Sigma Cameras

April 23, 2013 – 00:00

Sigma Cameras

Fotocamere Sigma

The two seem completely at odds with each other - the image quality and size. It 'been a rule of thumb after the invention of photography that a larger camera, with a recording area larger (either silver or silicone) that - ceteris paribus - to produce images of superior quality. And so the photographers continue to toil around cameras and lenses that encumbers them, all in a search for the best image. On the other hand, we all want to be free from clutter. To walk to a foreign city (or a dangerous one) without the weight and sometimes drawing attention to a DSLR would be nice. To take a walk in the woods with your spouse, those able to photograph the mists of early morning or a chance encounter with a deer, without the baggage (both literal and metaphorical) involving an SLR is something that many of us wish for . the digital revolution has given us no end of cute, small, low-cost cameras and well featured little pocket that would seem to do the trick. For some users, they do. For snapshots at family gatherings or holiday photos that will end up as a smallish prints from Walmart, they are often right. But for the more serious photographer and critic, no matter how attractive these cameras can be in terms of functionality that usually disappoint in terms of image quality.The reason for this is simple: small sensors. For example, the Ricoh GR2, a pocket digital camera very popular among serious photographers, has a sensor that measures 7.6 x 9.5 mm. Take out a ruler to see how small this is - about the size of your smallest finger nail. And, as we know, smaller sensors, particularly those with a high pixel (that mostly everyone wants to) will have photo sites very small. Net income - noisy images, even at the lowest ISO settings, or, if the manufacturer has used the aggressive reduction of the on-chip noise, reduced resolution.To make the comparison a little 'easier to visualize Let's compare the diagonals of these formats. The GR2 Ricoh and Canon G9 (digital cameras and the like) have sensors with a diagonal of about 10mm. On the other hand a 4/3 format DSLR, such as those from Olympus, has a diagonal of 22.5 mm. A typical Nikon or Canon or Pentax DSLRs with APS-C size approximately has a diagonal of about 28mm. Godzilla was right - size matter.But not wait! There is much more that is unique to the Sigma DP1. It is one of the cameras are unique in the world to use a Foveon sensor currently. His elder brother, the Sigma SD14 is so equipped. And to confuse things, not the new Sigma DSLR and DP1 only have essentially the same sensor, but it is only 4.6 megapixel resolution.It really is not possible to compare the number of megapixels in a sensor matrix base and Bayer camera , and a Foveon based one. The numbers simply do not jibe, or tell you a lot of value. A sensor 10MP Bayer, for example, because of its anti-aliasing filter and color recording matrix, both of which reduce resolution, has less of an advantage than 4.5MP Foveon sensor used in the DP1 that the numbers suggest. Bayer has 10MP, many experts agree on a resolution of less than a third sensor of comparable size monochrome would.A 4.5MP Foveon sensor, however, has no matrix decoding or antialiasing filter is to reduce the resolution, and thus is considered to be some experts to be equivalent in terms of spatial resolution of a sensor to a third more to double his problem is that the pixels count.The Sigma and Foveon have long been pitching their wares as having the triple their actual count of pixels. So the DP1 and SD14 DSLR are advertised as having 14.1MP. This can make good advertising copy, but only confuses the hell out of people who are trying to understand what this is really all about and come to a decision to purchase smart. It also involves endless punch-up on the discussion board web, where the faithful Foveon have to defend their territory against informed naysayers.Without often not taking a position on the issue, I'll just add, as shown below, that the DP1 is able to make extremely sharp and very low noise 13x19 "prints when ressed increased slightly (below), which are far superior to what one might expect from the numbers 4.5MP, and I seem to be quite similar to those the IQ of a typical 8 - 10MP DSLR. Notice that I do not write DSLR, digital camera, because the overall image quality of the DP1 is on a very different level from that of other pocket cameras. This is, I believe, to Due to the size of its sensor, not necessarily specific properties of the Foveon technology, but therein lies a tale, so read on.The Sigma DP1 is quite small, although manageable size. pocket Some digital cameras have become so small that they sit easily in a shirt pocket, but they are demanding to work with. DP1 I find to be just right. It 'sa bit smaller (in fact, most thinnest part) that the Canon G9, but when you add the need a viewfinder accessory for the Canon Sigma clutter decreases in importance. Ricoh GX100 is thinner and actually easier to handle because of his grip contoured. Canon Like the DP1 is very boxy, though Sigma has put dimples gripping