Sigma TCSTV Sigma DP2 Quattro Review

Yup, good review, good video. Highlight issues would worry me if I were in the market for such a camera though, even if you can push the shadows. So what's your new haircut like? ;)
 
Fine review, as usual. I think if I were in the market, I'd wait for the DP1 Quattro to come out and take the opportunity to buy a DP1 Merrill at a great discount. Yeah, the Quattro is better at somewhat higher ISO and the battery life sucks less, but those are still handicaps, not features. So I'd probably go all in on making this a very contemplative low ISO beast only. Which is how I used the DPIM when I had one for a couple of months last summer. And it was brilliant in that role. The Quattro would expand the capabilities slightly, but not enough that I wouldn't be using a completely different camera if I wanted something more responsive or for lower light shooting.

-Ray
 
Excellent review, I remarked as such on UT.

Very thorough and it really is great that a serious camera review channel is promoting the Sigma cameras for a second time.

As per my comments on UT, the only feedback I have is that I have found that with careful pp the existing Merrill cameras can be used up to iso400 and even iso800 with very good results. But not for the faint hearted or inexperienced.

LouisB
 
Sigma should just give up all pretense that these are serious compacts. They aren't. Serious compacts are small, take anywhere all-rounders. Sure the DPs are small and take anywhere, but they aren't all-rounders. They can't compete with the Sony RX100s, the Fujis, the Panasonic, and the like.

The DPs are field cameras meant to capture carefully-composed scenes with stunning fidelity. And for this they are nearly unmatched. So Sigma, give up the vestigial grip, give up the low profile. Give us a brick with a sturdy tripod socket, an all-day battery, a 5" rear tiltable, hoodable, high res, high gamut, touchscreen LCD, and an image processing pipeline that will spit out JPGs and TIF files in a jiffy so we can review our work in the field.

I'll be the first in line.
 
Sigma should just give up all pretense that these are serious compacts. They aren't. Serious compacts are small, take anywhere all-rounders. Sure the DPs are small and take anywhere, but they aren't all-rounders. They can't compete with the Sony RX100s, the Fujis, the Panasonic, and the like.

The DPs are field cameras meant to capture carefully-composed scenes with stunning fidelity. And for this they are nearly unmatched. So Sigma, give up the vestigial grip, give up the low profile. Give us a brick with a sturdy tripod socket, an all-day battery, a 5" rear tiltable, hoodable, high res, high gamut, touchscreen LCD, and an image processing pipeline that will spit out JPGs and TIF files in a jiffy so we can review our work in the field.

I'll be the first in line.

That actually makes quite a lot of sense - except if you want to do some intense hiking before you get to the scene you want to capture. Then, every gram and cubic centimeter is one too many. Although the all-day battery would be nice, as well as the other features you mentioned... choices, choices!
 
That actually makes quite a lot of sense - except if you want to do some intense hiking before you get to the scene you want to capture. Then, every gram and cubic centimeter is one too many. Although the all-day battery would be nice, as well as the other features you mentioned... choices, choices!

Exactly.
 

Attachments

  • SDIM0111.jpg
    SDIM0111.jpg
    216 KB · Views: 435
If the Merrill is "unusable" above iso 200 then this review is unusable as well. Why so many "crap", "garbage" and unsubstantiated statements such as "rather like 20MP". And how about focusing on what the camera does and is good at, rather than ranting about what it is not. For landscapes or stills nothing in the 35 mm format can touch the Merrill imo. And the only relevant question would have been whether the Quattro even surpasses the Merrill for this use.
 
If the Merrill is "unusable" above iso 200 then this review is unusable as well. Why so many "crap", "garbage" and unsubstantiated statements such as "rather like 20MP". And how about focusing on what the camera does and is good at, rather than ranting about what it is not. For landscapes or stills nothing in the 35 mm format can touch the Merrill imo. And the only relevant question would have been whether the Quattro even surpasses the Merrill for this use.

The objective of the Quattro was to maintain the stellar Foveon image quality and address the many limitations of the camera. These are the battery life, AF, and interface. We address that when used properly, the Quattro still produces spectacular images (though not quite as sharp as the Merrill). If we just talk about what the camera is good at, it's not much of a review is it?
 
the uncomfy grip, the highlight issue, the high iso issue... not the camera for me. but im always seeing GORGEOUS pics from these sigma cameras from other people! so, im glad theyre out there for others, so i can enjoy their efforts!
 
The objective of the Quattro was to maintain the stellar Foveon image quality and address the many limitations of the camera. These are the battery life, AF, and interface. We address that when used properly, the Quattro still produces spectacular images (though not quite as sharp as the Merrill). If we just talk about what the camera is good at, it's not much of a review is it?

I beg to differ as I buy cameras because of what they can do best and not to find flaws.In the end it`s always about compromises and the Swiss Army Knife solution is too boring and eventually not satisfying. But then I have a stable of cameras which do not seem to convince testers and partly DXO, including all DP Merrills, M9 and Nikon Df. And by the way, the interface of the DP Merrill is among the most straight forward of any camera I tried, easily understandable without consulting a manual. I`d call this exemplary.
 
retow;193073the interface of the DP Merrill is among the most straight forward of any camera I tried said:
I have also found it to be very straight forward. The Q button effective.
I also use a Ricoh GR which is applauded as being very well laid out but the Sigma is clarity probably because of the junk that is left out.
 
I think the stuff in the review, positive and negative is really useful information. Having spent some quality time with a DP1M, I came to appreciate it as a really amazing specialist and recognized it as clearly NOT being an all-rounder. No problem - I could conceivably see buying one for what it's good at if my priorities changed a bit.

The new Quattro clearly tries to improve on the All-Rounder weaknesses of the previous model but it appears that it only barely succeeds, creates a few new flaws along the way (ergonomic), and barely improves on what the camera does well, if at all, with possibly some improvement in color fidelity at the expense of some of that amazing resolution. This tells me that I'd possibly become more interested in a DP1M as the price comes down, but that for ME, the Quattro isn't of much interest. It may tell someone else exactly the opposite.

But to me it sounds like the Quattro still does the same things well that the DPxM series did, but not really better. And it makes some progress in the direction of the "Swiss Army Knife", which it was evidently trying to move toward, but not enough to actually supplant any actual SAK in my bag. So, to me, it's role would remain as a specialist with some pros and cons worth knowing about relative to the previous generation. Highly informative for me as a potential buyer...

-Ray
 
I beg to differ as I buy cameras because of what they can do best and not to find flaws.In the end it`s always about compromises (...)
I ended the quote with the word 'compromise' because I think you hit the nail on the head there in terms of argument (but not conclusion). A compromise, by definition, includes pros and cons. To inform potential buyers about what kind of compromise this camera (or any camera) is, the cons have to be named just like the pros.
 
I ended the quote with the word 'compromise' because I think you hit the nail on the head there in terms of argument (but not conclusion). A compromise, by definition, includes pros and cons. To inform potential buyers about what kind of compromise this camera (or any camera) is, the cons have to be named just like the pros.

There is no conclusion with compromises, but the compromise is the conclusion in itself. One I`m not too willing to accept easily when it comes to my toys I use as a hobbyist.:D Thus all the quirky cameras I enjoy using.
 
Back
Top