yet to see a real world video review that doesn't say the screen is almost impossible to read in bright sunlight - one of the main drawbacks of this camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted March 15 Share #87 Posted March 15 Advertisement (gone after registration) 5 hours ago, Chris W said: Looking at a camera for a few minutes at a trade show is very, very different to using it in real life. I have yet to see a real world video review that doesn't say the screen is almost impossible to read in bright sunlight - one of the main drawbacks of this camera. Agreed. It’s mentioned again and again. Getting this wrong is inexcusable. I understand going for the billet build quality, the stylized UI, etc but if you go with no possible viewfinder and then get the screen quality and brightness wrong, you’ve a failed product. I also don’t like the single strap attachment and what is described as a pretty sharp edge along the bottom of the camera. I imagine the edges on the camera (particularly the black) will be destroyed quickly with any regular use. One YT video mentioned “the camera is so solid that anything it bumps against will take the damage rather than the camera.” Clearly they’ve not used much metal camera gear. If I’m Sigma there’s no way I release something that will get this much press coverage with this many easily resolved design issues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graphlex Posted March 15 Share #88 Posted March 15 On 3/9/2025 at 5:05 AM, frame-it said: He says that the raw photo files are only 12-bit, but other reviewers say 14-bit photo files. Would be more interesting to me if it’s 14-bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlosgavina Posted March 15 Share #89 Posted March 15 (edited) On Sigma's BF website: Quote Still Image File Format: Lossless compression RAW (DNG) 14-bit / JPEG (Exif3.0) , RAW(DNG) + JPEG: recording is possible Edited March 15 by carlosgavina Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 15 Share #90 Posted March 15 30 minutes ago, graphlex said: He says that the raw photo files are only 12-bit, but other reviewers say 14-bit photo files. Would be more interesting to me if it’s 14-bit. From Sigma BF official specifications: Still image file format: Lossless compression RAW (DNG) 14-bit 12-bit would increase readout speed two-fold, with negligible impact on IQ. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DadDadDaddyo Posted March 16 Share #91 Posted March 16 I'll admit that Duddy-wise, I'm a Fuddy, but I truly just can't understand picking a camera for how it looks... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 16 Share #92 Posted March 16 (edited) Those who say that the rear screen is unusable in bright sunlight obviously have their own standards of usability, and I wouldn't argue with them. But to help the rest of us, can you say how it compares to, say, a smartphone, Leica TL2, Sigma fp, Leica Q, M or any other common camera that has a rear screen, even if it has an VF as well (preferable a Leica, since that's where we're coming from)? Is it worse than any of them, or do you find all of them unusable in bright sun? Edited March 16 by LocalHero1953 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted March 16 Share #93 Posted March 16 1 hour ago, DadDadDaddyo said: I'll admit that Duddy-wise, I'm a Fuddy, but I truly just can't understand picking a camera for how it looks... And yet M users complain that the M240 is “too thick” Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted March 16 Share #94 Posted March 16 I wonder if an anti-glare protection screen could help with unwanted reflections and mitigate the issue Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 16 Share #95 Posted March 16 12 minutes ago, Simone_DF said: And yet M users complain that the M240 is “too thick” The "thickness" issue is more about how it handles, not how it looks, though both criteria can be intertwined. I pick a camera based on how it handles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 16 Share #96 Posted March 16 12 minutes ago, Simone_DF said: I wonder if an anti-glare protection screen could help with unwanted reflections and mitigate the issue Max brightness (nits) is probably the main criterion of outdoor usability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 16 Share #97 Posted March 16 1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said: Those who say that the rear screen is unusable in bright sunlight obviously have their own standards of usability, and I wouldn't argue with them. But to help the rest of us, can you say how it compares to, say, a smartphone, Leica TL2, Sigma fp, Leica Q, M or any other common camera that has a rear screen, even if it has an VF as well (preferable a Leica, since that's where we're coming from)? Is it worse than any of them, or do you find all of them unusable in bright sun? I have a matte screen protector and that helps, but any LCD can be unusable in bright sunlight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 16 Share #98 Posted March 16 18 minutes ago, jaapv said: I have a matte screen protector and that helps, but any LCD can be unusable in bright sunlight. I agree - hence my question - is the BF any worse than any other LCD? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 16 Share #99 Posted March 16 1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said: I agree - hence my question - is the BF any worse than any other LCD? I believe thta the latest iPhone Pro Max have a screen with better outdoor visibility, but they also sometimes suck in bright sunlight. I do not believe that BF's LCD is any worse than LCDs of other cameras. Ricoh GR III works pretty well outdoors (no EVF). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrichie Posted March 17 Share #100 Posted March 17 13 hours ago, SrMi said: I believe thta the latest iPhone Pro Max have a screen with better outdoor visibility, but they also sometimes suck in bright sunlight. I do not believe that BF's LCD is any worse than LCDs of other cameras. Ricoh GR III works pretty well outdoors (no EVF). I am considering a BF for a daily camera with 24 + 45mm lenses, however I think it was a big mistake not putting an EVF into it [it is a highly requested feature of the GR cameras due to the glare issues]. This is the only thing making me hesitate as unfortunately for me I am a total sucker for minimal design. It would be nice to know if Leica are going to to an ILC version of the Q [L mount] or not. I would be crying if I committed to the BF as It would tick off every single negative problem of the BF [except price most likely]. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now