surfaces, where necessary, which helps to snap lot.A lens cover is provided, but unlike the Ricoh is not tied, and then easily misplaced. Canon has a mechanism of self lens capping, which is my preference in any case in this size camera. I was also a bit 'frustrated with the Sigma lens cap, because it can only be inserted in one orientation, making those pocketed a process that requires visual inspection.Even if the DP1 a fixed focal length lens (28 mm equivalent) rather than a zoom, extends even when the camera is turned on, a little 'slow down the process of recovery. neckstap A is expected, but why anyone would want to put in so diminutive a camera on a belt is beyond me. This camera size wants to have a wrist strap, and this is the first thing I did, stealing one from a pocket-sized tape recorder that I do not use it anymore. (I can foresee a great online business in the factory unused wrapped Sigma DP1 neck bracket in the days to come). menus of DP1 are a disaster. There are poorly structured and has 15 items in a menu of recovery sliding and 17 other articles in the Set Up menu. There are no shortcuts, such as there are in most other cameras, where you can access the settings you use frequently or with a wheel or a dedicated control. DP1 Everything on the menu is controlled by the main LCD. Boring and do not contribute to any form of rapid interaction and engaging with the user. It 's almost as if Sigma did not notice the progress that its competitors have done in the last half decade in the development of the user interface. Sigma has the usual slow contrast-detect autofocus that all digital cameras offer , although it seems a bit 'slower than some others. But again, in terms of user interface poor, although he points of focus available there is no way for them to get that with a different voice menu buried inside a sort of sliding. good.Curiously Not at all, there is a control wheel manual focusing on the top panel left. In combination with a button that allows a magnified view on the LCD screen, accurate enough for making the focusing is possible. But (you knew there was a but, did not you) is a spinning wheel free and easily moved out of position with the brush of a finger. Moreover, incredibly, there is no lock on the infinite position nor is there a setting on the hyperfocal as supplied by Ricoh GX100. I would gladly give the focus manual for Infinity and locking positions hyperfocal. These are much more useful in a pocket digital camera to manual focus magnified in this way. My approach to shooting with the DP1 was to fill the viewfinder with optical Voigtlander (see below) and confidence auto focus, shooting when the beep, indicating that the autofocus has locked. I also do this when shooting distant objects, because there is no way to be sure that the camera will remain indefinitely due to the lack of a block in the wheel of focus. Sigma What was he doing during the 18 months following product announcement? This stuff is not rocket science. Just buy some products from a competitor and see how they do! And 'can set the camera to a pre-focus and then switch to manual focus or to guess. This is almost mandatory when trying to work quickly and with a quick shutter response. Everything would work much better though if Sigma had emulated setting hyperfocal block Ricoh. Be aware and that because of the larger sensor, the Depth of field is a little 'closer on the typical digital camera. This makes accurate focusing even more important, of course, exacerbates the problems of focus of the camera. The DP1 has a fairly modest list of duties for the price. U.S. $ 800 is the very high end of the scale, if not the highest, and if it were not for its image quality pounds (as we shall soon see) would be seriously out of functionality and off-price by hundreds of dollars from part of numerous other pocket cameras that also shoot raw.While there are some pocket cameras fixed lenses (those by Ricoh come to mind), most of this breed have zoom lenses. Sigma has a fixed 16.8 mm f / 4, which is equivalent to a 28mm lens on a full frame camera. focal length will find this to their liking by many street photographers, but it will be too large by many. My personal preference would be 35 mm, but I understand that many people like something broader. The f / 4 aperture is a compromise with the physical dimension. F/2.8 would be very welcome, but I realize that it would be very difficult to design a lens with such a small enough opening. If they went to 35mm would probably not have been the hardest, though, but he could produce reduction in sales. Compromises, I know.The LCD screen of DP1 is a shame. E 'just terrible. resolution appears to be low, and it seems simply weak and coarse. Yeah, I know it can be made clearer in the menus, but that still does not put it anywhere near on par with other screens. one on the Canon G9 is not only bigger, but brighter, with a higher resolution, and is much more crisp. The screen of the Ricoh is not so hot, but its way better than the Sigmas.I was also distressed when shooting in low-light conditions (eg an overnight stay) to note that Sigma loses color LCD. shots are