Any Foveon shooters in here?
jmphotocraft
Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
I recently picked up a Sigma DP2 Merrill. Not a very practical camera but when used in its sweet spot it's blowing me away with all the detail. Like, more detail than my 5D3.
Be sure to peep the ORIGINAL.
Be sure to peep the ORIGINAL.
-Jack
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
0
Comments
Sam
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Thanks. Well this is the catch with Sigma photos... the straight-out-of-the-camera JPEGs are nothing special, nothing like this. However, if you open the RAW in Sigma Photo Pro (SPP), do nothing other than convert it to 16-bit TIFF at 0 sharpness (the default on a -2.0 to 2.0 scale), then process the TIFF to your liking in LR (at 0 sharpness), this is what you get. So it's not right out of the cam, but there's not much sharpening applied either.
SPP is a terrible, buggy, crashy piece of 3rd rate software. I wouldn't do any developing in it other than to simply convert a raw to a 16-bit TIFF. Add in the fact that it takes about 15 seconds for the camera to write a single frame to the card, and the shooting experience is decidedly film-like - you choose your shots sparingly. The buffer will allow you to take a number of shots successively, but if you want to see what you just shot, you are waiting about 15 seconds.
To be fair, the above is a two shot vertical panorama, stitched manually, to create the square composition. But that doesn't matter.
Here's another:
ORIGINAL
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
ORIGINAL
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
Unrelated…. have you attempted to up-rez (although I don't know what anyone really needs to) any of your shots to super sizes, you know, just for the heck of it, to see how they stand up it?
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
Yeah. I haven't tried to really test the bokeh yet. I don't think I've taken a single shot at f/2.8. Maybe it's better then. But regardless, I didn't buy this camera for bokeh, I bought it for detail. I'll use my 5D3 when I want bokeh.
HERE is a 24mp version of the above pic. I think it holds up well and is comparable to a 5D3 image. Of course it's not like more detail comes out of hiding, it just gets bigger. I probably wouldn't do this unless printing larger than 36". I got a 24" x 24" metallic print of the top image in the OP and it's awesome, you can put your nose to it.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.