Thread: DP2M versus Fuji X100

I ran a quick test between the two cameras. Each set at ISO100 and f8. Please excuse the difference in focal length. The focal point for each shot was exactly the same, the centre of the picture.

I've taken only the centre third of each to compare. Quite a difference. No sharpening involved, just a bit of a tweak in the shadows. Considering the high esteem the Fuji sensor and fix lens combination are held, the Sigma combination is quite frankly mind blowing.

all those who are considering this Sigma unit will hopefully find their way here and be able to see for themselves.

The first shot was the X100. This one is the Sigma, but I have had to halve the size of the jpeg so I could upload it. Hopefully it serves a purpose

Apparently, if you can work around the Sigma's peculiarities, the image quality is stunning. Maybe when they hit the used market I'll get to try it first hand.

I still don't understand why the DPs are considered peculiar or quirky.

They're just cameras, and my DP2s doesn't operate any more oddly than the other cameras I own.

Having used DP cameras (and I really liked them but I just can't use something without a viewfinder + the DP's I had the LCD was next to useless), I would be curious to know how the Merrill fares at ISO 800-1200. I know the X100 (and keep in mind the X100 does not have the newest Fuji sensor) has no issues whatsoever with those ISO's. The DP's I had could not be used over ISO 200 (400 maybe but the files usually looked terrible). I was actually considering getting a Foveon DSLR until they came out with that crazy price. I opted for a FF Nikon instead.

Yep, the DP2M has its shortcomings. I bought it purely for landscape work. My Sony RX100 is my pocket camera for everything. my X100 for the pure joy of shooting street photography and landscapes. but the Siggy for slow, considered, high detailed, still life. It was the image detail I wanted more than anything, and boy oh boy, this camera gives it in spades!!

The Siggy isn't peculiar, though I can understand why people think it may be. It is just poor at AF in low light (good light is perfectly fine and as good as my Fuji) and image quality above iso400 really does suffer. Other than that, the menu is very simple and it is a very straightforward camera to use. Learning curve is very shallow indeed. only peculiar insomuch that it doesn't have a huge amount of pointless menus that people just never ever use, such as lots of silly filters. It does what a great camera should do, and that is take great photos.

That said, each to their own of course.

Yes, the Merrill image quality is stunning.

Originally Posted by pdh

I still don't understand why the DPs are considered peculiar or quirky.

They're just cameras, and my DP2s doesn't operate any more oddly than the other cameras I own.

As a DP2 owner, I completely understand why some folks say they are peculiar.
I tell folks that who's first time it is with these things is that it's paramount that one is patient & deliberate - once you understand this, one is less apt to be frustrated

The X100 picture does not look sharp. My X100 pictures are much sharper than that - the DP2M is, of course, tack sharp, but my X100 pictures are not that far off from what I've taken with DP cameras. The X100 is a better walk-around camera whereas when I used the DP cameras they really needed a tripod. But sharpness is almost not the right word for the DP2M - it's just smooth and seamless unlike any other camera.

If the DP2M comes down in price I'll snap it up. At $1000 I think it's a great camera given its capabilities, it's just not what I need right now.

I look on my DP2M as a miniature 4x5 field camera, light, immensely portable, two step digital processing, albeit without movements or the ability to change lenses, mounted on a tripod with a single film speed:100. I also can't think why I would want another lens on it; its present lens being superb with a field of view similar to that which my mind comes upon.