made in color, but the screen is completely faded black and white, and this is not a special effect. I have not seen this behavior in years. Suddenly in 2002 all over again. too surprising to any digicam in 2008 is the lack of a histogram. There is not even a provision for flashing lights are overexposed. There is a bar chart on the review, but it is small and ill-defined. Nearly useless. Frankly, for a shooting Camera Raw, and which is designed for the photographer more serious, the lack of a real-time histogram is a serious omission. addition to the settings ISO 100-800 there is a self-ISO mode. But only moves between ISO 100 and 200, not including one of the other gears. seems to be a sort of useless for me, and another example of strange oversights and omissions that Sigma has allowed to exist in this camera.With the DP1 LCD be poor as it is, apart from an optical viewfinder would be a good idea, and offers a sigma. I am not able to get my hands on one during this trial period, but I had a 28mm Voigtlander Find shoe mounting accessories close at hand and this did the job very well. The only problem with the use of this particular finder is that it blocks the pop-up flash from the comparison opening.By fully electronic viewfinder on the Ricoh GX100 is not as bright as an optical VF, but does not show highly accurate framing and technical information. The optical viewfinder incorporated in the Canon G9 is quite small and weak, and lacks accurate coverage, but it is better than nothing, and when combined with LCD big and bright that the camera makes it an acceptable combination.The pop-up flash on DP1 is anemic. There is an owner Sigma accessory shoe for mounting flash, but it was not available for testing. Fortunately, the DP1 has a relatively high image quality at ISO 400, and is acceptable at ISO 800, shooting light so helpful with his f / 4 should not be much of any matter except conditions.More weaker lighting the point is that the lack of any form of stabilization of the DP1, optical or electronic. Again, in 2008, it is a true and its omission with is now part of practically every camera on the market, including those at the lower end of the price range in this segment.Note that I did not feel either JPG or video output. seems to me that this camera because it is so expensive and still function poor, it is all about image quality, and so, therefore, to shoot JPG with the DP1 would be for snapshots only, and I do not care, at least not for this test. Neither do I think that many people care about shooting video with the DP1, and I know you will not, so do not bother to do any shooting in these modes. Be aware that due to the low spatial resolution of the video Foveon sensor products are only 320 X 240 pixels, just enough to use on Youtube, and hardly watchable on TV let along on the computer monitor. Anyway, please refer to one of the popular sites revision digicam for their insights into how the DP1 is in these areas even if interest you.The Sigma DP1 raw sprouts, and that together with its large sensor and the Foveon technology is a key component in its application. But, just like all other digital cameras shoot first, the DP1 is slow to save the files on the memory card. Why camera manufacturers can not put in ASIC able to read and write at the same time, as they do in reflex, is beyond me. The DP1 is equipped with a raw processing software for Windows and Mac called Sigma Photo Pro Unfortunately this is a very primitive, simple to use, but very slow and under-featured. Apparently Sigma has changed the compression algorithm of their raw format from the camera's SD14, even if they use the same sensor, and so does not Lightroom Adobe Camera Raw does not yet support the DP1 from mid-April 2008. Hopefully soon, though, and not soon enough for my taste, because processing before is currently torture with the appearance of the software Sigma Sigma software.A curious first is that there seems to be a fairly high contrast applied to the raw file in default (zero). Actually, I found it necessary to dial down sharpening to -4 before export to obtain a level of clarity that I found acceptable. But, if I run the sharpness all the way down I also found that the image because so little accutance that no amount of sharpening later would take him back to life. simply not I understand what Sigma is up to this. Do not mess with the sharpening of the Sigma raw files. This is our job! Although a small point, the supplied charger has a cable rather than a built-in. This makes the trip with the charger more awkward than it should be. Many manufacturers have realized by now - that the small cameras have a small battery charger. Sigma does not. Here is the summary up-front, to save you from the tedious chore of examining the images below and that they need to read the text. The image quality of the raw Sigma DP1 is excellent - really far superior to that of any digital camera I've ever seen or used. Given that the camera uses an APS-C sensor almost size should not be so surprising. Combine this with what appears to be an objective of very high quality (Sigma has some little experience in this