mjh Posted February 14, 2008 Share #61  Posted February 14, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I haven't seen a SD14 test chart myself but, color moire has no play in the test here Well, that’s the point: with the SD14, there is no colour moiré. I’ve seen lots of colour moiré from other cameras using conventional sensors. There’s the usual trade-off: less resolution because of a strong antialiasing filter or high resolution and some artifacts with less effective AA filters (or no AA filters at all). You can get rid of the colour moiré in the raw converter, but it’s tricky.  as I recall that I've read somewhere that starting from 250 lp/ph desaturation kicks in and above 500 lp/ph all turns into black and white, so unlike many Foveon advocates claim, a "color resolution" test is meaningless, the black and white charts should do its justice. You cannot judge the resolution of fine colour detail unless you actually feed fine colour detail to the camera. B&W resolution charts don’t tell you anything about a camera’s ability to resolve fine details that depends on colour rather than luminance contrast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 14, 2008 Posted February 14, 2008 Hi mjh, Take a look here Examples DP1. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sdai Posted February 14, 2008 Share #62  Posted February 14, 2008 B&W resolution charts don’t tell you anything about a camera’s ability to resolve fine details that depends on colour rather than luminance contrast.  The high frequency response to details varies from one color to another ... the result will only be valid when you measure a synchronous response to a given sample. When you hit peak performance in red, it's probably not so right in blue ... but a standard for measurement of the overall final result has to stay neutral. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted February 14, 2008 Share #63  Posted February 14, 2008 The high frequency response to details varies from one color to another ... the result will only be valid when you measure a synchronous response to a given sample. When you hit peak performance in red, it's probably not so right in blue Only with a Bayer sensor, but so what – check all the primary colour pairs if you feel like it. But red/green and red/blue should suffice.  but a standard for measurement of the overall final result has to stay neutral. The standard ISO test stays neutral only insofar as it doesn’t test a camera’s ability to resolve fine colour detail at all. There are several issues in this area (colour bleeding due to excessive noise reduction for example) that never enter into standard resolution tests; still they have an influence on effective resolution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 14, 2008 Share #64  Posted February 14, 2008 yes my understanding is with bayer principle sensors we have the AA filter for the average 2-5% of cases with moire, so we suffer less detail most of the time for the low percentage of cases where we really need it  Studies on the foveon have proven that it doesnt exhibit moire, therefore it goes that there is a gain in resolution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted February 15, 2008 Share #65 Â Posted February 15, 2008 Am I the only one who thinks that there might be something odd with the colours in those photos? Like they are laminated postcards from a couple of years ago or something. They don't pop at all. Â I'm totally confused by the images I've seen so far - the link posted by imants and the ones on dpreview. I personally think the images look cr@p to be brutally honest - smeared and over-sharpened at the same time, somehow. And on my 23" Apple monitor here at work, the images seem to have blotchy color artifacts, as well. Â I mentioned this in a comment over on theonlinephotographer and ctein (whose opinion I sincerely respect) decidedly disagreed with me... But I continue to be severely unimpressed with what looked like it could be a really interesting little camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivi1969 Posted February 16, 2008 Share #66 Â Posted February 16, 2008 I also saw the pictures and I cannot find any distinctive or a signature look on any of them, no wider tonal range or any 3d special look. Yes, it has less noise at iso 800 than the D2 at iso 100 so what, with the DP1 f4 lens you are forced to use high isos in medium to low-light situations and forget about intimate pictures with narrow depth of field. Â Did you see the distortion in this man's face? not my favorite portrait's camera! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted February 16, 2008 Share #67 Â Posted February 16, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) The image of the man's face was an excellent example of what I felt was weird about the color: the highlights all tended to yellow, giving him a severely jaundiced look, I thought. Â But then I couldn't really 'believe' the color of any of the shots - without really being able to put my finger on why. Maybe all Foveon images look like this...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted February 16, 2008 Share #68 Â Posted February 16, 2008 liver problems Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivi1969 Posted February 16, 2008 Share #69 Â Posted February 16, 2008 plasticman: I agree with you, it look weird but besides the color shift which could be corrected with white balance (I guess) what really bothers me is the idea to be confined to one slow wide angle lens... i would love to see comparative tests shots between this one and the new Ricoh... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 18, 2008 Share #70  Posted February 18, 2008 i think you can stare into inexpertly made images all you like, check out this SD14 directory Carl Rytterfalk Fotografi  take away the AA filter and get a + resolution add an AA filter and get a - resolution While clearly they meet Mp wise somewhere in between, Mb wise (spatially) they differ. What is left is similarly FF 12Mp res outshovels 12 Mp P&S resolution due to pixel definition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivi1969 Posted February 18, 2008 Share #71  Posted February 18, 2008 Hello Riley,  Very nice pictures, I love tee tonal range, much more beef in those raw files than the Vegas pictures, but again, if don't think they succeed trying to make a point showing high iso examples... in web resolution look fine but at 100% they are not so impressive... here is a 3200 iso shot. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/44365-examples-dp1/?do=findComment&comment=486777'>More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 19, 2008 Share #72  Posted February 19, 2008 rivi it aint a high iso camera, i dont think theres an APSC that is  the photographer has taken more care with WB on the portraits though and the detail is evident in almost every frame, reduced or not    Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivi1969 Posted February 19, 2008 Share #73 Â Posted February 19, 2008 Hi Riley, Â I agree that APS cameras are not specially intended for high iso use, (many are) but we have the option to use fast glass with them, like f1.4 primes who offers 3 stops advantage vs the f4. In iso practical terms you know it means 100 vs 800, 200 vs 1600 and so on... the f4 lens forces you to go high with the iso in many everyday situations. I would love to see side by side comparisons with the Ricoh GRII, the GX100 and the D-Lux3, and also against some SLR, I guess they are obligated for the fun of us all. Â The detail in the BW portrait looks very impressive but still has a limited dynamic range that is evident in his hair and cheek. In the portrait of the girl there is some kind of halo -or glow- around her face and arms that makes it look weird, like a ghosting effect, (or maybe is my powerbook) It would be nice if Sigma includes a tele-converter specially for portraiture photography and expand its usability just like many pocket cameras do, if the camera will cost 1000dlls I think is a little too expensive... Â Cheers! Ricardo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted February 19, 2008 Share #74  Posted February 19, 2008 Hi Riley, I agree that APS cameras are not specially intended for high iso use, (many are) but we have the option to use fast glass with them, like f1.4 primes who offers 3 stops advantage vs the f4. In iso practical terms you know it means 100 vs 800, 200 vs 1600 and so on... the f4 lens forces you to go high with the iso in many everyday situations. I would love to see side by side comparisons with the Ricoh GRII, the GX100 and the D-Lux3, and also against some SLR, I guess they are obligated for the fun of us all.  you wont get fast glass on APSC compact either, I suspect Canon and Nikon APSC would be further inhibited, or exhibit more fall-off, vignetting/soft edges  The detail in the BW portrait looks very impressive but still has a limited dynamic range that is evident in his hair and cheek. In the portrait of the girl there is some kind of halo -or glow- around her face and arms that makes it look weird, like a ghosting effect, (or maybe is my powerbook) It would be nice if Sigma includes a tele-converter specially for portraiture photography and expand its usability just like many pocket cameras do, if the camera will cost 1000dlls I think is a little too expensive...  the DR should be greater than P&S cameras the photog makes an admission he blew the highlights in the text below that B&W image  Blown highlights are not necessarily a product of narrow DR and i dispute that DR can be estimated from images at all. Since there does not appear to be an Imatest on SD14, i guess we will have to wait for Askey or someother reviewer to trash it later. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapp Posted February 19, 2008 Share #75 Â Posted February 19, 2008 The great advantage of the DP1 is that it can produce great images under normal conditions which no other compact digital camera of the same size can do. Take the camera for what it is and stop debating high ISO performance, portrait application of a 16 mm lens, ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rivi1969 Posted February 19, 2008 Share #76 Â Posted February 19, 2008 The great advantage of the DP1 is that it can produce great images under normal conditions which no other compact digital camera of the same size can do. Take the camera for what it is and stop debating high ISO performance, portrait application of a 16 mm lens, ... Â Under normal conditions many cameras can and should produce great images, if not they would be obsolete don't you think? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted February 19, 2008 Share #77 Â Posted February 19, 2008 Very nice pictures, I love tee tonal range, much more beef in those raw files than the Vegas pictures, but again, if don't think they succeed trying to make a point showing high iso examples... in web resolution look fine but at 100% they are not so impressive... here is a 3200 iso shot. Â I actually don't mind the grain in that shot - for once, I could almost say it looks somewhat 'film-like' - but please don't quote me on that. Â But in any case, is there any evidence that the DP-1 will be able to produce images of this quality? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted February 19, 2008 Share #78  Posted February 19, 2008 But in any case, is there any evidence that the DP-1 will be able to produce images of this quality? There’s no reason to suppose otherwise. Obviously, the fixed focal length is a limiting factor, so nobody would suggest to use the DP1 for serious portrait work. Image quality, on the other hand, should be similar to that of the SD14. If you are working in raw mode, that is – JPEGs taken with the SD14 can look truly horrible, and I suspect the same might be true of the DP1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozkar Posted February 20, 2008 Share #79  Posted February 20, 2008 The image of the man's face was an excellent example of what I felt was weird about the color: the highlights all tended to yellow, giving him a severely jaundiced look, I thought. But then I couldn't really 'believe' the color of any of the shots - without really being able to put my finger on why. Maybe all Foveon images look like this...?  Want to see weird colour? Just shoot the M8 on AWB. 1.201 has improved somewhat, but it is still far from perfect. My M8 & 28 Summicron cost $10,000 (Aussie dollars), the DP1 will cost $1000. For $10k I expect nothing less than perfection, for $1000 I could live with tweaking WB in PP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozkar Posted February 20, 2008 Share #80 Â Posted February 20, 2008 The great advantage of the DP1 is that it can produce great images under normal conditions which no other compact digital camera of the same size can do. Take the camera for what it is and stop debating high ISO performance, portrait application of a 16 mm lens, ... Â Well said. Some guys here are carrying on like the DP1 will sell for the M8's ridiculously high price. And expect a fixed focal wide angle lens to shoot intimate portraits without distortion. Get real. Â The DP1 is far from perfect. As is the M8. But for $1000 (Aussie) the DP1 is a steal. If this little beast had a Leica badge it would sell for $2000. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.