Is a Sigma an uncompetitve, limited slow dinosaur because it can’t take 10 frames per second like some Nex cams? Of course not, since you’ve made it quite clear that the Sigma Merrills make images the 2012-era Nex’s couldn’t dream of. The Nex is a whole ‘nother level of image quality that makes its bulk and slowness worthwhile for a significant bunch of people. Is the Sony Nex an uncompetitive, limited slow dinosaur, because it can’t take 60 frames per second like a Nikon V1? Of course not, because when the Nex’s speed will do, the Nex makes images the Nikon couldn’t dream of. Thanks to your nice writeup, which wisely shows us not-full-size images so that we can see the difference the Sigma Merrills make even at ordinary print sizes, am beginning to see the foolishness of viewing the Sigmas as being merely too-slow, too-limited competition to Bayer sensor APS cams. Kudos on getting up early and taking some interestinh pics, as well as putting together the blog and comparisons. I approximate the Foveon 15 Mp (or 45 Mp if you believe Sigma’s marketing!) resolution to about 30 Mp of Bayer resolution. Plus, an upsized Merrill size still holds better detail than a Nex-7 file. The difference in size is not 50%, more like 25%. Or are you upsampling the Sigma (and not the Sony) image?Ī. I find that odd: at that printsize, the 50% extra dpi resolution should matter. Lastly, you state that you like to print large (24″x36″), but that 24Mp versus 16Mp makes little difference. No, because shooting in aperture priority the only thing that changes is shutter speed and that has no effect on DR and colour response Thirdly, by comparing at 1.6EV difference, aren’t you handicapping the Nex-7? Less DR, different color response, etc.?Ī. That is not possible, because I had to use two different softwares to process the files (Sigma files aren’t supported in anything but Sigma proprietary software, very unfortunately) Secondly, did you use the same WB settings (spot, average, landscape, sunset, or custom) in both? Frankly, I find the color differences a bit extreme, and think that both cameras are off somehow.Ī. Exceptions are if I choose a particular shutter speed for aesthetic effects like here (blurring water)
#Iridient developer for olympus review iso
First question is why 4s? ISO 400 or ISO 800 would work for your printsize too, imo.Ī.I always shoot at base ISO on a tripod for maximum quality if I can.
There is evidently some difference in how the cameras’ meters work, seeing that the resulting levels are pretty much the same In your example the Sigma is shot at -0.3EV and the Sony is shot at +1.3EV, both at ISO 100, both at 4s.Ī. In short, the Sigma DP1 & DP2 Merrill and the Sony Nex-7 with Sigma lenses all offer you great image quality in very compact and light packages. As I said at the beginning, your requirements, and therefore your conclusions, can be different than mine – that’s the beauty of it, especially in times such as these, when compact cameras are getting so good. I will keep them and give them a try on future trips as well. They do in a small, light package, and they suit my shooting style very well. That said, the Sigma DP1 Merrill and Sigma DP2 Merrill produce image quality with a look that I could define, for lack of better words, close to medium format. another is a trade-off that depends on what you shoot and what your priorities are.
#Iridient developer for olympus review software
One of my biggest problems with the DP Merrill series of camera is that Sigma Photo Pro, usability-wise, is closest to be the worst piece of software ever designed. However, the Sony Nex-7 is definitely the better camera when it comes to flexibility, features, battery life, speed of use and ease of file processing. In particular, I found the sharpness and detail of the Merrill more to my liking than the Sony’s, despite the slight odd colour casts. Under an artistic point of view, which is what interests me the most, I have been very happy with all camera and lens combinations.
0 kommentar(er)