area) and you have a winning combination.The fact that the camera uses a Foveon sensor seems to be both good news and bad news. vaunted benefits (at least by his fans) of the Foveon chip does not seem all that obvious to me. For the color rendering for the most part looks good, although it is not everything that exceptional as to be obviously superior to decent intermediate Bayer sensors of which I am aware. seems high resolution detail, especially given the size of the sensor, but the very fine lens that the camera uses can also be an important factor in this problem judgment.The Foveon sensor in the DP1 is its low resolution. As explained above, the camera may in fact be comparable to a Bayer based camera with 8 megapixels, but if one wants to make larger prints you must be willing to work a little 'processing and resizing.I tried the first Sigma software supplied image size doubling capacity and found it to be terrible. You're much better resizing in Photoshop. My preferred approach to make prints larger than 13X19 "by DP1 (if smaller than the output resolution I simply left as they are) is to res in Photoshop Bicubic Smoother, or if printing from Lightroom 2.0 to allow any printing program that upressing ability to do the job. As you will see in the various samples below, in all areas that I've tried (and I've done more than what appears here), the DP1 is equal to one or beatings completion easily. It is simply not a digital camera I've seen that can compete in almost every area of ​​comparison of image quality. The Sigma DP1 equal picture quality of an SLR? This is something that I'm deliberately not going to comment on, for several reasons. The first is that I do not know what to compare it with that will not be the people asking why did not you compare it with something else. Moreover, the choice of the lens has an important role, as well as processing RAW. Pitfalls abound, and I'm not interested in simply fall into one of them on this time.Is the DP1 in the ballpark when it comes to picture quality with DSLR. Yes, it is. What can I say comfortably. If you are satisfied with the constraints of recovery that involves working with a DP1, do not need to clean high ISO or frame rate greater than 400, then yes, the DP1 can be a substitute for a DSLR pocket. But you must keep in mind the size of the output and clip limits insists that this camera on.In each instance below I want to include an image that shows the global scene photographed by DP1 and then 100% crops of each of the three cameras, comparing the Sigma DP1 with the G9 Canon and Ricoh GX100. In any case, the images were taken before and white balance and exposure basic processed in Lightroom 2.0. Files Sigma were minimally processed in the software before Sigma for white balance, exposure and basic black point, then exported to 16-bit TIFF files in Adobe RGB. Sharpening was done for the software files Sigma Sigma and not at all in Lightroom. Sharpening, while the budget adjustments and exposure have been made to. CR2 Canon and Ricoh. DNG Lightroom.Alice was told that taking a bite out of one side of the mushroom would make her taller and the other would make it smaller. This is our dilemma well.We have three cameras on the comparison, one that is 4.5MP (species), one that is 12.1MP, and a third which is 10MP. What to do? Ress the smallest at the top, or res larger ones down. Or, leave it as is? The problem is that none of these approaches is ideal, and each is subject to someone crying foul. Remember, as described earlier in this review - Foveon files are able to be ressed-up in a much greater extent than can Bayer images from a camera, but are smaller to begin with. After many experiments, I decided to reduce the file Canon and Ricoh to the same screen size as the Sigma file using bicubic sharper. This allows them to conveniently view here side by side, and it is not a factor when any aspect IQ different resolution is discussed. Even at ISO 100 the Canon and Ricoh (especially the Ricoh) show a little 'texture luminance. The Sigma is completely clean. Not that this is a big problem, since it's all the noise and luminance can be easily eliminated with the Luminance slider noise in Camera Raw or Lightroom, without any real effect on the resolution. But it is an indication that the high pixel count / small sized sensors have their limitations.At ISO 400 the Sigma does very well against both competitors, which shows a clean and natural with almost no noise. The Canon holds up pretty well as far as the sound is good but not very good at holding highlight detail. The rates at least as Ricoh, exhibiting chroma as well as the luminance noise at this speed, and likewise does not do well with strong reflections, as seen along the railing in all the shots. As good as the DP1 at ISO 400, it begins to lose the grace to ISO 800. Not terrible, but definitely chroma noise starts to become visible. I would say that 400 is a very usable speed in case of need, but 800 should be reserved for those times that the quality is secondary to get shot. The subtitle of the exhibition called DP1 an "enigma", and in fact its design is a bit 'of mystery. First, it was announced at Photokina in September 2006 has not yet begun to ship up to March 2008. The elephants gestation is not so long. Sigma has commented publicly during that long wait he had a little 'technical design and to address the problems that prevented IQ early delivery before - and that's fine - but what does this hiatus 18 months ago, the most curious is the question of what on earth the Sigma DP1 engineers who were not fixing the sensor / processing issues were doing at the time. The camera has so many small design flaws that have not been addressed in all the time that the company has at its disposal is quite amazing. It does not take long for one to see, however, that the DP1 is a special animal. Controversial though its sensor technology can be again, and as difficult as the number of pixels in question is still for some people, the high-resolution images clean, sharp and high that this small pocket camera can produce are nothing short of remarkable. It 'clearly a significant step higher than that of any other camera.Though pocket I have no experience with another Foveon sensor camera equipped, which now that I've spent with the DP1 shows me that a large part of the on-flattering forum online on the almost magical properties of the Foveon sensor are just that - flattering. There simply is not any remarkable advantage that I can see on a Bayer matrix sensor, other than the lower rate of the chip pixel spatial translates into a greater enlargability evident that numbers alone would indicate. Foveon has benefits, too. Yes, it definitely looks. But it also has negative aspects, such as reducing the sensitivity of the red channel, and poorer sensitivity in low light compared to contemporary cameras from manufacturers that do not use Foveon chip. When the Foveon technology was announced back in the 90s there were those who forecast that was so far superior to Bayer that it would spell the death knell for the color matrix decoding. The time has shown that this was not the case. In fact, with the exception of some specialized technical cameras, Polaroid and a couple of years ago, in a small point-and-shoot, the Foveon chip is designed only appeared in Sigma cameras. If the technology is that a well would have to imagine that some manufacturers of other cameras would be at least dabbled in it.I can not talk to the business side of things, as I have absolutely no information about any negotiations and trials that may have occurred with major producers Camera different from Sigma. But technology has a way of winning really rise to the top (just look at Canon's CMOS vs CCD first showed what was possible with the original D30). And with regard to CMOS, since the sensor itself is Foveon CMOS technology, one must ask why Foveon has found itself so limited in its ability to produce higher resolution sensors. The original Sigma SD9 DSLR of 2002 has had a chip of 3.4 MP and it was not until four years later, in 2006, that the SD14 has raised a huge 4.6MP. In that same period increased from about 6 MP DSLR other than 10 and also 12MP and 14MP. Not to say that the megapixels are any type of measurement of absolute goodness, but in fact raises the question of why Foveon sensors have been so slow in bottom line scale up.The is then that the Sigma DP1 is able to produce images high quality, probably the highest of any current pocket camera. But it is my belief that this quality derives less from its use of Foveon technology that makes the simple use of a nearly APS-C sensor size and a high-quality lens, and when (and if) cameras from other manufacturers decide to go this route, and assuming that a greater attention to the basic features and functions of the camera Sigma has done, it can be very difficult for Sigma to compete, unless you really pull up your socks. Hey Canon - like on a G10 with one of your sensors 1.6x optical viewfinder decent? Now that would be a killer competition, and would have professional photographers who flocked in droves. On the other hand, if Sigma were to bring out a new generation of style DP1 camera that had more attention to its operation as a camera that simply demonstrating its technology, which could really have something like well.Entities: Canon, Foveon, the Ricoh, Walmart, Adobe, Olympus, Nikon, Pentax, Youtube, Polaroid, a list fairly modest, DSLR, ISO, LCD screen, JPG, chroma noise, Windows, Michael Reichmann, Bayer, Godzilla, Michael Reichmann, Alice, Bicubic sharp, Sigma DP1, Sigma SD14, D300, DSLR, CMOS technology, PhotoshopTags: cameras, sensors, Sigma, the quality of the images, Foveon, Sigma DP1, Foveon sensors, Ricoh, pixel count, APS-C sized , Canon G9, small DSLR, pocket camera, Ricoh GX100, Bayer, pocket-sized digital cameras, technology, manufacturers of cameras, optical viewfinder, Foveon technology, software Sigma raw files Sigma, sharpening, Bayer matrix, small pocket camera , sensori bayer, numero di pixel ad alta, obiettivo di alta qualità, immagine confronto della qualità, elaborazione RAW, Camera Raw, il rumore di luminanza, il software Sigma, menu, Sigma DP1 collo, Ricoh GR2, Lightroom, accessorio a slitta, Sigma DP1 spara

Source: benjohn.org

Olympus Olympus LI-50B Rechargeable Li-Ion Battery for Select Olympus Digital Cameras - Retail Packaging
Photography (Olympus)
  • Olympus Branded Retail Package
  • Fits specific Stylus series models

You might also like:

デジタルカメラ2012年モデル、キーテクノロジー
デジタルカメラ2012年モデル、キーテクノロジー ...
Olympus TG-1 ukázkové video
Olympus TG-1 ukázkové video
Henry
Henry

I'm just using an Olympus D-380 digital

So there's no film and no lenses for this one. I have to watch the light as this camera loves the light and doesn't do real well with dog faces that are shaded. That is very frustrating. There's no optical zoom (I don't like the quality of the digital zoom) so I really have to get in their faces for closeups. That's okay with me because it's pretty fun to be that close. But I really want one with an 8x or 10x optical zoom so I can get some shots that I am missing now.
I think this camera is fantastic for the money. It cost me about $200 and I think you can get it for less now.

Interview with Jonathan Blaustein of “The Value of a Dollar”  — PetaPixel
Jonathan Blaustein is the photographer behind the project “The Value of a Dollar“, which went viral on the Internet in 2010 and then was subsequently acquired by the State of New Mexico and the Library of Congress. Visit his website here.

Olympus Olympus SZ-12 14MP Digital Camera with 24x Wide-Angle Zoom (Black)
Photography (Olympus)
  • 14 Megapixel
  • 24x wide-angle zoom
  • 3 LCD
  • HD Video
  • Dual Image Stabilization
Olympus Olympus SP-810 UZ Digital Camera V103020BU000
Photography (Olympus)
  • 36X Ultra Wide Optical Zoom (24-864mm EQUIVALENT).
  • 720P HD Movie with HDMI Control
  • Magic Art Filters (Still & Movie)
Olympus Olympus Stylus TG-830 iHS Digital Camera with 5x Optical Zoom and 3-Inch LCD (Silver)
Photography (Olympus)
  • Waterproof 10m/33ft, Shockproof 2.1m/6.9ft, Crushproof 100kgf/220lbf, Freezeproof -10C/14F, Dustproof
  • 16MP BSI CMOS Sensor, TruePic VI Image Processor, High-Speed Performance
  • GPS and e.Compass, Full 1080P Full HD Video
Aftermarket Usb cable for kodak easyshare easy share digital camera
PC Accessory (Aftermarket)
  • Valued package includes: 1 X USB Data Cable
  • 100% Brand New item
  • Type: Generic / Aftermarket
  • Best Replacement for the original Kodak U-8 cable.
  • Please pair use with KODAK USB A/V Connector when using this cable for the following models: M873 / M883 / M1033 / V530 / V570 /
  • V603 / V610 / V705 / V1073 / V1233 / V1253 / V1273

Related posts:

  1. Olympus Digital Cameras Australia
  2. Olympus Digital Cameras Pakistan
  3. Olympus Digital Cameras website